Return to: Home | Life & Society | Religion

22 comments from readers

Sharif
19 June 2008 at 13:42

Good news, This fatwa against terrorism. I doubt if this fatwa will be quoted , as Mr. Sarwar claims. It comes from a community in a country where Muslims are a minority. Talking of this in a majority Muslim country would be big success. In such countries so many killings are taking place in the name of Islam. Hardly any body is thinking of fighting against, what they call Jihad against infidels. In Pakistan, for example, if terrorists, in name of Islam, kill people, the press says, even the liberal ones, why are you killing Muslims. In other words, it is OK, if not desirable to kill the infidels, but leave Muslims alone. The end of Terrorism and Jihad can only be achieved if Muslims admit that Quranic teachings, at least a part of them, need reformation. The rest is all irrelevant, if not a waste of time. Writers who claim to be liberal, should concentrate on reformation and not on cosmetic operations just to achieve a better image of Islam. There again, under current circumstances, In Muslim countries even suggesting reformation, or deleting a verse in Quran would be tantamount to a fatwa and could shorten your life. Then you have to hide yourself in infidel country. What a religion, and I was born one. O dear, save me from so-called liberals and Mullahs for doing nothing but trying to create a better image.

Southfork
19 June 2008 at 16:49

Courageous and honest reply Sharif. All religions will only be saved by their own liberal minded devotees who refuse to be cowed by the fundamentalists

Sharif
19 June 2008 at 17:45

Thank you Southfork: In my first note I did not mention any specific examples. Problem number one is the status of women.Muslims do not treat women right. According to the Global Gender Gap (GGG) report, the planet's ten-worst offenders are: Yemen, Chad, Pakistan, Nepal, Saudi Arabia, Benin, Morocco, Turkey, Egypt and Oman. Of the ten, nine are Muslim-majority states. At the other end of the spectrum, the planet's best countries for women to live in are: Sweden, Norway, Finland, Ireland, New Zealand, Philippines, Germany, Denmark, Ireland and Spain. Not even one of the top-ten is a Muslim-majority state

But can Islam ever catch up while the following Qur'anic verses are believed by the vast majority of the Muslim faithful to be the dictated words of God? ...

"Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because Allah has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and beat them." (Qur'an 4:34)

"If any of your women commit a lewd act, and they testify to their guilt, confine them to their houses till death overtakes them." (Qur'an 4:15)

I challenge any Muslim to come forward and admit that yes, such verses must be deleted from Quran?

As you may be able to see from my name, i am a man.

proudlyleft
19 June 2008 at 19:36

Let's be honest, Sharif, every religious scripture in the world contains statements that are as problematic as the ones you quoted from the Quran, though again the translation of the Quran remains controversial in many parts (something both religious Muslims and their Western critics refuse to consider). Again, all religious people (not just Muslims) put faith in some kind of divine revelation: if it is not a book, it is a commandment; if it is not a commandment, it is a miracle etc. It seems to be a bit excessive to expect religious Muslims to start hacking away at the Quran: what they can be expected to do, and what many of them have been doing for decades, is to reinterpret such lines in keeping with current values.

Muslim countries often have a serious problem when it comes to the status of women. There is no doubt about that, and it is something that many Muslims (sometimes even religious ones) are concerned with. But can the matter be simply attributed to the Quran, or are there other social, political and economic factors at play? There is a good argument for the latter option. The tendency to simply blame the Quran for all the ills of Muslim societies and the (often Western/ised) call for religious Muslims to basically repudiate a book that is the essence of their identity (instead of reforming/reinterpreting/re-translating some parts of it) seems to smack of cultural browbeating to me... No wonder some even not-very-religious Muslims react strongly to it.

IndigoJo
19 June 2008 at 23:05

The fatwa may well carry extra weight because it comes from an institution associated with conservative views on religious matters, even if there may be some distance between them and the Taliban and some of the more extreme elements among Pakistani Deobandis. However, it is not the first fatwa to be issued condemning suicide bombings and deliberate attacks on innocent people in jihad; Shaikh Muhammad Afifi al-Akiti (who currently lives in Oxford, but is from Malaysia if I remember rightly) issued a fatwa to that effect a few years ago which has also been widely quoted, as have a number of Saudi scholars and others. It would be interesting to put this issue to the major Deobandi religious schools in Pakistan, such as Binoria and Darul-Uloom Karachi.

