Is Jehad Passe’?

umpteen times we`ve been told on chowk that unlike in hinduism, ``all muslims are equal`` and blah blah blah ... yet here we have fido`s brother omkar telling us ahmediyas are lesser muslims, or they`re not muslims at all...and then there`s the sunni-shia nonsense...which is it?

What amazes me is the world is chruning in the beginning of a global world war which will be devastating from every point of view.
And some pada likkhaa Muslim Pakistanis are still debating about what is written in some book...... and interpretting it many times over....what the hell...you dim wits...if 2 people read the same book they can get 2 different meanings...(EVIDENCE of this is all around read the newspapers and see how different people interpret the same verses of a religious text )...you guys are doomed and sab ko le doobo ge ...and you sic people the virgins are here on earth not in heaven ......(ulti aa gayeee)

The General can only take you to war (as he has done in the past). As far as India is concerned, India has been fighting a war. It is only now acknowledging that it NEEDS to fight cause the Islamists will keep fighting till death or till everything is PURE enough Islamically for them.

So make sure you have your soorma on, cause when dem virgins come a calling you want to look good dont you ....... (sic !!!!!!) kyaa ideology hai ? Wah re pakistan kyaa teraa Islam ..... Allah O Akbar

News Item from Dawn: ``The United States has formally placed Lashkar-i-Tayyaba and Jaish-i-Mohammad on the state department`s list of officially designated terrorist organizations.``

Very good news. These organizations are no different than the taliban insofar as they think they have made it their God-given right to take over a society through force. There is no more room in a civilized country for such organizations than there is for gangs of armed bandits. They have nothing to do with Islam, everything to do with political ambitions.

Let us just hope that the current crisis stops short of war breaking out between Pakistan and India. It would be a tragedy if brave soldiers and innocent civilians on both sides lose their lives on account of these criminals.

OmarAkram #80 Let me first say that I think you are a decent person, but you see only a part of the picture.

You say ``Allah says in quran and that too quite categorically that Jews and Christian will never be your friends and well wishers`` I dont think this is a universal statement. It is one of the parts of the Quran that are applicable within the limited context of those times (just like there are passages in the Quran that call upon muslims not to speak in a voice louder than that of the Prophet when in his presence - clearly this passage was meant for those times only, just as the passages providing guidelines for the wives of the Prophet).

There are a number of references elsewhere in the Quran on these matters and the over-all message is along the lines I had mentioned. See for example, Surah Rum where the Quran speaks of a battle in a ``distant land`` (Iran) where the believers (the Christian Roman Empire) were in retreat before the non-believers (the Iranians), and the Quran speaks in most affectionate terms that ultimate victory would be of the Roman armies. In Surah Baqarah (which is a kind of an Executive Summary of the Quran), it is stated that all individuals, regardless of religion, will be judged by God. And this message is repeated later as well. Please trust your eyes and brains when reading the Quran (the Quran itself calls for this) even if it goes against what you have been told. I think you will come out agreeing with me - muslims are enjoined to respect all faiths, and to live in peace and with affection with their fellow men whoever they may be.

As for the incidents in UK you mention: I have not lived in the UK for any length of time, so cannot comment. The times I have been there (about a dozen times for a few days each over the past 20 years), I have found the Brits to be a good-natured and gracious people (from the immigration officials to strangers in their underground trains, as well as co-workers). That is just my personal experience, so I wont dispute what you say. Let us be more charitable to our fellow humans whatever their nationality of religion: no society is crime free, prejudice is rooted in people. But some societies are more civilized than others, and on balance I think British society is miles ahead of Pakistani society in terms of checks and balances against unfair treatment of the weak by the strong. Indian society may be around the same level as Pakistani (you point to Babri, I can point to the treatment of Ahmedis in Pakistan - and I am a sunni muslim who is ashamed of the treatment of Ahmedis). But let us have the intellectual honesty and humilitiy to see where we are relative to where we should be. And do what little we can as individuals to do the right thing.

… “Ahmeadis are not Muslims”(Omar Akram)

What an arrogant self delusional meanest excuse to persecute a whole community– as if Islam is the personal property of the likes of Mr. Omar Akram.

I say -- Ahmedis are 100% Muslims – they are gentler and kinder Muslims – they are 100% entitled to interpret Islam as they want to – among so many other interpreters of Islam.

