September Morning bhatti,

Your obsession with Ahmadis is not doing you any good. Check out your fav website ... BBC. There's something about bomb blasts in Islamabad.

... with people like you, it is no wonder the ummah is going to the dogs.
No banana for you ...

September Morning Bhatti, you are back to rambling incoherently.
Bad Muslim. No banana.

September Morning Yes I did. But you are not smart enough to realize it.

Your reasons exist only in your head; ullema act according to their own ideas.
Your reasons mean nothing ... except to you ... and that's why you are trapped in a bubble.

September Morning Bhatti,

You’re a butthead obsessed with Ahmadis, for the wrong reasons. What is annoying is your own stupidity.

You claim that Al-Qaeda has no intellectual backing. When I show your ullema perpetuating violent fanaticism, you claim I am stereotyping. Hello, is anybody home?

I have cited ullema, their views, their calls for jihad, their literature, death squads, lal masjids, taliban, wahabis … and you can’t counter any of it. Calling these arguments “zanana logic” means nothing. It only underscores your own incompetence. So take your e-mail address and stick it ...

September Morning Bhatti Mian,

Your “test of rationality” is irrelevant to the ullema, who have their own ideas. You’ve failed to make your point. Note that lal masjid brigade did not share your logical framework … and did what they felt right.

You keep ignoring views of Maudoodi, Israr, and Naik; publications in mosques; death squads; calls for jihad; suicide bombings; and punishment for apostasy etc. These activities are a part of the culture that perpetuates Al-Qaeda, talibans, lal masjids etc.

You have finally admitted there exists a Saud problem. Can you spell Wahabi? And then you think Al-Qaeda has no intellectual backing because BBC says so!

And finally, you are back to taking cheap shots at Ahmadis. Ironically, you also seem to support Maudoodi’s views on unprovoked war (#221) and think that killing apostates may be ok. There is one thing worse than being a lunatic jihadi: denying the fact that you are one.

Ahmadis have had khilafat for a 100 years now. And you’ve failed to find anything against our khalifa or the community. Your ullema on the other hand are encouraging suicide bombings and calling it “jihad”. The irony is hard to miss!

September Morning Bhatti,

You keep ignoring your ullema’s teachings, the literature they are publishing, and their calls for jihad and suicide bombings. Then you claim Al-Qaeda has no intellectual backing because BBC says so. The joke is on you. Ha ha this!

Read the above again. It shows your state of denial ...

+++

You claim that Maudoodi does not count since he came before Al-Qaeda. And that Naik does not count since he came after Al-Qaeda. Hello, is anyone home?

Al-Qaeda is a product of a culture of fanaticism ... that keeps giving rise to more lunatic ullema. Maudoodis created it, Naiks are perpetuating it. Got it?

You further claim that Israr does not count since he is a nutcase! What can I say? (scratching head icon).

These are the “intellectuals” that you continue to ignore! Whether or not they were present at the exact location on the day when Al-Qaeda was formed is irrelevant (and laughable)!!!!!! Whether they come from indo-pak or arabia too is irrelevant. Their views are echoed by Al-Qaeda ideology … as I specifically showed by quoting Maudoodi in #221.

As I said, ask your ullema a few questions … but you already know the answer. Your imams will echo the views of Maudoodi, Israr, and Naik … which are also reflected in Al-Qaeda ideology.

So tell us more about the death squads, lal masjids, the suicide bombers, the wahabis, et al. Note the books and Quran copies in the mosques (these books were not merely printed in Saudi Arabia. Some were research thesis on Islamic laws by higher students at Arab institutions. Copies of Quran were published under auspices of government department and department heads of saudi arabia).

So Nebraska is not the issue; and neither are Ahmadis! Problem is with your ullema but you are in denial.

Bad Muslim
No banana ...

September Morning
Bhatti,

Note the “more later” at the end of my previous post. It means I’ll post more later. Got it, little genius?

So far you have confused things. Instead of discussing Islamic fundamentalism, you keep going back to Ahmadis … only to later claim that you are not interested in Ahmadis. You are not very bright, you know.

… but then again, you also think killing for apostasy may be OK … even as you criticize Ahmadis for being an organized community. And then you also support Maudoodi’s unprovoked war against non-Muslim nations, even as you criticize Ahmadis.

And I am forming my opinion on basis of your posts. So think carefully before making absurd statements.

Now take a deep breath and shut the fuck up. I’ll post more later, you idiot!

September Morning Bhatti,

My use of “jihadi” as a “lunatic jihadi” applies to you … and not to sahaba. I explained it further as those killing others for leaving Islam (apparently you may be OK with it). You are confusing the issue and making things up. Perhaps this is the best you can do!

So your are back, once again, to discussing Ahmadis. This time it is the Soviet-Afghan war and what did Ahamdis do about it! I fail to understand your obsession … but first, let’s do a quick rewind:

- So far you have criticized Ahmadis for being an organized community. As it turns out, you are the one who thinks killing for apostasy may be an acceptable idea. What a shame, Bhatti!

- You criticized Ahmadis for not standing up to tyranny. When I explained Quranic view in the light of Prophet’s (pbuh) migration, you dropped the issue.

