Islamophobia is the Politics of the Ahmadiyya Cult

Ahmadiyya times smears Suliman Gani

Introduction

I was alerted to a story in the Ahmadiyya Times blog today that risibly depicts Shaykh Suliman Gani as an extremist. I think that this warrants a libel claim against the editor of the Ahmadiyya Times. It wouldn’t be the first time that the Ahmadiyya/Qadiani cult has used extreme language to describe Muslims or their representative bodies, but on this occasion, they appear to be nailing their colours to the mast of a shadowy new group called “Student Rights“. Interestingly, Student Rights stops short of labelling Shaykh Suliman, one of the gentlest, most humane people I’ve ever met as an extremist, but the Qadiani hate group, the only “religion” in the world with the word “hate” in their slogan and the only one that bans its members from using Facebook, was not so concerned about the use of the word “Extremist” in the headline of their edited piece.

The Student Rights article describes the views of a billion Muslims that the Qadiani cult is outside Islam as “bigoted”. Good luck with that one! It’s hardly a controversial position, being held by every Muslim authority on the planet. Since when does the normative tradition of any religion have to justify which heretical group it does and doesn’t include? Such sensationalist trash belongs in the gutter, like the defunct News of the World.

This piece might as well have been written by Basha Nazir, the Qadiani PR man caught with his pants down trying to get his members to lie to Channel 4 about their identity. This was in a vain attempt to game Darshna Soni in the wake of their failed hate campaign of 2010, based on a leaflet that didn’t exist. In fact, many releases we have seen lazy journalists and politicians use have come straight from the pens of the Qadiani spin-masters. If only journalists and politicians did a little more homework.

Curious about this new, somewhat opaque group and its unusual eagerness to attack mainstream Muslim figures like Shaykh Suliman Gani and Hamza Andreas Tzortzis, I decided to look more closely at their board of advisors. You might be surprised at what crawled out of the woodwork, but then again, perhaps not.

The first question we surely must ask is, of what relevance is Islamophobia to student rights? The naming of this oddball site is one of many anomalies. One can only imagine that “student rights” acts as an overt façade for Islamophobia, because let’s face it, Muslim students are British too, and also have rights. Perhaps the Islamophobic, Qado-Zionist-sympathising board of Student Rights might be interested in the rights of Qadiani students ordered by their leaders not to mix with Muslim students at university? That’d be worth a blog on social cohesion.Or perhaps they might be interested in the old men of the Ahmadiyya covertly spying on students?

I think it’s very important that Muslims become aware of this shadowy hate group and understand that the agenda of the Zionists, the Islamophobes, the Extreme Right and the Qadiani Ahmadiyya is aligned. If you need to see proof of that, you need only visit the Student Rights blog, which frankly, makes Mad Mel look, well, not so mad.

I’m sure Hamza Tzortzis will not be worried by this stupid bunch of clowns, and neither should Shaykh Suliman. All that’s happened is that this group has helped clarify that the Qadiani agenda is reprehensible to all Muslims. Thanks to Student Rights for making this crystal clear!

Hilariously, the Student Rights blog carries on with its absurd canards about the Islam Channel and other mainstream Muslim representatives, denouncing many of our leading figures and conflating them arbitrarily and clumsily to more extreme figures.

On then, to a quick analysis of the board of Student Rights.

Rt Hon Jim Fitzpatrick MP

Jim Fitzpatrick, a Government minister, has publicly condemned the Muslim tradition of separating men and women at weddings. The farming minister and his wife walked out of the marriage ceremony of a constituent after discovering they would have to sit in separate rooms. He said the gender segregation was a sign of increasing radicalisation and was damaging to social cohesion.

However, Muslim leaders insist the custom is traditional at Islamic weddings as well as in mosques, and expressed surprise that Mr Fitzpatrick, a third of whose east London constituents are Muslims, was unaware of the fact.

Sir Iqbal Sacranie, a founding member of the Muslim Council of Britain, said:

“I think in the interest of cohesion it would be better if Mr Fitzpatrick established more contact with the Muslim community. It shows a lack of interest on the part of the MP to engage with people with different backgrounds and sadly it reflects badly on him.

