The Mullah and the Munir Report

MaududiLives/Escapist/Malik99

I really appreciate your efforts to confront the fitna-e-Quadianiyat at this board, but I must protest your constant use of word ``Ahmadis`` while referring to them. Please keep in mind that ``Ahmad`` was one of the given names of our Holy Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him). So there is a chance that if we keep on referring to them as Ahmadis it will have connotations of an association with our Prophet. We cannot let that happen. Therefore, I must request you to refer to them either as ``Quadianis`` or ``Mirzais`` or ``Lahori Quadianis`` or ``Lahor Mirzais`` but never as ``Ahmadis``.

This is fatwa from Shaheed-e-Islam Maulana Yusuf Ludhianvi, on which all Ulema has an Ijma`a (consensus), therefore, it is binding on us.

Sattar

The fact remains that Mirzaiyat came into existence during the British era, hence, your premis that Mirza Sahib ordered his people to support British to help save themelves from persecution is false. The very word ``persecution`` is used in the sense when a ruling entity (whether majority or minority) oppresses and ``persecutes`` a ruled entity. Muslims were not a ruling entity.

The flip side of this argument is that, if Mirzais can help Imperialist oppressors to enslave Muslims, so that both can further their agenda, once, then what will prevent Mirzai`s from doing it again. In other words, if need be, you can destroy Pakistan or Muslims anywhere around the globe and enslave them whenever opportunity becomes available. According to you and Mirza Sahib`s writings affirm that.

Long and short of it is that it seems as though, in Pakistan, EVERYBODY is scared of ``The Mullah``.

I mean, when on a bus, ``The Mullah`` will board, intone long prayers in an angry monologue, flash eyes and turbans at everybody so that they pay up, disembark, head for the next bus . . . while on the bus, people will mutter below their breath and go back to watching pirated movies.

Likewise, here. The bravest Pakistani interactors at chowk are mostly the ones who hide behind their handles. If they are not scared of Indians, as they go on and on about, then they are obviously/probably scared of their own ``The Mullah``.

Come on guys! When we were young, we were given fairy tales about wicked goblins and bogeymen. Now it is time to grow up. Please stop getting scared of your ``The Mullah``.

Please stop waiting for your Mullahs to exterminate themselves. Please have the bravery to do it on your own!!

For more details on this Report by Justice Munir and Kiyani

Read ``Syed Ata Ullah Shah Bukhari``
By Shorish Kashmiree.

Published by Chutaan Publications.
Lahore.

Dr. Mohammad Iqbal`s Letter to Pandit Nehro.

In this letter Iqbal says ``I have no doubt in my mind that the Ahmadis are traitors both to Islam and India.``

********

Lahore
June 21, 1936

Dear Pandit Jawahar Lal,

Thank you so much for your letter which I received yesterday. At the time I wrote in reply to your articles, I believed that you had no idea of the political attitude of the Ahmadis. Indeed the main reason why I wrote a reply was to show, especially to you, how Muslim loyalty had originated and how eventually it had found a basis in Ahmadism. After the publication of my paper, I discovered, to my great surprise, that even the educated Muslims had no idea of the historical causes which had shaped the teachings of Ahmadism moreover. Your Muslims admirers in the Punjab and elsewhere felt perturbed over your articles as they thought you were in sympathy with Ahmadiyya movement. This was mainly due to the fact that the Ahmadis were jubilant over your articles. The Ahmadis Press was mainly responsible for this misunderstanding about you. However, I am glad to know that my impression was erroneous. I myself have little interest in theology, but had to dabble in it a bit in order to meet the Ahmadis on their own grounds. I assure you that my paper was written with the best of intentions for Islam and India. I have no doubt in my mind that the Ahmadis are traitors both to Islam and India.

I was extremely sorry to miss the opportunity of meeting you in Lahore. I was very ill in those days and could not leave my rooms. For the last two years, I have been living a life of practical retirement on account of continued illness. Do let me know when you come to the Punjab next. Did you receive my letter regarding your proposed Union for Civil Liberties? As you did not acknowledge it in your letter, I fear it never reached you.

Sincerely yours,

Mohammad Iqbal

barachota #52 Dost mittar visited Pakistan, and wrote a series of wonderful articles on it. While I always knew that Pakistan was a wonderful country, these articles told me a lot about Dost Mittar too - that he basically has a positive outlook on life and is not a loser. And I have known him on chowk for 2-3 years now and consider him to be a gentleman. So I suggest you dont form an opinion in haste.

As for something DM may have said in anger (which I believe he did recently, although I havent read it nor consider it important enough for me to bother reading it): he may well have been unfair - but then he apologized for whatever it is he said on unplugged. Furthermore, we ALL say unfair and mean things when we get angry.