- You criticized Ahmadis for having a khalifa. I pointed out that Quran also asks believers to obey the Prophet (pbuh); would you have objected to it if you lived 1400 years ago? You dropped the issue.

- I cited Maudoodi who preached unprovoked war on other nations. You failed to condemn it and tried to validate by writing a confusing, elaborate response. Once again, your tactic is a shameful one.

You are a closet jihadi … the lunatic type.

More later …

September Morning Bhatti,

I used jihadi in the sense of a “lunatic jihadi” … who wants to kills others for leaving Islam, for blasphemy, for adultery. Since you are trying to validate these practices, it makes you a “lunatic jihadi”. That’s all.

And it is good to know that you may agree with ullema on killing apostates. Finally you are being honest and dropping hints about your views.

+++

Maudoodi being dead does not make him irrelevant; you are clearly mistaken. Zakir and Israr did not create Al-Qaeda ... right. But they are influenced by the same views and culture that have shaped Al-Qaeda ideology. They have significant following and they continue to perpetuate the culture that shaped them in the first place. Calling them names proves nothing.

The books that I referred to earlier … that I read in the mosques were printed in Saudi Arabia! In these mosques I also came across Quranic translations with added inserts and explanations which widen the scope of jihad beyond what Quran actually said. Where do you think the suicide bombers in middle-east are coming from? Planet Mars??

And feel free to go to any mosque ... and ask the imam. Go to Arabs if it turns you on. And let us know what they say ...

September Morning Bhatti,

You are slowly coming out of your jihadi closet. In a sorry attempt, you try to justify death for apostasy etc. by arguing that … “crime depends on the understanding of society”.

Yes indeed … and ullema’s views on apostasy reflect their outlook in life. And when you defend these ullema, it reflects your own outlook in life!

+++

So what if Maudoodi is dead? His teachings live on! You also ignored Zakir Naik. Here’s another one: Dr. Israr Ahmed. Watch this brief clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTz6EPjqgZU
Pay close attention at 1:10 …

Check with any imam ... and he'll agree with "death" for apostasy, adultery, and blasphemy. These views have become part of mainstream Islamic thought … which also drives Al-Qaeda and similar organizations. And your efforts to defend these ullema are shameful at best.

Lastly, I am not comparing our khalifa to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). I am questioning your reasoning. And as I have shown, your criterion does not hold up. If you lived 1400 years ago, you would have argued against obeying the Prophet (pbuh) on basis of your “what if” scenario. Got it?

September Morning Bhatti, to round out the discussion, here's another excerpt from Maudoodi. You are fooling yourself if you think he does not count. Happy reading (think of Al-Qaeda as you read this)!

+++

“Human relations are so integrated that no state can have complete freedom of action under its principles unless the same principles are in force in a neighboring country. Therefore, both for its safety and the general reform, a “Muslim party” will not be content with the establishment of Islam in just one area alone. It should try to expand in all directions. On one hand it will spread its ideology, on the other it will invite people of all nations to accept its creed, for salvation lies only therein. If this Islamic state has power and resources it will fight and destroy non-Islamic governments and establish Islamic states in their place.”

Haqiqat-e-Jihad (Reality of Jihad); Lahore: Taj Company Ltd., 1964; page 64, 65

[The above statement is an open declaration of war against other nations. It essentially means that a strong Islamic nation is a sign of present and eminent danger for the neighboring non-Islamic states. Maudoodi tries to validate his interpretation by casting Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) as a person who declared war against other nations to subjugate them. Note the emphasis on unprovoked war … associated with the Prophet of Islam … whose sole aim supposedly was to seize power and rule over others. Maudoodi further states …]

“This was the policy which was adopted by the Prophet (pbuh) and his Rightly Guided Caliphs. Arabia, where the Muslims Party was first formed, was the first to be subdued. After this, the Prophet (pbuh) sent invitations to all neighboring countries, but did not wait to see whether these invitations were accepted. As soon as he acquired power, he started the conflict with Roman Empire. Abu Bakr became the leader of the Party after the Prophet (pbuh) and attacked both Roman and Persian Empires and Umar finally won the war”

Haqiqat-e-Jihad (Reality of Jihad); Lahore: Taj Company Ltd., 1964; page 64, 65

September Morning bhatti,

This is why I asked you to check with any imam about Islamic punishment for apostasy, adultery, and blasphemy. Go to any mosque and ask! The answer will be … death, death, and death. How do you think this viewpoint became so pervasive?? Because it has been taught in Islamic institutions for ages now. Maudoodi is one example. I have come across several books of Islamic law in mosques where this view is blatantly supported. Zakir Naik is another name that comes to mind ... who recently explained why apostasy should be punished with death. You are indeed in denial!

Moving on ...

So all you have against our khalifa is a hypothetical “what if”. Is that all?? I mean, is that all you have???

All along you have ignored the real good he has done and you are hung up on a hypothetical “what if”. It’s a shame, bhatti, that this is the best you can do. So please spare me your self-righteous rants about the great things you have done for Ahmadis.