It is difficult to forgive ZAB for the crime he committed against this educated Muslim community.

Personally I don’t know much about Mirza Ahmed –except what I heard from my father in my childhood, who -- in the beginning 30’s -- was one of the editors of a Lahore newspaper – Zafar Ali Khan’s Zamindar -- that used to make fun of “that court clerk” Mirza and his love for Hamida Begum.

But now I think Mirza was a great reformist – who forged -- such an educated, dedicated, intellectual, civilized, and peaceful community of Muslims -- out of the Cauldron of Restless, Wild, Innovative Punjabis.

On this board the gentle civilized discourse that comes out of Mr. Sattar’s pen is evidence of the sophistication of this 100% MUSLIM community.

OmarAkram # 80

Am I in violation of the Quran by counting several Christians as my friends and seeing a Jewish physician for 5 years now?

In my humble opinion, muslim youth in Britain are being seriously misguided by fanatic Wahabis who use literalist, selective and out of context translations of Quranic verses to suit their political agendas.

Please do this. Search the Quran for all references to Christians and then checkout the context from some tafseer written by a Sunni or Shia rather than a Wahabi Mullah. You might be surprised.

Do you think the Christian King of Ethopia (Habsha) who gave refuge to muslims was an enemy of Islam? Do you know what our Prophet said when he died?

SATTAR #79

....As an Ahmadi-Muslim I would like to point out that Ahmadis believe in the kalima, in Quran as the final and perfect word of Allah, in the status of Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) as “khattam-un-Nabiyeen”, in other prophets and scriptures, in angels, in the day of judgment, and in all other articles of faith. They pray like other Muslims, recite Quran, pay zakat, fast during Ramadan, offer Haj, and more.....``

Asad Sb.

Iam sorry to learn that the only Ahmediya that corresponded openly here ,shows double talk on this forum.On the thread now in the back stage from the front page ,you discuss with NASAH explaining that in Koran Mohommed is not said to be the final prophet & you dont believe so too b/c you consider Koran as your imaan

Here to Sunni audience on front page you say you ``Mohommdur rasool allah ``therefore you believe in finality of prophet .What is it ?

#51 shammi

India would do well to make the cost of jihadi sposorship by pakistan unacceptably high WITHOUT going to war. Anyone can go to war and end up destroying a lot of things. I don`t think you`d disagree with that. Aborogating the Indus river treaty is an act of war. Pakistan would be sure to retaliate. If india starts building a dam, pakistan could blow up the dam and still not be rebuked for it, because that would be a just act. (BTW, i have doubts about how much india could do to retain the river water because many of the tributaries originate in tibet).

India could present the evidence (without risking the sources) to the UN and demand action against pakistan as a signatory to the anti-terrorism treaty. There`s a hundred ways to skin the cat but we must not hit out in anger.

An excerpt from an article (An Islamic Fifth Column) in Wall Street Journal (Dec 26) op-ed page -

``.. Mohammad Junaid, the NY born Pakistani-American, who after Sept. 11, ditched his $70,000-a-year job as computer techie joined the Taliban to ``kill Americans``. He did so to the cheers of his mother, who, astonishingly, had been rescued from the world Trade Center.``

The article is written by Farrukh Dhondy, a writer living in England.

He is blaming Anglo liberals for Pakistani Mill workers’ stupidities in UK. Their children and grand children are joining jihadi ranks.

Some one with access to WSJ e-copy, please provide the full article. It will be an eye opener.

EDUCATION AND PAKISTANIS,

It is amusing to read the scholarly discussions about ahmadias, are they muslims or not. What is significant in this posts by the educated pakistanis is that no one wants to talk about what each paki has to declare on the passport. The dicussions implicitly accepts that if ahmadias are not muslims, then the treatment of abdus salam and what is on the passport is fair.

Chowk has proved only onething, if all of the universities in pakistan are nuked, there would be no loss to the country, it is a place where education makes no difference to the beliefs of the people. I like the jihadists, at least they believe in what they have learned. May it time that the pakitanis changed the topic to euthenasis of a nation.

Re Jaish-e-Mohammad (#57):

Sahib, your hateful attitude towards others is most disgusting and disturbing. There is no place for such nonsense in Islam, as it contradicts the very essence of humanity and Quranic teachings.