BTW: two of the countries Sharif mentioned are not Muslim-majority countries - Benin and Nepal. It is interesting to note that Moldova comes fairly high on that list despite its reputation as a source of trafficked women; it is worthwhile to note that it measures only inequality, not the quality of life that men or women enjoy.

Vladimir Val
20 June 2008 at 01:58

Any one who studied the life of Mohammad and the beginning of Islam knows that Mr. Ziauddin Sardar’s statement of "In Islam, creating social discord or disorder, breach of peace, rioting, bloodshed, pillage or plunder and killing of innocent persons anywhere in the world are all considered most inhuman crimes” is a big fat unadulterated lie.

Around 620 AD Mohammad entered into a treaty of non-aggression with the citizens of Mecca. The treaty was to be for a period of several years but as soon as Mohammad felt strong enough, he broke the treaty and plundered Mecca, killing all in his way. This act set a president for the Koran. Mohammad made it clear that Muslims were commanded to make treaties that they had no intention of keeping, if it was to the advantage of the Muslims. This is deceit and it was a breach of peace, blood was shed, he and his men pillaged and plundered, and they killed innocents. This brought another “law” to the Koran. At that time it was considered by all that houses of worship were no place for blood shed. Mohammad added an addendum to that; unless the inhabitance “resisted”. This meant that if one raised a hand to defend them selves, they could be slaughtered; as they were.

There is no Imam who condemns the slaying of infidels. Infidels are not innocent by the shear fact that they have not submitted to Islam.

hopeandfear
20 June 2008 at 07:12

Dear, if you analyze wrong history, then you will come to wrong conclusions. The above mentioned treaty was broken by citizens of Mecca. And, I think they even refused to settle the matter. Also review the history before this treaty (how meccans oppressed the muslims); Actually when he entered mecca, he announced peace to all except the terrorists (six people were ordered to bring to justice). So, I kindly request you to refer history from authentic sources (Michel H. Hart, Encyclopedia, wikipedia, etc...)

Sharif
20 June 2008 at 08:38

It is difficult to discuss anything if you start to accuse others of quoting wrong sources, as hopeandfear has done. Hope and fear? Is that not motto for a faith?. I have read in some books that Bokhari also mentions this episode that vladimirval quotes. I have read a book called 'Why I am not a Muslim' by an author who because of Fear, does not use his real name. He also mentions such attacks by Mohammed. Before he conquered Mecca, his main source of income was , attacking caravans with goods and subsequently distributing the loot. A lion's share he took for himself. Before a war started he used to tell his followers. "If you win, you will own their property and their women". Women? Yes, Muslims were allowed to have sexual relations with women of defeated enemies.

lawdude
20 June 2008 at 18:14

There is so much mis-information contained in these comments that it will take a fairly long essay to refute them, which is why these ideas continue to be repeated till they become part of the social lexicon.

Neither Shariff or Vladimir seriously address the story which is the Deobandi fatwa and conference against violence. It is clear from these Deobandi scholars that this reputable body of Islamic scholars assert that violence and killing in the name of Islamic is un-Islamic and unsupportable.

Instead of addressing this issue, Vladimir merely makes up facts and distorts Islamic history while defaming the Prophet Muhammad. There was no treaty between the Muslims and the Meccans in 620. If you cannot have an honest debate, then at least admit your ideologically driven agenda.

With respect to Shariff's comments, quoting Ibn Warraq clearly show's his apostate and hostile tendencies. There is no sense debating those who derive their income and livelihood on writing books that attack Islam, defame the Prophet Muhammad, and reject the Quran as an authentic book of religious inspiration.

Both Vladimir and Shariff's intentions are clearly to continue old colonial stereotypes and ignore the positive efforts of some Muslims. Simply dismissing the efforts of an extremely influential conservative Islamic institution with followers in the millions in India, Pakistan, Europe, South Africa, and North America, and digressing into irrelevant issues like women is not an argument.

When you are ready to have an honest discussion, then we can discuss the true merits of these latest efforts to combat violence.

maniseharan
21 June 2008 at 03:28

Great news. This message only comes from the muslims in minority group and this were to be directed toward countries where majority live then three quarter of the battle is won.