Quran commanded companions of the Prophet (pbuh) to obey him. Apply your “what if” to the Prophet (pbuh) now. You should have been there to criticize the companions for obeying the Prophet (pbuh). And you should have been there to criticize the Prophet (pbuh) for migrating and not standing up to tyranny. It seems you don't think before writing absurd posts.

Before questioning my calling you a fool and an idiot, review your own language and imagery on this board (against me, we well as against others). You come across as a demented individual. But that's your problem, not mine. So deal with it ... instead of worrying about Ahmadis and their khalifa.

September Morning Krbhatti (#217),

Your asserted that no intellectuals agree with Al-Qaeda. I showed that mainstream Islamic scholars echo some of the core ideas that Al-Qaeda represents … so your claim is incorrect. As I suggested, check with your local mullahs and check Maudoodi’s writings. You are in denial if you think that Maudoodi has no backing. There are countless other mullahs who preach similar views, giving rise to a culture of hatred and fanaticism. Al-Qaeda type organizations are a product of this culture and its politics.

Instead of discussing this issue, you started rambling about Ahmadis and their khalifa. You are an idiot, a moron par excellence.

Our khalifa is constantly reminding us of the message of Quran. He spends his time praying and fasting, studying Quran, giving lectures on Islamic teachings, meeting people who seek his counsel, and heading humanitarian organizatinos. He is in public eye around the clock and has very little time for himself. Go watch him before you criticize him.

It is because of our khalifa’s efforts that we have a well-functioning, global community … opening up schools and hospitals all over the world (read kulharee’s #213), have a global satellite system that broadcasts Islamic and educational programs in most major languages 24-7, helping communities all over the world. Note “Humanity First” … a global organization to help victims of natural disasters … which has been started under the current khalifa. It is registered in 20+ countries so far. They helped in the aftermath of the earthquakes in Pakistan, the tsunami in the far-east region, earthquake in China, and much more.

And what does it cost each Ahmadi-Muslim to provide for the khalifa? Less than a dollar a year. Read this again … it is less than a dollar a year. So what exactly is your problem, I fail to understand.

One has to stand up to tyranny … but there is a time and place for it. But I don’t expect you to understand this. Note the Holy Prophet (pbuh) himself migrated and left his homeland. Perhaps you should have been there to criticize him (pbuh) … you idiot!!!!!!!!!!

September Morning
krbhatti (#208),

Like I said, you are totally losing it. Your post and your tone show this quite well.

Resistance is one thing … but attacking others to get even is another. Islam allows one, not the other. And yet under some circumstances Islam allows picking up arms to fight in defense. Try to appreciate the difference.

One should resist … lock the doors, hide, evade, repel the attack, run away etc. Islam even encourages the oppressed to avoid the situation altogether by migrating. This is why our khalifa left Pakistan. And this is why Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) left Mecca.

A khalifa does not have to be a head of state. Look up the meaning of khalifa. Your argument is baseless and your obsession with Ahmadis is pathetic.

+++

Re #209: In #108 I showed views of a scholar of Islam who has a large following among the ummah. His views are reflected in the views of Al-Qaeda and similar organizations. Ignoring these realities while pointing of BBC web-site is idiotic of you.

You are not very bright to begin with. And your anger with Ahmadis and fixation with sexual violence points to some deep-rooted issues.

September Morning
krbhatti (#206),

… now you are losing it. Are you feeling alright, bhatti?

Your question should be directed to Allah Almighty Who asks Muslims to be patient when faced with hardship and persecution. Once blood has been shed, there is no point in perpetuating the cycle of violence and lawlessness.

However, under some circumstances Quran allows the oppressed to defend themselves by picking up arms. Till Allah granted this permission, Holy Prophet (pbuh) and his companions patiently bore the atrocities … including the ones you are postulating.

In summary, we’ll follow what Quran tells us and Allah will do the rest; I have complete faith in Him.

As for the khalifa, he is supported the same way Abu Bakr, Omar etc. were supported back then. I am still unclear on your obsession with Ahmadis and their khalifa. If anything, our khalifa has restrained Ahmadis, thus breaking the cycle of much violence. And this is exactly what Quran tells us. But you can’t seem to appreciate these basic facts …

September Morning krbhatti (#178),

You are unable to find anything on Ahmadis or their khalifa; your criticism is merely for the sake of criticism. This is why I called you a slimy hypocrite.

Like I have shown (#165), in response to Ahmadis being martyred, our khalifa only reminds us to restrain ourselves and to be patient, just like Allah commands us in Quran, just like the practice of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). This is the benefit of having a khalifa. And this is the reason why Allah has raised prophets in the past (and continues to do so, in my opinion): to warn people and to remind them of their duty to Allah and His creation.

So don’t worry about Ahmadis being in “deep shit”. Rather notice the condition of the ummah … which is busy issuing fatwas of kuffr and death, blowing itself up, and taking hostages in big red buildings. Rest of your post dwells on irrelevant points …

The original point I raised is this (#89): Your contention that Muslim fanatics have no “intellectual backing” is flat wrong. They have centuries of scholarship and leadership to validate their views. I have posted views of one of their leading scholars (#108) and you are unable to respond.

So please follow you own advice. You could use a little self-copulation, you know ...