Violent fundamentalists like you are an embarrassment to humanity. Such doctrines as yours have caused much bloodshed throughout the history of mankind and have always exploited and harmed the innocents in the name of religion.

Individuals like you are the enemies of mankind and Islam. The world needs to get rid of lunatics of your kind … not by violence, but through education and learning the true message of peace and compassion for all given by Islam and by every religion of God.

Asad

re sattar

Sattar sahib, your patience astounds me. These nuts keep on saying the nastiest things and questioning your deepest held beliefs. And yet, you have never crossed the line of decorum. Heck, you have ebery right to say that these folks are non-Muslims!

EIther way, hats off to you. We all can learn from your cordiality and humility.

re ali1 78

``Why do you insist on deporting any desi who does not agree with you 100%? Not just from the US but from Britain too!``

I have never said anything close to that. If you cannot find arguments, why do you have to be cowardly and imagine things?

For the record I am a civil libertarian. As for saving me, as the old Bengali saying goes, `Rakhe Allah, maare ke`.

From The Pioneer

History sheet of a rogue state

A Surya Prakash

Within two months of its creation, Pakistan sent armed tribesmen into Jammu & Kashmir in October, 1947. The operation, which was supervised by the Pakistani Army, was a major success. The tribesmen overran large parts of the state and were on the verge of capturing Srinagar. The state`s Maharaja signed the Instrument of Accession in the nick of time, enabling Indian forces to save Srinagar, and at least partially push back the infiltrators.

As the battle continued, the Prime Ministers of the two countries met at Lahore in December, 1947. Prime Minister Nehru wanted his counterpart Liaqat Ali Khan to appeal to the intruders to withdraw. Khan pleaded his inability to do so. He told the Indians that he ran a government of ``moderates`` and that if he issued such an appeal, there was every danger of his Government being replaced by extremists. The Indian leadership fell for this argument.





The history of the subcontinent is replete with such incidents. From its inception, the Pakistani leadership has made ``anti-Indianism`` Pakistan`s raison d`être and has often upped the ante. But when its plans go awry and India gets ready for the kill, rationalists come off the wood work on both sides of the border and inveigle the Indian leadership to make concessions so that ``there be lasting peace`` or because ``there is danger of extremists gaining control in Pakistan``. Here are some more examples: In August, 1965, Pakistan once again sent thousands of infiltrators into J&K. Indian troops repulsed the attack and a war broke out in which India captured several strategic points on the Pakistani side of the state. India lost some territory in the Chhamb Sector, but Pakistan`s losses were critical. The United Nations intervened and called for a ceasefire. Following the cessation of hostilities, Pakistan`s Foreign Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto swore in the Security Council that Pakistan would launch a thousand-year war against India. When the Indian delegation walked out in protest, Bhutto said ``the Indian dogs are going home``.

Later, under pressure from the Soviets, Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri chased the chimera of peace and bartered away the gains of the War at the Tashkent Summit. The leaders of the two countries signed an agreement which said both sides will abjure force, will not interfere in the internal affairs of each other and will honour the terms of the ceasefire in J&K. Shastri died of a heart attack hours after he signed the accord. Pakistan President Ayub Khan, having won back the strategic areas lost in war, was laughing all the way to Rawalpindi and the foul-mouthed Bhutto was rubbishing even this accord. Yet, Sardar Swaran Singh, the Indian Foreign Minister, was deluding himself and Parliament by claiming that Shastri had succeeded in reversing the trend in the subcontinent ``and in stabilising peace between the two countries``.

One must only read the debate in the Lok Sabha in February, 1966 on the Tashkent Agreement to understand the extent to which Indians can fool themselves. Swaran Singh told the House that the was ``fully satisfied`` that the question of infiltrators was not likely to arise hereafter! One Congress MP after another was hailing the accord and urging the Government to forget the conflict and to expand trade, cultural and other ties with Pakistan.