Sharif
21 June 2008 at 09:57

Lawdude: You obviously like your words so much that you posted them twice. There are some points in your post, which are inaccurate. You say I did not go into Deobandi verdict. If you read my 1st post I said: Good news, this verdict on terrorism. Then you say anybody who reads Ibn warraq, is prejudiced anyway. Really? May I remind you again that you read my 2nd post. There you will see my quotations from Quran. Yes, If you now claim that anybody reading quran is not neutral, it would be another matter. So I quote quran, and you dot contract those quotations, which means they were accurate. So there.

You then turn your anger by saying that Muslims are not killing Muslims anywhere in Muslim countries. (I was referring to majority Muslim countries). All I can say is you should read the papers in detail. I am quoting a Pakistani paper from today (Daily Times, Lahore), which shows how we are handling this phenomenon:

"Another boy has been sentenced to death and fine for blasphemy by a sessions court in Sialkot. The verdict came as the court was surrounded by zealots who want people immolated to their fanaticism. Like dozens of cases in the past, the judge had to hand out the maximum punishment to save his own life."

In Egypt, Iraq, Iran. Pakistan and other countries are full of such rot. Women being killed for not wearing Hijab, women talking to another man, Men caught drinking and mosques being bombed by unknown zealots for no other reason than a faith in another sect. The list is long. I come from pakistan, and saying that intentions are clearly to continue old European colonial stereotypes, is a lie and should be taken by any other man of gentlemanly nature.

I have tried to reply to your assertions. If you want to carry on with discussion, may I suggest that you read before contradicting me. I know, in Islam anybody criticizing Islam gets another treatment, Like this boy in pakistan. But we are west and also i write like Ibn Warraq, you can't get me. thank you. Refrain yourself to arguments. Salman rushdi, Ms Ali and many more are hiding from 'tolerant' followers of your faith.

aflatoon
21 June 2008 at 11:25

i just wonder what constitutes trrorism.please define trrorism.i know nobody will make a defination acceptable to all.attacking a weak n one of the most backward countries in the present world in the name of fighting trrorism is not an act of terrorism.if afghanistan had not been attacked by the neocons the world should not have seen so much horror,death,destruction,maiming n torure.in the name of fighting terrorism the acts of torturing the enemy or suspected enemy fighters like hanging them by the wrist in uncomfortable positions ,water boarding n keeping locked in places like guantanamo bay ,in secret prisons the us is itself perpetuating acts of terror.but no body is bothered by these acts of inhuman proportions.attacking iran in the hollow claim of wmd is itself an act of terror.these acts are continuing.no body is bothered about somalia n ethiopians attacking n ransacking it.the world has for gotten a small place like chechnya whidh is being vandalised n plundered by russia.for the last decade or so.

mr sardar i request u to kindly first define terrorism n then talk about it.the muslims have been at the receiving end oth euroans n now americans for almost a decade.now they are doing something abhorrable n unpardonable acts.but do think about the causes my dear sir.the falasinees are being humiliated,maimed n killed by the occupiers of their lands ;this act is being supported by the so called allies.there is so much injustice n acrimony prevailing in the present world that any sane voice will not be heard.branding a set of people as terrorists is itselaf agross injustice.are the chechnyans fighting for their freedom terrorists then why not the tibetans .i have not seen them being branded as terrorists.what about the sim fein;they were never christened terrorist.so als with the basque folks who are known as seperatists.

plese sit down n think what the world has undergone in the name of democracy n secularism.who is responsible for this.who is supplying arms n deadly weapons to israel to attack israel.the matter is being complicated by holier than thou attitude.in the 9 th century itself europe n america has done so much killing n bloodshed that it will take a lot to write about these gory acts.till a few decades back s.africa was ruled by the shamsful aparthied supported by all the champions of humanity n preachers of kindnes.the west has itself been a victim of its double standards;what justice it will deliver to this strife torn world whidh is mainly their own creation.

sorry for this bitter outburst.but i have not seen any problem solved in my lifetime either by the super powers or their hand maid the impotent uno.waging war on other lands is not going to help.today also 4 soldiers are reported to have been killed in afghanistan.u may brand it as an act of terror but please dont forget there is a war going on .in war the enemy is not hugged or kissed.moreover what ever may be said the nato or calition forces what ever misnomer u apply to it are the invading or occupying powers.no amount of fatwas is going to help.the americans have landed in a wrong place.afghanistan is not columbia.pl remember this.arm twisting the maliki govt into long term agreement n keeping their forces in iraq till etrnity is not going to help eother.go on seeing the result.even if u get some tutored fatwa they are not going to change the seriousness of the situation.in the end i will say lwt justice prevail.stop your double standards. aflatoon india.