Source: Daily Telegraph

Even the right wing Telegraph condemned Fitzpatrick’s actions as “foolish and inappropriate

George Galloway went further:

“I am absolutely amazed and astonished that a Government minister with a substantial Muslim minority in his constituency should have decided to give such a gratuitous insult to so many Muslims.”

The Ahmadiyya do not allow mixed weddings themselves. Perhaps they should think twice before backing Student Rights. Or perhaps Fitzpatrick, who advises a site so firmly on the side of the deceptive Ahmadiyya cult, should be advised as to the the latter’s real nature? (Perhaps he should just be very careful what he puts his name to, if he wants to avoid future accusations of Islamophobia.)

Fitzpatrick of course rejects accusations of Islamophobia and as recently as 2010 asked the Muslim community to judge him on his record. It’s entirely possible that he was misrepresented or given bad advice. In which case, he needs to be made aware of the extremely divisive agenda of Student Watch and to understand that the figures this group is attacking are mainstream. Baroness Warsi was courageous enough to stand up to this type of scaremongering and warned against having Muslims divided into extremists and moderates. This approach legitimises caricatures and stereotypes and allows the question “So when did you stop beating your wife?” to be asked without concern. The Ahmadiyya should be utterly ashamed of peddling such hatred and continuing its smear campaign, but it’s no surprise, as Muslims have continually warned.

My personal feeling is that Fitzpatrick should have it brought to his attention that Student Rights would not have the backing of any legitimate Muslim representation. He would find that his own East London community would be shocked to find him on the board of such a virulently anti-Muslim organisation that is also so openly pro-Qadiani.

 

Rt Hon Tom Brake MP

Brake is the MP for Carshalton and Wallington, where many of his constituents are Qadianis. He has attended their annual Jalsa Salana event on several occasions and is totally supportive of their offensive Islamophobic campaign. Like a few other gullible politicians, he was taken in by the opportunistic hate campaign orchestrated by the Qadianis in 2010, where it was found that false statements had been made (on oath!) by the Ahmadiyya, and which ended up making the Qadianis look duplicitous in the eyes of the police. Brake hosted a tour of the House of Commons for the Lahori Ahmadiyya. His bias is therefore self-evident.

 

Robert Halfon MP

Halfon, a Tory MP is a former Political Director of the Conservative Friends of Israel. We could stop right there, but let’s continue. Halfon is no stranger to launching attacks on Muslims or their representation. Inayat Bunglawala reported Halfon making the following disgusting and defamatory accusation about the Muslim advocacy group Engage in the House of Commons:

“Will the Leader of the House find time for an urgent statement on iEngage, the secretariat of the newly formed all-party parliamentary group on Islamophobia? iEngage has a track record of being aggressively anti-Semitic and homophobic, and has extensive links with terrorism in Tunisia and the middle east.”

Inayat correctly reported that Halfon can only get away with such statements because he was protected from libel by parliamentary privilege.

Inayat has challenged Halfon in strong terms to repeat his comments in public. Halfon is an Islamophobic monster who would find much in common with the Ahmadiyya cult’s chief apologists.

 

Rt Hon Kim Howells

Dr. Kim Howells is a Labour Friend of Israel. Spotting a pattern here? Pro-Israeli, Pro-Qadiani, anti-Muslim haters and possibly one or two unwitting cohorts who got suckered in without realising what was going on.

MPACUK reported in 2009 that Howells suggested the government use the money it would save by pulling troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq to spy on Muslims. One should remember that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, the founder of the Ahmadiyya cult offered his spying services to the occupying government of the time.

 

Rt Hon Denis MacShane

It’s hard to know where to start with this nutty Zionist attack dog, but Inayat Bunglawala nails this confirmed Zionist for a lot more than Zionism and Islamophobia. This offensive man with zero credibility amongst Muslims and millions of others was also found to have claimed £125k in MP expenses for his garage. Why didn’t this hater end up in jail? Probably because Zionism got to his head and made him completely nuts.