Bon nuit. j`ai voir le cinema francaise ajourdhoui - mais avec des subtitles.

he #53 i think what you mean is we should have separation of religion and state. Because even if we all claim to be muslims, the fact is that there are vast differences in what we consider to be islam. Trouble in Pakistan is that the maulvi wishes to push his version - which by no stretch of imagination can be called islam, and Maudoodism is the correct word for it. And furthermore the maulvi wishes to enforce Maudoodism on Pakistan by giving it the name of Islam.

The only good news is that the vast majority of Pakistanis see through the mullahs nonsense, and it is only due to the military support that these rascals are anything more than a bunch of lotta carriers.

Manto,

Good to hear that patronizing remarks are considered better than contemptuous ones in your book of decent conduct. Are you a History professor? What part of History did I get wrong in my post?

Anyways, it is good to hear a Pakistani talk about nay teach History to an Indian. I thought your history starts with Harappa then fast forwards to Qasim Bhai`s emancipation of the Sindhi masses :-)

Maududi...

So now you are assuming I am a Qadiani by faith? and I don`t oppose the Iraq war?

You know why no one is buying your nonsense... because there is nothing straight forward about you... you appear to be a sinister, bigoted fanatic... and nothing else...

You know what the only difference between Maudoodi and Hitler was? Hitler had a brilliant political sense... he outwitted Hidenberg`s advisors to get into power... Maudoodi kept dreaming that he was coming to power... he sold himself repeatedly to America... to the Army... etc but he could never win elections... and I have no doubt that had the a-hole actually gotten into power ... he would have been worse... he would`ve been as brutal as the Nazis... but unlike the Nazis he wouldn`t leave behind autobans and Volkswagen... he just wouldn`t have the vision to do so.

Romair...

An Islamic party like Turkey`s AKP is perfectly acceptable to us... like I said somewhere... compared to AKP even our PPP is a Jehadist party.

-YLH

tahmed,

Blame it on me, on India, on the scheming machinations of the other Muslim countries, or the world at large, but the fact that you batting on a sticky wicket IS NOT MY FAULT. I
didn`t have a hand in the troublesome state of affairs that you people have created in your
country. Generally, I prefer to keep shut keeping in mind the excessive Paki sensibility to
any remark directed at their reality. But, when I saw manto and his ilk shouting from
rooftops, debasing mullahs and waxing eloquent about a `secular` Pakistan...couldn`t stop
myself.

Hell, the mullahs are kicked on both sides, on one side for causing partition, on the other for opposing it. I`m sure studying religion is a mistake in your part of the world. BTW, the worst crimes of genocide were perpetrated by secular alcohol guzzling pedophiles and not by maulanas - remember Bangladesh.

``What we need is an anthropological study to understand why you people are like this`` Good to know that you finally worked out the meaning of that fancy word anthropology. If you take my advice, don`t waste your precious resources on such inanities. Better to spend money on medicine, otherwise your children will keep coming to our country for treatment.

sameerJB,

At best, your remarks about Pakistani people not accepting Urdu are hilarious. I`m sure it was an Indian hand at work, that forced Urdu to be adopted as the national language of Pakistan.

Save yourself from becoming a victim to moral sermonizing of Chinese. The proverb you quoted reflects their unhealthy way advancing their goals - see someone as a friend when you are 20, as an enemy when you are 40, just because you`ve already used his friendship to advance your position. When there was no glue to hold your rag-tag nation of mutiple ethnicities, you looked upto Urdu... job done you want to throw it out. How convenient!!

Comparing Urdu to Punjabi is a cruel joke. At best, Punjabi is an unrefined form of Urdu. To substitute this unchiseled, rude and flat language for Urdu is taking your country backwards.

Jahalat ko mazhab banake....

Fauji-lover Romair`s post number 51:

Everytime you are given a counter-argument and your list of world examples is thrashed as being baseless comparisons you run away and come up with new countries to show as examples.

First it was your `Pakistan can be like Malaysia, it can be like Singapore, it can be like Korea, like Taiwan` whereas there was absolutely no comparison between those countries were given all out support from America and most were also blessed with visionary leaders. Pakistan has nothing. Now with regards to mullah the menace, it`s the comparison of Pakistan with Algeria, Iran etc.

You, like the Mullahs have the same psyche. You don`t care to deal with the process and the underlying forces at work. You just take the statistic- the end result- and worship it and then propound worthless theories to back it up.

Time and again analysts have pointed out how dictatorial regimes provide the best breeding ground for Islamic fundamentalism. Your examples of Egypt, Algeria, Iraq- all justify that theory of analysts. Show me a place where there is a strong Islamic fundamentalist movement and I`ll show you a dictatorial policy and a regime that is behind it. Or in many cases, there is a Fauji-freak behind it!

After Suharto left Indonesia, it was the fundo leader who became PM. Now after a relatively untampered DEMOCRATIC PROCESS his party doesn`t figure much. In Malaysia, because of the DEMOCRATIC PROCESS the fundos have had only minor success and in the last election fell further behind. In Bangladesh, precisely because of the DEMOCRATIC PROCESS the Jamat has about half the seats it had in the early nineties.