Ahmad
21 June 2008 at 12:10

The Deobandis' fatwa is a welcome move, but it will be interesting to see how this is actually implemented. For instance, what is the Deobandis' stance about other groups in Islam with whom it has historically had very hostile relations, to the point it has even fired up their members to attack other Muslims and mosques? The Deobandis' hatred for the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, for instance, has motivated some Deobandi radicals to persecute Ahmadi Muslims in Pakistan. Since the Ahmadis live by the motto 'Love for All, Hatred for None' - which should be the banner promoted by all in Islam in fact - they have never retaliated. In addition, do not the Deobandis believe that Jesus will one day descend weilding a sword and threaten to slaughter any man or woman that rejects Islam? Where will this fatwa be then? Perhaps in light of the bad press the Deobandis have received lately (the Times ran a special feature exposing the extremist views of its UK head, Shaykh Riyadhul Haq), the fatwa appears to be a PR stunt. But I hope I'm proved wrong and that this really does signal the start of their move back towards true Islam.

Sharif
22 June 2008 at 08:17

Ahmad's input is welcome. Ahmadis are being persecuted in Pakistan, but also in other Islamic countries. Saudis, Kuwaitis and many others do not allow them to enter their country. In Pakistan, where there are estimated to be a couple of million Ahmadis, is the treatment inhuman. I wonder if any scholar of Islam , throws some light on this subject.

After having said that, I must correct Ahmad that to claim that Ahmadis "Love for all. Hatred for none" is just a slogan, nothing more. Agmad knows that. I know a couple who stopped paying the monthly contribution to the sect and they were not only thrown out of the group, but considered kafirs. Another woman whose husband used to beat her up (here in the west), went to their Imam and she was told not to leave her husband and carry on trying in the hope that he may change. She decided a divorce and was later excommunicated. There was a time when you saw a Burqa clad woman, you knew the woman belong to this sect. The status of women in their sect is worse than many other Muslim cultures. This 'love for others' does not include even their close relatives, since when they die, Ahmadis refuse to join the last prayers (Janaza) for him or her. When Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan died, Sir Zafrullah refused to give the last respects ti him because 'He (JInnah)is not Muslim' in their eyes. I must also say something positive about their faith. This is the only sect which declared Jihad as unislamic, as Mirza Sahib said, Jihad is not needed to today's world. How i agree with him.

Ahmad
23 June 2008 at 18:58

Sharif, I have been an Ahmadi Muslim all my life, and God is my Witness that the slogan sums up the Ahmadiyya Jama'at in a nutshell. The isolated cases you cite are not based on true facts. Yes, there are some members who do not pay their chanda (subscription) either at all or according to the prescribed rate, but this does not preclude them from being Ahmadi Muslims. I personally know of some members who do not pay anything, but they continue to participate in our events unchallenged. The people you cite I presume were those who may have conducted themselves in a manner not worthy of our traditions, and because of their unacceptable and indeed unIslamic behaviour effectively cut themselves off from the Jama'at. In any case the Jama'at is no need of people's fees - I would refer you to our Khalifa's sermon of 13th June (go to http://www.alislam.org/archives/ and look under 'Archived Sermons')

As for the treatment of women, if it really was that bad, why do the thousands of our female members, young and old, continue to make enormous sacrifices for the cause of Islam (building of mosques, etc) and demonstrate utmost love for our Khalifas? There is no comparison in the selfless dedication and commitment to the mission of the Promised Messiah of our ladies, and the casual 'services' given by other Muslim women who think donating spare change to the odd dawah project here and there is what Islam requires! Again, the case you cite of domestic abuse needs looking at properly - not knowing your sources I don't think we are obliged to respond to things about which you have no proof. But let it be made clear - the Ahmadiyya Jama'at does not condone any mistreatment or abuse of anyone, not least women, who hold an extremely honoured position in our community. I would also invite you to our mosques, Jalsas, etc, to see the extent of this honour.