Halfon isn’t the only MP abusing parliamentary privilege to spread lies. MacShane also smeared MPACUK earlier in 2011.

It’s not just Muslims who have problems with this crazy guy, our Jewish friends do too.

 

Shiraz Maher

A good background on Maher can be found at Indigo Jo Blogs in the article Shiraz Maher fails to prove his point (again)

Engage shows Maher criticising the US Ambassador for visiting the East Lonon Mosque.

Maher, who sports a trademark Qadiani beard (don’t worry, I don’t actually think he’s a Qadiani) supported Hazel Blears in her unprecedented and stupid war against the MCB in the wake of Israel’s assault on the people of Gaza in 2009. Maher then demanded the resignation of Daud Abdullah, sounding just like a Qadiani, a Chaa-wala to use Asghar Bukhari’s interesting metaphor.

A pretty good picture of Maher is painted by his friends and the company he is associated with, including the likes of Ed Husain, who after leaving the discredited Quilliam, now works for the Council on Foreign Relations. Maher counts amongst his admirers The Sun’s Trevor Kavanagh. (The Sun of course, recently apologised for faking a story about a Muslim bus driver, not the first time they’ve invented negative stories about Muslims in an attempt to fan Islamophobia.)

One wonders whether the Qadianis will also at some point apologise for inventing the story of a a hate leaflet in 2010 that acted as a driver for their Islamophobic campaign of 2010, brought crashing to a halt thanks to numerous embarrasing leaks on thecult.info and the brave and upright work done by Akber Choudhry in defending the Khatmenabuwwah Academy in East London. Many Muslims took part in exposing the underhand shenanigans of the Qadianis and they would be too numerous to list, but they know who they are and they are a credit to Muslims and to Britain.

 

Lord Palmer of Childs Hill

He was the Chair of the Liberal Democrat Friends of Israel until 2010 and is currently a Vice President. I think we can end the discussion right there, don’t you?

 

Daniel Johnson

(We’d be grateful if anyone could source information on Johnson for us.)

 

Dr Alan Mendoza

Mendoza and Ramm appear together an awful lot with Douglas Murray, who made this contribution to social cohesion and harmony at a conference in the Netherlands in 2006:

“It is late in the day, but Europe still has time to turn around the demographic time-bomb which will soon see a number of our largest cities fall to Muslim majorities. It has to. All immigration into Europe from Muslim countries must stop…. Conditions for Muslims in Europe must be made harder across the board: Europe must look like a less attractive proposition.”

Far be it for me to use “guilt by association” as a tactic. let’s delve further into Mendoza specifically. He is the Executive Director of The Henry Jackson Society, which includes as signatories the Rt Hon Michael Gove (an Islamophobe), Denis MacShane (Zionist, expenses monkey, liar and Islamophobe), Stephen Pollard (Editor, the Jewish Chronicle) and our friend Robert Halfon MP, whose Islamophobic credentials were established above.

Mendoza came down heavily in favour of Israel, casting them as peacemakers in the wake of their horrific assault on Lebanon in 2006.

Google Mendoza, Ramm and Murray to hear them whine on if you’re really curious.

 

Benjamin Ramm

I haven’t looked too hard on material for him, but Lenin had this to say in 2005:

The editor of The Liberal, Ben Ramm, was the most unbearable speaker of the whole night. Snide, cocky and actually insistent on a return to Free Trade – Victorian England style! Why he was invited, I shall never know. He was uncompromisingly for the Liberal Democrats, of course, and was heckled by those who are familiar with the Liberal record in Sheffield, Liverpool and elsewhere. I tuned out.

Now we can’t condemn a man for being snide and cocky, after all, I’ve been that too at times. What we can condemn a man for is a return to Free Trade Victorian England style. This was uncompromising and made Thatcherism look like revolutionary socialism in comparison.

However, his position on Islam and Zionism isn’t clear, so he gets let off the hook. I guess he’s in because he hangs out with the Zionist Mendoza and the Islamophobe Murray.

 

Alex Radzyner

Radzyner is the writer of the ‘London Theater Goer’ blog.

