Ahmadis all over the world are and have always been involved in their countries political process, which ever country that might belong to. Pakistan is no exception.
Looking back at history, Ahmadis in Pakistan consider the Ayub era golden for their civil liberties like freedom of press, expression, peaceful assembly, etc. Though, in principle they believe in democracy and have always considered it the corner stone of progress in Pakistan. So, when a dynamic politician like ZAB showed up on the horizon they were quick to jump on his band wagon. Their views are border line leftiest when it comes to state & legislation and siding with PPP was natural.
ZAB took full advantage of their organization, simplicity and honesty. Many wouldn’t know but Ahmadis not only contributed to his campaign but also were the backbone in managing the finances of his campaign. Mostly because they believed in him like the majority of the country at that time.. which probably had more to do with his charisma & art of public speaking than his deeds. My parents who had never voted in their entire life, for the first time (and sadly the last time in Pakistan) voted!
So, when the Mullahs accused Bhutto to have been elected with a ‘Qadiyani Conspiracy’ they were not very far from the truth, which was the first & the last they will ever be near the truth.
Soon after his election when ZAB’s true colors come to show and Ahmadis realized that he is no different than most other politicians of the country, who are all talk but no action, they were quick to join the opposition. The country was a mess especially after 71 war and divided, which left a bitter taste about politicians among all Pakistanis. Therefore, when the Mullahs started propagating against Ahmadis & suggested that ZAB wouldn’t do anything about it because ‘he was elected because of Ahmadis’ .. ZAB had no problem declaring them Non-Muslims in an effort to divide the opposition and successfully shying away from the acusation that Ahmadis supported him & vice versa. He was also sure that Ahmadis wouldn’t vote or support him come the next election anyway, considering the fact that he didn’t keep any of his campaign promises
It seems that some people are trying to spread confusion between
Muslims. The Pakistani scholars of Islam including shias have given the
decision that Ahmedis are non muslims. so what is wrong with that.
It was not Saudi or Irani decision but PEOPLE OF PAKISTAN made
a decision in a DEMOCRATIC WAY.<<<
Zulfikulfi, if tomorrow people of Pakistan decide in a Democratic Way that Sunnis are not Muslims, would you accept that? And since when do you believe that PEOPLE have been empowered to Decide on other people’s Religion? Do you mean to say that Ahmadis are only non-Muslim in Pakistan and not Saudi Arabia because there people don’t get to decide in a DEMOCRATIC WAY? Are you also suggesting that there’s no need for Quran Nimaz etc., and PEOPLE OF PAKISTAN should decide in a DEMOCRATIC WAY about what is Islamic and what is not? are you also saying that DEMOCRATIC WAY is Islamic way? What are you suggesting?
[/QUOTE]
Good point! Who gave humans the right to decide divine matters. When we face the creator, it will be our actions not the actions of others that will be held accountable. This BS is classic in showing the control and manipulation of the great People of Pakistan by the religious extremists. It is absolutely rich to see a hard drinking, immoral and corrupt ZAB leading the charge on deciding who is Muslim or not.
The irrationality of some people really amazes me.
Good point! Who gave humans the right to decide divine matters. When we face the creator, it will be our actions not the actions of others that will be held accountable. This BS is classic in showing the control and manipulation of the great People of Pakistan by the religious extremists. It is absolutely rich to see a hard drinking, immoral and corrupt ZAB leading the charge on deciding who is Muslim or not.
The irrationality of some people really amazes me.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ahmadjee: *
Ahmadis all over the world are and have always been involved in their countries political process, which ever country that might belong to. Pakistan is no exception.
Looking back at history, Ahmadis in Pakistan consider the Ayub era golden for their civil liberties like freedom of press, expression, peaceful assembly, etc. Though, in principle they believe in democracy and have always considered it the corner stone of progress in Pakistan. So, when a dynamic politician like ZAB showed up on the horizon they were quick to jump on his band wagon. Their views are border line leftiest when it comes to state & legislation and siding with PPP was natural.
ZAB took full advantage of their organization, simplicity and honesty. Many wouldn’t know but Ahmadis not only contributed to his campaign but also were the backbone in managing the finances of his campaign. Mostly because they believed in him like the majority of the country at that time.. which probably had more to do with his charisma & art of public speaking than his deeds. My parents who had never voted in their entire life, for the first time (and sadly the last time in Pakistan) voted!
So, when the Mullahs accused Bhutto to have been elected with a ‘Qadiyani Conspiracy’ they were not very far from the truth, which was the first & the last they will ever be near the truth.