Regarding Sir Zafrullah Khan Sahib, you have misquoted him and thereby misrepresented us. Correct, he did not join the funeral prayer - as it was led by an anti-Ahmadi mullah who abused Mirza Ghulam Ahmad - but when asked about his non-participation in the Janaza, he responded with words to the effect that 'You can either consider this a case of a Kafir not joining the Janazah of a Muslim, or a Muslim not joining the Janazah of a Kafir'. 'Kafir' and 'non-Muslim' are different. One can be a Muslim but still be a Kafir (as the Prophet Muhammad said, a Muslim who does not offer his daily prayers is a Kafir - the word Muslim was still used in the hadith for the Kafir). Kafir means one who covers the truth. However, a non-Muslim is one who does not believe in Islam. Sir Zafrullah Khan Sahib used the term 'Kafir' in the context of someone (i.e. M Ali Jinnah) who did not believe in the Promised Messiah, but never used the term non-Muslim.

Another point of correction - Mirza Ghulam Ahmad only prohibited physical Jihad for this age, not the ongoing spiritual and moral Jihad of self-purification and self-correction.

Stan Rosenthal
24 June 2008 at 17:23

Aflatoon, there is a very simple definition of terrorism that clearly distinguishes it from other forms of violence. It is a form of violence that is intended to create terror by DELIBERATELY targetting innocent civilians in places where by all the standards of civilised behaviour they would consider themselves to be safe, like market places, restaurants, buses, mosques, synagogues, churches, queues for work, football fans celebrating the victory of Iraq etc, etc, Not to mention the car bombers who put children in their cars to escape detection!

javK
25 June 2008 at 01:22

I don't think this fatwa adds much to the current debate - next to no muslim has a problem with innocent civilians let alone killing them.

The problem is the not so innocent ones, who come to our lands, undertake military training, get armed to the teeth with weapons, and parade around and want to be termed civilans when the locals decide to have a pop at them - eg Israel. Here is the not so palatable (to the west) use of violence which some see as freedome fighters and others terrorists...

The article below is quite a good analysis addressing a number of the issues above...

http://islamic-considerations.blogspot.com/

Sharif
25 June 2008 at 07:57

Stan Rosenthal: your definition of terrorism is not off the mark. What Aflatoon was saying is simply this: Everybody talks of terror and they mean the Muslims killing others and he wants to equate USA wars as terror and thereby justify the Islamic terror. Ask Aflatoon this: When Muhammad attacked Mecca was it also terror? When he also attacked many other countries after he became powerful, what would he define such acts? Muslims carried on with Muhammad's 'conquer' policy much after his death. That is why they say that Islam was spread with a sword. At one time they reached Europe. Many Muslims feel 'proud' to narrate the story of Tariq who crossed Africa and took over Gibraltar and then Spain. Were these people heros or terrorists? The fact is we have had all our 'black' history where subjugating other weaker nations was considered part of the game. Now it is America, but America does not colonize other countries. they have self interest, but they let people elect their countries, something very uncommon in Muslim countries. If you are going to a mosque in Cairo or Karachi and a bomber bombs the place, you can say, well, this is not terror, it is in reply to American 'terror'. What a logic. If Van Gogh is killed in the streets of Amsterdam, just because he dared criticize Islam, that is also in reply to USA. Aflatoon, you believe in that?

yahya
13 September 2008 at 00:29

Asian Human Rights Commission condemns in strongest terms the leading Pakistani channel, GEO TV, for its incitement to death through its broadcast and the subsequent murders. This is indeed a shameful day for humanity when the leading channel takes it upon itself to take the society back to dark age of witch-hunting and religious persecution.

“The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information that an anchor person working for a prominent television channel [GEO TV ed.] has incited … to kill - to devastating effect. … The first killing happened within 24 hours of the broadcast, …”

Please support this Asian Human Rights Commission urgent appeal to stop Pakistan going into stone age completely;

http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/mainfile.php/2008/2999/