***

Conclusion

So there you have it. A list of mostly rather unsavoury characters to say the least. As to who actually writes the Student Rights blog, it’s hard to tell, but given the list above and the brazenly pro-Qadiani agenda, given the heavy Zionist influences and the cast of usual suspects, it’s very easy to see why Qadiani Ahmadiyya is regarded with such suspicion by Muslims and anyone who stands against racism, right-wing extremism and Islamophobia. After all, it was very much the rhetoric displayed by the Student Rights team that led to Anders Breivik mass murdering dozens of kids in Norway.

Given the utter lack of mainstream credibility that “Student Rights” will get thanks to the extreme positions taken up by the majority of its board, I’d advise the targets of this farcical blog-rag not to worry too much about its hysterical, frothing, but really funny output.  I’d also advise a few of the board members who value their remaining credibility to distance themselves from this hateful site.

It’s time for the Qadianis and their friends to stop being troublemakers, to stop telling lies, to stop exaggerating the so-called “Muslim threat” and to start building bridges. I doubt they will do that. They, like many cohesion-haters, including the far right, Islamophobes and Zionists seek to divide communities by creating a false picture of hatred and seeing monsters where there aren’t any. There is little doubt that groups like the Ahmadiyya cult help to stoke the fear that inspired Anders Breivik to kill scores of Norwegian socialist children in a chillingly political massacre, a crime that is more popularly described as terrorism. We mustn’t let such groups deceive our institutions and we mustn’t let them attack our representative bodies without an answer.

 

(Thanks to Islamophobia Watch and Engage, many of the above stories were documented by them)

(A previous version of this article stated the following: Brake hosted a tour of the House of Commons for the Ahmadiyya – after feedback, we have clarified this line to qualify Ahmadiyya with “Lahori”.)

Qadianiat at the Crossroads of War and Peace

Founder of Ahmadiyya Times calls for increased drone attacks on Pakistan

In recent years, the Ahmadiyya Community and its Qadiani followers have increasingly sought to portray themselves as the world’s only peaceful Muslims. This is an awkward proposition for most Muslims, for many reasons. Most gallingly, it disguises the underlying deceit that according to Qadianis, they are the world’s only Muslims. The 1.6 billion Muslims who maintain that prophethood ended with Muhammad of Arabia, in the Qadiani worldview, are disbelievers or kuffaar.

This is readily apparent from the writings of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani and his successors. (As a corollary, due to the Qadiani introduction of a new prophet in the form of Ghulam Ahmad, all Muslim schools of thought are unanimous in holding that Qadianis are outside the fold of Islam.)

Of course, the notion that Qadianis are the only peaceful Muslims, apart from its logical fallacy, suggests that all other Muslims are murderous fanatics. To be clear, Qadianis have certainly faced persecution, often at the hands of misguided Muslims, and there is no justification for such behavior. But to use this as an excuse to paint all Muslims as violent savages is wrong and illogical – in the West, at least, this is something we have tried to learn after 9/11.

Many Qadianis, unfortunately, seem oblivious to the dangers of painting with such broad strokes. In an insightful essay published last July, Professor Hussein Rashid calls out the Ahmadiyya for using fears of terrorism to promote opposition to the Ground Zero Mosque. “Their approach,” he argues, “appears to be based on a Good Muslim/Bad Muslim dichotomy that ends up hurting the Muslim-American community.”

Indeed, Qadianis have become darlings of the right-wing media, with their leaders regularly appearing on Fox News to decry the radicalization of Muslim-American youth and promote the bizarre idea, as Prof. Rashid writes, that “a good Muslim should surrender the rights guaranteed by the state” – including the right to express criticism and disagree with one’s government.

Many Qadianis, it seems, are wedded to an old-world authoritarian model of leadership in which one simply does not criticize those in power. It has been suggested that the same mindset that encourages Qadianis to pledge unfailing allegiance to the hereditary and arguably corrupt system of khilafat also promotes the bizarre idea that in a modern constitutional democracy, free citizens should not openly practice their religion or criticize their government’s foreign policy.