Soon after his election when ZAB’s true colors come to show and Ahmadis realized that he is no different than most other politicians of the country, who are all talk but no action, they were quick to join the opposition. The country was a mess especially after 71 war and divided, which left a bitter taste about politicians among all Pakistanis. Therefore, when the Mullahs started propagating against Ahmadis & suggested that ZAB wouldn’t do anything about it because ‘he was elected because of Ahmadis’ .. ZAB had no problem declaring them Non-Muslims in an effort to divide the opposition and successfully shying away from the acusation that Ahmadis supported him & vice versa. He was also sure that Ahmadis wouldn’t vote or support him come the next election anyway, considering the fact that he didn’t keep any of his campaign promises
[/QUOTE]
Ahmadis backed govt of 1950's used the full force to beat
the peaceful protesters. And ordered one of them to be hanged.
This is what the kadiyaness did to Pakistanis.
And some people have the audacity to talk about MERA PAK tera PAK.
And than people talk abt QUAID E AZAM as being a modern and secular
leader. I wonder where they get this idea from. Let's not forget his name
was Muhammad. And he left his family for his beliefs. i-e Muslim
beliefs.And people who listened to his beliefs were all MUSLIMS.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Spock: *
RF, why do we bring drinking into account when we discuss a political figure, be it Jinnah or ZAB.
Every man has his weakneses. ZAB had some exceptional qualities that no politician after his time will ever have.
[/QUOTE]
The Quaid did not declare Ahmadis nonMuslims, nor did he try to exclude anyone (including non Muslims). The Quaid was not a Mullah nor did he pretend to be one, in fact he was hated by the Islamists of that period. So his personal life was his matter...essentially a secularist. ZAB, although understood by the masses to be a seclaurist not only involved himself in religious matters, but was also instrumental in the Anti Ahmadi declaration. Coming back to the main point: Isn't it hypocritical for ZAB to get involved in these matters?
This isn't a ZAB bashing thread so please don't bring out the usual list of his 'great' actions. It's really interesting that Bhutto, a member of the Shia community would declare Ahmadis non Muslims, yet we fast forward 30 years later and now there is talk amongst the extremists of declaring Shia's non Muslims. When will it end? I disagree on these matters on only principle, because lets be honest, as a believer of the Salafi (Deobandi) school, I'm pretty much unaffected by these declarations.
The Quaid did not declare Ahmadis nonMuslims, nor did he try to exclude anyone (including non Muslims). The Quaid was not a Mullah nor did he pretend to be one, in fact he was hated by the Islamists of that period. So his personal life was his matter...essentially a secularist. ZAB, although understood by the masses to be a seclaurist not only involved himself in religious matters, but was also instrumental in the Anti Ahmadi declaration. Coming back to the main point: Isn't it hypocritical for ZAB to get involved in these matters?
This isn't a ZAB bashing thread so please don't bring out the usual list of his 'great' actions. It's really interesting that Bhutto, a member of the Shia community would declare Ahmadis non Muslims, yet we fast forward 30 years later and now there is talk amongst the extremists of declaring Shia's non Muslims. When will it end? I disagree on these matters on only principle, because lets be honest, as a believer of the Salafi (Deobandi) school, I'm pretty much unaffected by these declarations.
[/QUOTE]
Founder of PAK left his family for religion.
He was a educated person but not secular.
Interesting to see that you brought up so
many issues. I think you have extremist
views. You used so many words like
DEOBAND/SALAFI/SHIA. What are you
trying to prove???. Before this email
you were uttering Love for INDIA.
And dear sir, there is no such thing
DEOBAND SALAFI.
The Quaid did not declare Ahmadis nonMuslims, nor did he try to exclude anyone (including non Muslims). The Quaid was not a Mullah nor did he pretend to be one, in fact he was hated by the Islamists of that period. So his personal life was his matter...essentially a secularist. ZAB, although understood by the masses to be a seclaurist not only involved himself in religious matters, but was also instrumental in the Anti Ahmadi declaration. Coming back to the main point: Isn't it hypocritical for ZAB to get involved in these matters?
This isn't a ZAB bashing thread so please don't bring out the usual list of his 'great' actions. It's really interesting that Bhutto, a member of the Shia community would declare Ahmadis non Muslims, yet we fast forward 30 years later and now there is talk amongst the extremists of declaring Shia's non Muslims. When will it end? I disagree on these matters on only principle, because lets be honest, as a believer of the Salafi (Deobandi) school, I'm pretty much unaffected by these declarations.
[/QUOTE]
People like you who are trying to advocate so called tolerance for minorities are BOTHERED BY ZAB"S drinking habit. Interesting.
The bill was passed more than 30 years ago. Its a done deal.
May Allah bless ZAB. I am not bothered about his sect like you.
Founder of PAK left his family for religion.
He was a educated person but not secular.
Interesting to see that you brought up so
many issues. I think you have extremist
views. You used so many words like
DEOBAND/SALAFI/SHIA. What are you
trying to prove???. Before this email
you were uttering Love for INDIA.