Muzaffar Mansoor
14 September 2008 at 15:52

I am grateful to the writer Mr Ziauddin Sardar of Newstatesman for his brave articulate representations in this matter. It is shame that none of the ruling parties PPP and PML (N) leaders, functionaries, ministers, governors and the prime minister or even the President of Pakistan has directly indirectly condemned the incitement of GEOTV and consequent murders of innocent Ahmadis until date. No wonder both parties claim credit for resolving ‘90 years Qadiani problem’ and their silence is deliberate and in approval of what is said and done by the GEOTV anchor person. There is no SUE-MOTO by any of the Chief Justices; no voice is raised by any of the Aitzaz Ahsan Bar President and or his lawyers who have been advocating for independence of judiciary and human rights. It may be so that this matter is not earning them any funding. It is hopeless for them. I am deeply disappointed and saddened to read comments from educated people who directly and indirectly support and sympathise killing of innocent human beings in the name of interpretational feud of religious beliefs in Islam. Ahmadis do believe in the unqualified finality of prophet hood of Mohammad SAW but with same interpretation of earlier holy religious scholars and holy Waliullahs. They do differ in interpretation with today’s political Mullahs belonging to either AHRARI-ISM or MAUDUDI-ISM not Islam who use Islam for their interior motives and vested interests. Tell me did Holy Prophet of Islam SAW ever killed and made to kill an human being because of blasphemy during his entire life give me one example. Moreover as an Ahmadi Muslim I have been reciting Kalima LA ILAHA ILLALLAHO MOHAMMADUR RASOOLULLAHE since 55 years whole heartedly with its full meaning and understanding and Mohammad as Mohammad SAW and not Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as alleged by a political Mullah at GEOTV AALIM ON LINE recently. How dare he could make such slanderous and libel comments. “LAHNATULLAHE ILAL KAZEBEEN” is what to be referred in the Holy Quran about such people who spread hate based on their lies and half baked and fake knowledge. May God protect us from such evils? Yes there is great need for FATWA against those who commit crimes against the humanity and peace.

Muzaffar Mansoor
17 September 2008 at 18:48

HUMAN RIGHTS RESTORATION INTERNATIONAL FORUM

UNITED KINGDOM

HRRIF – UK

The Case of Murder of innocent human beings:

HRRIF is horrified to learn that two innocent Pakistani citizens belonging to a minority religious sect known as ‘Ahmadi Muslims’ were murdered shortly after a broadcaster on one of the country’s main television channels urged viewers to kill “blasphemers” and “apostates” as a sacred religious duty. According to the reports, Amir Liaqat Hussain, anchoring a programme ‘Aalim on line’ on the widely viewed GEO TV Sky Channel on September 7, declared that the murder of members of the Qadiani [derogatory word for Ahmadis] was (Wajib ul Qatal) the sacred duty of the Muslims. He followed up by urging two other participants on his program, who belonged to different sects of Islam, to endorse his viewpoint. Hussain, who is a former minister for religious affairs in Pakistan’s federal government, representing MQM reportedly obtained the endorsement he sought more than four times. Again on September 9, Hussain answered a query on a phone-in program with the comment that those guilty of the alleged sin of blasphemy should be put to death.

Within 18 hours of the first broadcast, Abdul Manan Siddiqui, a heart specialist in the city of Mirpur Khas, in Sindh province, was murdered. He was the district Amir [chief] of the Ahmadi Community in Mirpur Khas.

The doctor was reportedly called out of his clinic on the afternoon of September 8 by six people who pretended to have brought a patient. Siddiqui was dragged outside, shot 11 times and died on the spot. His private guard and a woman passer-by were also injured in the attack.

The following day, Sheikh Muhammad Yousaf, a 75 years old rice trader and district Amir [chief] of the Ahmadi Community, was killed in the city of Nawab Shah, also in Sindh province the Home of the President Zardari. He was reportedly shot at by motorcycle borne assailants. Since the promulgation of the notorious Ahmadi-specific Ordinance XX in 1984, he is the 94th Ahmadi killed for his faith. The assailants had taken a route past a police station. No one was arrested.

The HRRIF has strongly condemned the action and joins the AHRC, HRCP, IFJ and all other right thinking peace loving people in condemning the incitement to intolerance and violence apparent in the declaration made by Hussain and his two interlocutors. “Under legal standards for curbing hate speech in the media, the burden of proof is on Amir Liaqat Hussain and the channel that broadcast his program to establish that they do not bear some responsibility for the murder of two innocent men,”

“Media outlets must implement measures to ensure their content abides by ethical principles, including curbs on hate speech, both in the interests of promoting tolerance and also to ensure there is no opening for state authorities to intervene in the expression of fair comment.” IFJ Asia-Pacific has rightly said

Additional Information:

The Ahmadi Muslim Community was declared non-Muslim on September 7, 1974, through a constitutional amendment, and was labeled a non Muslim minority by the PPP government. Since then, there has been open hatred of the Community by certain Islamic circles and fundamentalists across the Muslim world, and its members suffer widespread discrimination. Ahmadi followers are not allowed to pose like a Muslim and even bury their dead in the ordinary grave yards of Muslims, and many of those buried before 1974 were desecrated by fundamentalists.