Whether you call this approach quietism or blind loyalty, it certainly has ample precedent in Qadiani history. In a pamphlet written in honor of the 50th anniversary of Queen Victoria’s rule in 1887, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad writes:

RK tuhfa

This notice of congratulations is from the person known as Yasuu’ the Messiah who has come to the world to rid it of all sorts of deviations; he whose purpose is to establish truth in the world with peace and kindness; so that he may teach people the way towards true love and servanthood to their Creator; and to explain to them the path towards true obedience to their ruler, the Glorious Queen, whose subjects they are.

 

[Roohani Khazain, Vol. 12, Tuhfa-e-Qaisiriyya, p. 253]

It can thus be argued that the Qadiani worldview is motivated by two fundamental values: obedience to the state, and “love for all and hatred for none.” Interestingly, it is certainly plausible, and perhaps even likely, that these two values might come into conflict with each other. Here we can offer two opposing hypotheses. Either the Qadiani administration would choose peace and oppose violent and martial government policies; or it would unfailingly insist on unquestioned loyalty in all cases.

 

This is obviously not a novel predicament – it has been considered countless times throughout history by all types of communities, and with the exception of cults or autocratic neo-fascist societies, most people of conscience have come down on the side of an individual’s freedom -and perhaps even responsibility – to speak out against immoral and unethical actions of one’s government.

How have Qadianis attempted to reconcile this conflict? It certainly seems that, insofar as they acknowledge that such a conflict exists, that they come down on the side of unquestioned loyalty. Indeed, many critics have charged that the purported Qadiani belief in “love for all, hatred for none” is merely a public relations slogan and categorically does not apply to Muslims. (Interestingly, in many cases, it also seems that “unquestioned loyalty” also does not apply to Qadianis residing in Muslim-majority nations.)

All of this brings us to the founder and managing editor of Ahmadiyya Times. Imran Jattala, based in Los Angeles, is a high-ranking official in the Qadiani hierarchy and has unsurprisingly paid lip-service to the peaceful nature of the Qadiani faith on many occasions. Among his interests, he cites “the promotion of dialogue for peace and tolerance through interfaith outreach.”

On January 8th, however, Mr. Jattala posted a comment on a PBS article about the murder of Punjab Governor Salman Taseer. He attacks the author for raising the possibility that the U.S. bombing of Afghanistan and Pakistan, with increasing death tolls among civilians, might be linked to rising extremism in the region. And then, in one sentence, he provides a robust data point for how one Qadiani leader reconciles his commitment to peace and his commitment to U.S. foreign policy. “The tasteless scenes of jubilation in the killer’s hometown,” he writes, “in my view make a case for more drone attacks, not less.”

PBScommentIJ

While the London-based Ahmadiyya Community has often been criticized for fomenting anti-Muslim sentiment and its generally pro-war disposition, rarely have we seen such unambiguous evidence of how fragile the “world’s only peaceful Muslims” are in their actual commitment to peace.

I do not profess to know how many Ahmadis, whether in the U.S. or Pakistan, support Mr. Jattala’s contention that more drone attacks on Pakistani civilians are needed. In any case, I hope the Ahmadi community engages in a critical discussion among themselves regarding their commitment to peace and how it should best be operationalized in a world torn apart by war.

Calling for more drone attacks on Pakistani civilians is probably not the best place to start.

Ahmadiyya Cries Wolf: Sensationalism and Subversion

We just intercepted this email sent to the Khuddam of Ahmadiyya. It makes for interesting reading:

Assalmaoalaikum warahmatullah brothers,

Following Sadr sahib’s instructions to Khuddam this afternoon I have some humble requests to make.

1) I have spoken with Dr. Basharat Nazeer sahib (Jamaat’s Press Secretary) regarding the feedback to C4. Dr Nazeer was suggesting that it should not necessarily be made evident that it is only Ahmadis who are writing feedback of support to C4’s website. So please choose the wording which is sort of neutral yet commending the job done by Darshana Soni (who is under serious distress as a result of an unexpected backlash by the mullahs of KN). Can I humbly request that all Khuddam up and down the country should be encouraged to respond to the call by Sadr sahib as it is our moral duty to show support to Darshna Soni for her excellent work. Our support should greatly outnumber the feedback of criticism from KN and its followers.