The winter of 1971 saw yet another conflict between the two countries. Pakistan`s military dictatorship led by Yahya Khan cracked down on freedom fighters in the eastern wing of the country, leading to a flood of ten million refugees into India. The war ended with the creation of Bangladesh but there was much more humiliation in store for Pakistan. India had also captured 5000 square miles of its territory in the west and 93,000 of its soldiers as PoWs. Prime Minister Indira Gandhi had acted with courage and conviction and given the Pakistanis a sound thrashing. She was now determined to end the ``Kashmir problem`` once and for all by getting Pakistan to accept the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir as the international border. This would be the trade off for Pakistan getting back 5000 square miles of lost territory and 93,000 PoWs.

Following the defeat, Bhutto replaced Yahya Khan and once again India was under pressure from the superpowers to reach a settlement with Pakistan. Bhutto came to Shimla minus the bluster of 1966. He wanted his 93,000 soldiers back as also the territories captured by the Indian Army in the western sector. And just when she was ready to put the knife in, the ``men of reason`` were at work once again. They argued that ``Pakistan had suffered enough humiliation``, ``since a civilian-Bhutto- has replaced a military dictatorship, India must be magnanimous and help bolster democracy in Pakistan``. Such was the clout of Pakistan`s friends both within India and outside, that they even trapped the mighty Indira Gandhi with their mumbo-jumbo and forced her to let Bhutto and Pakistan off the hook. And mind you, all for the sake of promoting democracy in Pakistan! Following this reprieve, the dog`s tail resumed its original curvature and ``democrat`` Bhutto was barking again against India and encouraging insurgents in Indian states until he was shown the door by Gen Zia ul Haq. Zia hanged Bhutto and undid many of Bhutto`s policies except one-anti-India operations. Democrats Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharief succeeded the military dictator and reversed many of his policies but continued the ``hate-India`` campaign. Yet, the ``agents of reason`` were at work again, pressuring Indian Prime Ministers to ``bolster democracy in Pakistan``. This fraudulent thesis forced even Atal Bihari Vajpayee to undertake a sham bus journey to Lahore, chasing the chimera of peace. Within weeks of this gesture, ``democrat`` Nawaz Sharief showed his true colours and sent infiltrators into Kargil in April, 1999. Around 400 valiant soldiers laid down their lives retrieving the Kargil heights for India.

Gen Musharraf succeeded Sharief and promptly banished him from Pakistan. The ``men of reason`` on this side of the border were back at work. They declared him `` a gentleman-dictator`` and forced the Government to recognise his regime and to invite him for a summit meet in Agra. They hailed his ``body language`` and his ``courage`` for laying a wreath at Mahatma Gandhi`s samadhi! The General is now showing his true colours and living up to the foul-mouthed tradition laid down by his predecessors.

Indian naivetè, it seems, knows no bounds. How many more soldiers do we need to sacrifice to appease these ``men of reason`` and to keep them in business so that they may crowd the opinion pages of our newspapers? Some of them are in our Parliament too and every time they open their mouth, it costs us tax payers Rs 15,700 a minute (even an STD call to God would be cheaper). For how long do we underwrite this and for what purpose?

We must now end this habit of glossing over the facts of history. The nation should no longer be hostage to the flawed reasoning of a few. Whether democrat or military dictator, every Pakistani leader is the same. He cannot go against Pakistan`s ``Janam Kundli``. It is a rogue state with a terrible history-sheet. It must live on the spurious thesis that gave birth to it and wage a constant battle against secular India to sustain itself.

Some day in the present millennium secular India may have a civilising influence over Pakistan and the latter may become a secular democracy. That is the time when India should extend the hand of friendship. Until then, secular India must break all ties with this communal state that has made terrorism an instrument of state policy. Meanwhile, India, the world`s largest democracy, must not shirk its responsibility. It must pursue the immediate agenda-``aar ya paar``-to avenge December 13 and to uphold liberal, secular and democratic values in the world.

P.S. Pardesi, Earlier Article was also from the same paper.

Here is a ``mother of all editorials`` from a true son of Pakistan - Najm Sethi -- in one of his bluntest rebuke to Pakistan`s military for its knee-jerk fossilized foreign policy – vis a vis its closest neighbor -- and closest RELATIVE – India.

Kashmir is not worth another insane WAR between Pakistan and India -- for heavens sake.

Fresh Start Needed

Editorial

by Najm Sethi

Friday Times



Pakistan’s military leaders have had a propensity for adventure unmatched by other dependent states in the modern age.