Dr. Ghulam Sarwar was murdered on March 19 in Faisalabad, Punjab province while Mr. Basharat Mughal on February 24 in Karachi. The Dr. Siddiqui is the 15th medical doctor killed since 1984. Religious Extremists across Pakistan incite hatred against Ahmadis

their beliefs, and call for their killing. Most profane and unfortunate is

it that these clerics are doing so during the holy and blessed month of

Ramadhan, a month of fasting, prayer and quiet devotion.

Is it not surprising and unbelievably absurd that under these circumstances, the authorities’ initiative amounted to registration of a criminal case under anti-Ahmadi specific laws Ahmadi jewelers, traders and businessmen at Chenab Nagar [Rabwah], who published Ramadan timetable for starting and closing the daily fast and “therein used the words ‘Imam’ and ‘Khilafat’, thereby injured the feelings of Muslims”, allegedly.

The entire Ahmadi population in Kotli Azad Kashmir is also charged by the police under anti-Ahmadi specific legislation nd their names are published in the Khatme Nabuwwat Kotli newspaper.

MQM gets rid of Dr Amir Liaquat Hussain:

The MQM has already announced that the popular religious TV person, Amir Liaquat Hussain, is no longer a member of the party’s Rabita Committee because he is making statements that arouse “religious hatred”. The announcement specified that he had been “warned earlier to stop making such statements on his television programme”. The MQM actually said that owing to his inclination to arouse religious hatred “his party responsibilities were ended one and a half years ago and his membership was suspended as well”. Now the MQM doesn’t want to be “responsible for any of his words and deeds”.

HRCP slams Ahmadi killings:

The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) has called for action to protect the lives of minorities and to halt the practice of hate preaching through the media. In a statement issued on Wednesday 10th September 2008, the HRCP said: “On Monday, an eminent Ahmedi physician and cardiologist was shot dead in Mirpurkhas. The next day, another prominent Ahmadi was killed in Nawab Shah. The Ahmadiyya community believes there is a link between these brutal killings and a programme telecast by a private TV channel in which the host called for the killing of Ahmadis.” Even if there is no direct link, neither of the offences can be tolerated, it added. The Ahmedi community is within its legal rights to demand protection against instigators of violence, it said. The statement demanded that the government ensure that the killers of the Ahmadi citizens are brought to justice and that nobody is allowed to use the media to preach communal hatred and fratricide, said by HRCP.

The HRRIF has noted:

No direct and or indirect statement of condemnation was issued in this serious matter by any of the ruling political parties PPP and PML (N) leaders, their functionaries and the ministers.

No statement and or concern are shown by the Prime Minister and or the President of Pakistan on behalf of their government.

No remorse and or explanation are given by the Chairman and or board of directors of the GEOTV Limited.

No Sue-Moto action is taken by any of the Chief Justices of Sindh High Court or the Supreme Court of Pakistan.

None from the Pakistan Bar Council and or lawyers in Pakistan has made any statement, dharna and strike who have been championing for the cause for the human rights and independence of judiciary for some time.

None of the G8 and donor countries ‘allies in the war on terror’ has made any statement or condemnation on the action and loss of innocent Ahmadi Muslims.

HRRIF appreciates:

Statement of condemnation in its strongest terms by none other than MQM leader Altaf Hussain in his press release and by live address to 20 cities and town in Pakistan.

Statement of condemnation by the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan - HRCP

Statement of condemnation by the Asian Human Rights Commission – AHRC

Statement of condemnation by the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) which represents over 600,000 journalists in 122 countries © International Federation of Journalists. Belgium Source: http://asiapacific.ifj.org/en/articles/ifj-condemns-inflamma... pakistan

All other right thinking peace loving people who showed concern and have condemned the action and complained to the OFCOM.

HRRIF demands from the concerned authorities and governments:

Penalize and place ban on GEOTV Sky Channels 815 to stop further incitement to murders

Take stern action against the agents of incitement, murderers and the perpetrators of intolerance and violence against the humanity.

Charge the GEOTV under the corporate crime of murders,

G8 and donors countries to show concern and place sanctions on the Government of Pakistan for failure to regulate irresponsible media provocation and to protect innocent killings of Ahmadi Muslims,

Place ban on the militant Khatme Nabuwwat [KN].