Please note that KN already have been asking their followers to write to C4 in opposition to the presenter/programme. Dr Nazeer has promised that he will soon send some sort of guideline regarding the type of language that could be used for the support of the programme.

2) Also Basharat Nazeer sahib with the help of his team is going to email a standard response for any potential interview by any of the radio/TV channels. I am waiting on his guidelines which I will forward to you on their receipt.

3) May I also suggest that with sadr sahib’s permission each region can contact their local radio channels and show willingness for being interviewed regarding the hate campagin. This should be done in an organised manner and the interviewee must be well briefed in light of the guidelines. i have also requested Dr Nazeer to send us clear guidelines for the interview. Dr Nazeer is of the view that if we proactively contact the local radio channels for being interviewed in this regard then chances for success are quite bright.

Time is of the essence in this regard, please act swiftly in light of Sadr sahib’s instructions. May Allah bless and protect our jamaat from all sorts of mischief.

Jazakallah,
Wassalam,
Farooq Mahmood
In-Charge Press and Media Committee MKA UK

(Please note in particular the area I have emphasised.)

If you’ve seen the misleading and sensationalist reports, which have caused grave offence to Muslims, and smeared many by association to a leaflet that nobody seems to have seen, then you will be surprised at the content of this email.

1) Dr Nazeer, the Ahmadiyya Press Secretary is suggesting that Ahmadis lie about their identity so that it doesn’t seem that emails in support of Ahmadiyya come only from Ahmadis. Other than this technique being straight out of the Zionist Hasbara playbook, it is also deceptive and proves a coordinated attempt from the top down to subvert the feedback to the press.

2) It mentions that Darshna Soni is under “serious distress”. The only distress that Darshna might be feeling, if at all, since I doubt she is in the habit of telling the Ahmadiyya of her feelings, is that of the gnawing realisation that she’s been had by the Ahmadiyya. Darshna is otherwise a really good journalist and I would expect at some point that she will seek to create a balancing piece. When she does, we will show her just what the Ahmadiyya is really like.

3) The email implicitly criticises KN for a coordinated response. Obviously, KN is entitled to respond. It has broken no laws and there exists no evidence linking KN with any crime. Some serious allegations were made that smear Muslims and it is right that Muslims should object to these smears, instigated as you can see by the media-savvy Ahmadiyya. The interesting point is that there was no coordination as such – the first email that I’m aware of was sent by a Muslim unconnected to KNA.

4) They refer to a “hate campaign” again. The only hate campaign I know of is being conducted by the Ahmadiyya against Muslims, in smearing them by associating them with one leaflet that nobody seems to have seen.

5) Once again, Muslims are smeared as “mullahs” and there is reference to an “unexpected backlash”. We are Muslims and if you smear us, we are entitled to respond to that. We do so openly and decently. In fact, we are within our rights to complain to OfCom about being tarred with the “hate” and “terror” brush again and again and again. Ahmadiyya has now confirmed its place in the Rogues’ Gallery of Islamophobes.

Muslims are open about who they are. Channel 4 should be aware that if they receive pro-Ahmadiyya propaganda from supposedly unaligned sources, that it is likely to be manufactured by the Ahmadiyya. If I was a broadcaster, I would now begin to pay serious attention to the repeated accusations by former members of the Ahmadiyya that it is a cult. Many of us at this web-site speak for Ahmadis who do not have a voice within their community. It is simply shocking that in 21st Century Britain there should exist a community whose members simply don’t have a voice. The rank and file of Ahmadiyya, some of whom are my good friends, do not care much for their leadership, but tribal codes and cult-like antics keep them scared, and trapped.