And dear sir, there is no such thing
DEOBAND SALAFI.
PLZ define what exactly do you want for
Qadianis.
[/QUOTE]
ab rajput bhi indian ho gya? Chalo acha hai, with all the indian members getting banned, rajput and zulfi can fill the vaccum!
The Quaid did not declare Ahmadis nonMuslims, nor did he try to exclude anyone (including non Muslims). The Quaid was not a Mullah nor did he pretend to be one, in fact he was hated by the Islamists of that period. So his personal life was his matter...essentially a secularist. ZAB, although understood by the masses to be a seclaurist not only involved himself in religious matters, but was also instrumental in the Anti Ahmadi declaration. Coming back to the main point: Isn't it hypocritical for ZAB to get involved in these matters?
This isn't a ZAB bashing thread so please don't bring out the usual list of his 'great' actions. It's really interesting that Bhutto, a member of the Shia community would declare Ahmadis non Muslims, yet we fast forward 30 years later and now there is talk amongst the extremists of declaring Shia's non Muslims. When will it end? I disagree on these matters on only principle, because lets be honest, as a believer of the Salafi (Deobandi) school, I'm pretty much unaffected by these declarations.
[/QUOTE]
Ok if its not, then why did you bring up his drinking habits? Hes one of the very few leaders who actually did something
This is truly sad. I am extremist yet also holding Indian views. What are the origins of Deoband? there are only 4 schools of thought in in Sunni Islam.
What do I exactly want for the Qadianis? How about treating them as people, as citizens of Pakistan?
Ok if its not, then why did you bring up his drinking habits? Hes one of the very few leaders who actually did something
[/QUOTE]
yara, I know you love ZAB and thats your opinion. The truth is that ZAB condemned an entire community based on religion yet he himself was not a religious man himself. When Pakistan was being created, the Quaid never excluded the minorities, in fact he treated them with respect. Thats the difference.
yara, I know you love ZAB and thats your opinion. The truth is that ZAB condemned an entire community based on religion yet he himself was not a religious man himself. When Pakistan was being created, the Quaid never excluded the minorities, in fact he treated them with respect. Thats the difference.
[/QUOTE]
I dont love him... My judgement of a political character is not based on if he drinks or not... Many view his decision to declare Ahmedis as non-Muslims as great, many dont... If you didnt like that decision, why carve out a relationship with his drinking habits?
When Pakistan was being created, the Quaid never excluded the minorities, in fact he treated them with respect. Thats the difference.
[/QUOTE]
Yes. I think eveybody agrees that every person must be treated with
repsect as long as they don't try pose what they are not. And don't try to malign religious feelings of the people.ZAB infact protected and saved Kadianies from extremists by declaring them as Non Muslims A right and just decision.
The whole point about this "community" is that they claim to be both Muslims and a minority within a muslim state. You cannot have it both ways. If they are Muslims, then they are not a minority and hence do not deserve any special considerations, however if as they claim they are a minority then they are non-Muslims and this is the status that has been accorded to them.
my friend's friend is rumered to be ahmadi(Kadianies). which i believe he is,cause whenever we talk anything islamic he always talk against islam or anything islamic and.onice i asked him are you kadianies, he said no, i am not,but kadianie are very good people and are on right side. then i asked him, then why are you always talking against islam and call them on right side. he couldn't answer.
anybody who doesn't believe in any islamic believe, is not muslims. even if you don't believe in only one page of quran, you'r not muslims. GOT IT.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by xtwo47: *
my friend's friend is rumered to be ahmadi(Kadianies). which i believe he is,cause whenever we talk anything islamic he always talk against islam or anything islamic and.onice i asked him are you kadianies, he said no, i am not,but kadianie are very good people and are on right side. then i asked him, then why are you always talking against islam and call them on right side. he couldn't answer.
[/QUOTE]
Wow! I guess that’s pretty conclusive then I suppose!
realizing that you probably wont get the sarcasm in this - it's a sarcastic remark!
"There is no God but God and Muhammad (PBH) is the messenger of God"
Saying this statement is the only prerequisite to be a Muslim.
Everything after that is only a measure of how good of a Muslim you are. Some might argue this, but if you think about it rationally, that’s the only condition stated for a person to be qualified as a Muslim.
Faith by virtue is a belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence and hence intangible, and most certainly not something one can judge someone on.
Whether the person proclaiming this statement is lying or not, is not something an individual can decide on. Consequently, the government (constituting a group of individuals) certainly has no right or the capability of judging whether a person’s faith is true or not.
This is truly sad. I am extremist yet also holding Indian views. What are the origins of Deoband? there are only 4 schools of thought in in Sunni Islam.