HRRIF Invites:

While condemning strongly now invites all right thinking peace loving people, activists, organizations and human rights agencies from all over the world to voice concern condemnation and mount pressure on those responsible to protect human rights by letter to OFCOM Riverside House2a Southwark Bridge Road London SE1 9HA or call on 020 7981 3040 or 0300 123 3333 and or send an email, G8 donor governments through your MP and directly to the government of Pakistan at the following address:

1. Mr. Asif Ali Zardari

President of Pakistan

President's Secretariat

Islamabad

PAKISTAN

Fax: +92 51 922 1422, 4768/ 920 1893 or 1835

E-mail: (please see: http://www.presidentofpakistan.gov.pk/WTPresidentMessage.asp...)

2. Mr. Syed Yousaf Raza Gillani

Prime minister of Pakistan

Prime Minister House

Islamabad

PAKISTAN

Fax: 92-51-9221596

Tel: +92-51-9206111

E-mail: webmaster@infopak.gov.pk

3. Mr. Rehman Malik

Advisor for Ministry of Interior

Room No. 404, 4th Floor, R Block,

Pak Secretariat

Islamabad

PAKISTAN

Fax: +92 51 920 2624

Tel: +92 51 921 2026

E-mail: minister@interior.gov.pk

4. Dr. Ishrat-ul-Ebad Khan

Governor of Sindh province

Karachi, Sindh Province

PAKISTAN

Fax: +92 21 920 5043

Tel: +92 21 920 1201

E-mail: governor@governorsindh.gov.pk

5. Syed Qaim Ali Shah

Chief Minister House

Karachi, Sindh Province

PAKISTAN

Fax: +92 21 920 2000

E-mail: pppsindh@yahoo.co

6. Chief Justice of Sindh High Court

High Court Building

Saddar, Karachi

Sindh Province

PAKISTAN

Fax: +92 21 9213220

E-mail: info@sindhhighcourt.gov.pk

7. Ms. Nadia Gabol

Minister for Human Rights

Government of Sindh,

Pakistan secretariat, Barrack 92,

Karachi, Sindh Province

PAKISTAN

Tel: +92 21 9207043

Fax: +92 21 9207044

E-mail: lukshmil@yahoo.com

8. Secretary

(Criminal Prosecution) SGA &CD Department

Government of Sindh

Sindh Secretariat,

Karachi, Sindh Province

PAKISTAN

Tel: +92 21 9213327-6

Fax: +92 21 9213873

E-mail: secy.cpsd@sindh.gov.pk

9. Dr. Zulfiqar Ali Mirza

Minister for Home

Government of Sindh

Barrack 79, Pakistan Secretariate

Near MPA hostel

Karachi, Sindh Province

PAKISTAN

Fax: +92 21 9204456

Tel: +92 21 9201920-1

E-mail: secy.home@sindh.gov.pk

For urgent Appeals Programme

Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrchk.org)

Thank you.

Chairperson HRRIF

Co-Chairperson HRRIF

Fax: 020 8767 0456 W: hrrif.com E: info@hrrif.com

saqibtahir
22 September 2008 at 01:01

Crimes against Ahmedies in Pakistan and rest of Islamic world are condemnable and Ahmedies should be allowed freedoms to practice their religion. All discriminatory laws against Ahmedies must be scraped.

At the same time I advise Ahmedies also to change their policies and stop cruel practices like 'social boycott', expulsions, hate propaganda, forced divorces and family breakups that they use against people who chose to leave Jamaat or express dissent about the policies or personal behaviour of Ahmedi leadership. It is highly hypocritical that Ahmedies don't allow any Ahmedi to object on any belief or people of Mirza family but expect that others will tolerate their beliefs that are in conflict with some basic tenants of Main stream Islam.

A lot of problems against Ahmedies are direct result of social isolation that Ahmedies have self-created due to their policy of not having marital and social relations with non-Ahmedi Muslims. This policy of Ahmadiyya has made this community a fortress community that is held hostage by their own dogmas - many purely based on hate.

I am an Ahmedi by birth and held many positions in Jamaat in my youth. Right now I am facing a severe social boycott by Ahmedi community including families of me and my wife. Is such practice human? My only crime was that I criticize corruption among clergy and so-called holy Mirza family and also some wrong practices including discrimination against women.