If anyone saw the BBC piece today, they would have been struck by the simply disgraceful antics of the shirk-master Rafiq Hayat, who shamelessly raised the spectre of “suicide bombing”. This was in stark contrast to the balanced and rational answers given by Akber, who once again was a credit to KN and the Muslims. Ahmadiyya membership should know that broad Muslim support of the awareness activity of KNA is perfectly legitimate. At least we are open about it.

There is a consensus view in the Ummah that Ahmadiyya is not Islam and this was made plain by the MCB in a recent press release. For the last time: Muslims do not condone persecution of the Ahmadiyya, but we are within our rights to define the boundaries of our religion – and we are within our rights to safeguard ourselves against routine deception. The CPS looked at the evidence and decided that there was no case. We Muslims love Britain, we are peace-loving, hard-working and we resent being smeared by the Islamophobes of Ahmadiyya (with media complicity) just as much as we resent the Anjem Choudharys of this world for the damage they are allowed (with media complicity) to inflict on our good name.

The press would do well to look at how Ahmadis treat their own membership, forcing their poorest, oldest and sickest to give 10% of their benefits to an outfit whose Amir seemingly endorses shirk and sexism, whilst foaming about demons that simply don’t exist.

Raising awareness amongst Muslims of the routine deceptions of the Qadianis (note proof of deception above) is not hatred, any more than warning people not to be taken in by Scientology is.

Welcome to Islam!

I’m delighted to report that a friend has reverted to Islam tonight. I will leave him to make his own comment on his situation when he is good and ready, but he joins a long list of reverts.

Ahmadiyya is crumbling, from top to bottom. The good people are leaving to rejoin Islam. And the one who has just rejoined me and a billion and half others is one of the nicest people it has ever been my pleasure to know. It makes me so unbelievably happy to know that this bright and compassionate young person has seen the light of Islam and embraced it. Islamophobia may rage on, but the truth is the truth!

Allahu Akbar!

Qadiani leader calls Ground Zero mosque an affront to “human decency”

Two weeks ago, the Assistant National Director of Interfaith Relations for the Majlis Khuddamul Ahmadiyya came out in opposition to the proposed Islamic center in downtown Manhattan (“the Ground Zero mosque”). In a column in the Richmond Times-Dispatch, Qasim Rashid argues that the mosque is an affront to “human decency” and offends the memory of the 9/11 victims.

Ironically, this is the same argument that has been used by right wing extremists who have threatened violence against the mosque for similar reasons. He also claims, without citing any sources, that the Saudi government is funding the mosque; again, fomenting hysteria about Saudi plots to take over America is a common tactic of neo-conservative Islamophobes.

With New York being home to over 800,000 Muslims, the fear-mongering in response to the Ground Zero mosque at times borders on absurdity. This is how Clyde Haberman of the New York Times summed up the controversy: “The center, which could rise as many as 15 stories and has the blessing of local officials from the mayor on down, makes some people uneasy. The reasons are understandable, if not entirely admirable. Some opponents, mostly political conservatives, have exploited the discomfort with statements that are inflammatory or misleading, or both.”

Naseem Mahdi, one of the foremost Qadiani clerics in the United States, recently claimed that his group represented “one of the leading movements” aimed at “bringing Muslims out of the dark ages.” Again, the resemblance to radical neo-conservative dogma is striking. For it was none other than Paul Wolfowitz, deputy defense secretary under Pres. Bush, who said “We need an Islamic reformation” and then proceeded to lead the invasion of Iraq.

More to the point, such remarks lead one to question how the Qadiani leadership reconciles their laudable doctrine of “Love for all, Hatred for None” with their apparent support of intolerance and bigotry towards Muslims in America.

Masroor & His Islamophobe Buddy

If you ever wanted to see in a single picture why Ahmadiyya is not Islam, here it is.
Bishop of Rochester and Head of Ahmadiyya

To see the details of this event, yet another miserable, but ultimately fruitless attempt by the governmentof Britain and the Qadianis to sow falsehood and division in the ranks of the Ummah, something that the divide-and-rule merchants have been trying to do since the heydey of the British Empire (a tactic now brilliantly exploited by other fascists around the world), you might want to look at this PDF press release by the Qadianis.

Want to know more?