Irrespective of the rights or wrong of the issue, Pakistani army generals provoked military conflict with India in 1965, 1971 and 1999.

In the process, Pakistan has had to sign unequal ceasefires (Tashkent), submit to humiliating surrenders (Bangla Desh) or accept forced withdrawals (Kargil.

It was, however, General Zia ul Haq who believed that Pakistan was in a win win situation in Afghanistan. But he was wrong.

If the legacy of the various wars with India is a reinforcement of historical pride and prejudice, the legacy of our “involvement” in Afghanistan is even more pervasive and poisonous.

It has derailed the post cold war impulse for political democracy, created the demon of bloody sectarianism, raised the spectre of violent fundamentalism, stamped a militaristic ethos on society and created a powerful but unaccountable state within the state.



The ISI’s writ has spread far and wide, at home and abroad.

Indeed, in recent times, an unprecedented and worrying development had begun to manifest itself with senior ISI operatives being invited as a matter of state policy into the precincts of GHQ and civilian government and also slotted into senior command positions in the army and vice versa.

This was in sharp contrast to the situation before our involvement in Afghanistan when no more than Brigadiers ran the ISI and army chiefs tended to frown upon overly active roles for former ISI-types in regular army matters.

Thus the ISI was actually poised to become a state in itself and for itself if the Afghanistan debacle hadn’t compelled General Musharraf to rein it in and freeze its more adventurous external operations.



Clearly, the ISI’s twenty-year “adventure” in Afghanistan is the worst thing to happen to Pakistan’s state and society in fifty years of independence.

One dismal but stark manifestation of this fact is that our army now has to defend not just our eastern borders with India as part of an old historical reality but also our western border with Afghanistan as part of a new self-inflicted injury.

Latest reports say that we have been obliged to move over 50,000 soldiers and 150,000 para-military troops to the border with Afghanistan in order to stop infiltration of Al-Qaeda terrorists into our tribal areas.

And we are being obliged to do this in a security environment in which India is threatening to overrun our borders in hot pursuit of “terrorists” allegedly trained and supported by us while the international community is clucking in sympathy with its plight.



If there is a silver lining in the cloud, could it be, ironically enough, General Musharraf? Here is a man who has acted decisively and courageously to win international support for Pakistan’s ailing economy by swiftly abandoning a thoroughly bad foreign policy in Afghanistan. He has also held out an olive branch to India by showing flexibility on Kashmir, even though India hasn’t yet had the sense to recognize the true value of his initiative. He has reined in the ISI by suitable postings, transfers and retirements. He has shunted intractably rigid-types from GHQ. And he has risked the wrath of the religious extremists by clamping down on them in the national interest. This is a great start in the right direction.

But much more needs to be done to reverse the tide.



Let us admit it. After Afghanistan, our biggest foreign policy failure is in Kashmir.

From 1947 to 1965, we beseeched the UN to grant us Kashmir in vain. We then tried to stir revolt in the valley and triggered a destabilizing war with India. After 1971, we buried the Kashmir issue at Simla and forgot about the UN resolutions abroad.

We then woke up in the 1990s to foment trouble in Kashmir after New Delhi had made a mess of things in the 1980s.

In the last ten years, we have exported Islamic revolution to Kashmir and provoked untold brutalities on the Kashmiris by India’s security forces.

In exchange, we have paid the price of urban terrorism in Karachi and elsewhere sponsored by India. We have undermined civil society and democratic pluralism by relinquishing political space to extremist jehadi organizations.

We have piled up debt in order to fuel the cold war with India and scared away potential foreign investors.

And we have pulled the rug from under the feet of elected political representatives who dared to think of smoking the peace pipe with New Delhi.

Now we are being pushed into a conflict with India by the very extremists who have already dashed our hopes in Afghanistan.

_______________________________________________

Isn’t it time to change a policy of perennial warring with India into a policy of enduring peace with our neighbours?

_______________________________________________

We have barely managed to survive a highly destablising debacle in Afghanistan whose end is not yet in sight.

But we might not be so lucky in the event of a conflict with India over Kashmir. Putting Pakistan first means doing it not just vis a vis Afghanistan policy but also vis a vis Kashmir policy. Nothing less than that will constitute a safe and secure fresh start for the country.(FT)