THESE are the examples you should be looking at. However, because of your Fauji-loving mentality, you only look at dictatorial regimes as it`s only there where you can justify your lop-sided rationale. You get overjoyed at seeing the `inconsistency` of those who decry 20-30 percent of Karachi voting for religious parites BUT are even more overjoyed when 80 percent of the population`s candidates are rejected and replaced by criminal chamchaaz by the your lovable fauji-freaks.

I don`t need to challenge you as your are incapable of rising above your convulated fauji-loving mentality. Please go find some other countries to draw retarded comparisons to. Perhaps you may have more success drawing comparisons with Equatorial Guinnea or Guinnea Bissau.

Islam should be a source, not the source to run Pakistan.

nikki: I assume you mean the p for ``people`` (as in ``you people``). Sometimes in the heat of battle one cuts friends as well as foes - I didnt mean ALL Indian people, I meant only those who introduce themselves on chowk the way this man did - he could have said ``I am Ardeshir Haider, from the great province of Maharashtra, and how are all of you today?`` He could have said, ``I am the man from fine city of Mumbai, Pray tell where are you from meray bhai?`` He could even have said a simple ``Hail fellows, well met``.

But no. He starts off with abuse. So need need to drown your sorrows. Glad you agree with everything I wrote except the last line. Since the ``you people`` could easily be misunderstood, I replace that line with the following: ``What you need, Master Ardeshir pehlwan, is an anthropologist to study the environment you grew up in.`` Master Ardeshir to kindly note the change and correct his copy of the post accordingly.

Cheers.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

It will be interesting to see what will happen if maulvi parties, continue to win democratic elections. What if MMA wins in Punjab and Sind someday, and becomes the majority party. Will it be allowed its day in the sun, by the people who keep arguing for election after elections?

Currently, to the best of my knowledge, Turkey is the only country that has elected an Islamic party into power. Iran would be another one, but people tend to doubt the way elections are held there. The other factor being that Iran reached its religious peak, a few decades ago, and is now moving towards the middle. While Turkey has made a clear shift from fanatically secular policies, supported by the guns of the military, to a religious party, which was banned once before, even though it had won the elections.

If free elections are held in Iraq (easily the most secular state in the Arab world), the religious forces will win power and will be in the opposition also. In Algeria, religious parties have (had) won also, and the Army forcefully kicked them out. In Egypt, religious parties are being kept at bay, by the dictatorship. In Saudi Arabia, if the monarchy goes, the resulting govt. will be heavily religiously influenced (even the monarchy is). So on and so forth.

And, of course, in Pakistan, the religious parties have won unprecendented seats, this time around. To the point that people can no longer use the old saying, ``maulvis never win in Pakistan.``

This should give a good indication of the trends in the Muslim world. The more democratic the govts. are becoming, the more and more religious parties are coming into power (or into opposition). It would be extremely naive to write this off, simply, as a, ``mullah and his voter friends gone nuts`` phenomenon. It is obviously much more than that. It is a change in the thought processes of the populaces, across the Muslim world.

One can hide one`s head in the sand and lay the credit of the success of mullahs on, ``other`` factors. Or one could just say that the voting population consists of nutcases. But the whole basis of democracy is that people know what they want for their own good - specifically in the cities, where they are not under feudal control. If, ``20-30``% of the people in Karachi are supporting the mullah, then are they all idiots? All 3-4 million of them? If they are, then the whole concept of democracy goes out the door, since Karachi has the most literate population in Pakistan.

Those who want to put a brake on the rise of the mullah, will not be able to do so, by conveniently blaming it on the CII, or the Supreme Court, or the Army, or on certain lines in textbooks (who remembers those lines, anyways), or on ARY, or on Two Nation Theories. Even if their argument is accepted, how does that explain the rise of the maulvi, in Muslim countries, other than Pakistan - specifically where elections of some sort are being held? Should that be blamed on Zia-ul-Haq also (he died over 15 years ago. Isn`t it about time, people opened their eyes, and realized that he cannot control the current social situation, any longer?)

This rise of the mullah needs to be studied in much more depth than this. For starters, it has to be accepted that his parties have genuine democratic following in so many countries. And the people who are following them aren`t idiots. Maybe they are following him, because despited all his faults, they actually see him as the best options out of a lot of poor options......His are the only parties, which allow the poorest of the poor a chance to have his/her voice heard.

Maybe people need to look at the fact that the whole Islamic world voted for non-mullahs for forty years, after WWII, everywhere. What exactly did these non-mullah parties (be they civilian or miltiary) do for the welfare of the poor Muslim? They did a lot for the tiny Chowk crowd (myself included), but their is a Pakistan beyond Defence, Clifton, Islamabad also.

That is where they will find the answers for why the mullah`s graph is rising.