Al-Jazeera’s Stream Discussion After-Thoughts

I came across the following, information management / damage control, blog post on the Cult today:

”After a recent approach by Al-Jazeera to the team at Thecult.info, today there was an excellent discussion between Akber Choudhry, the representative from the Ahmadiyya Awareness team, and Amjad Khan, a member of the Ahmadiyya religion on Al-Jazeera’s Stream programme. As the discussion progressed, it became clear that the points raised by Mr. Choudhry were causing Mr. Khan to become visibly uncomfortable. Most notably, Mr. Khan repeatedly lied on international TV concerning the following points:

  1. Mirza Masroor’s banning of individual Ahmadis’ Facebook pages;
  2. The Ahmadiyya doctrine that Muslims are not Muslims;
  3. Denying that they routinely associate average Muslims with the worst Islamophobic stereotypes (ie, ‘mullahs’ or ‘terrorists’);

This is the first time in a century that some of the Ahmadiyya beliefs and cult-like practices have been exposed to the full glare of the international media spotlight and faced with the bald facts, Mr. Khan and the Ahmadiyya were caught woefully short. We’re not surprised.”

One of the responses to the above was by a user called ”Setting the Record Straight” which read:

”That’s certainly some spin of how the show went. I’m sure listeners can judge for themselves how “well” it went for the anti-Ahmadi cause.

Mr. Khan called Mr. Chaudhry out on the lie that the Ahmadiyya Community “had banned all social media.” That IS a lie. They haven’t. Even the moderator pointed out how Ahmadis were Tweeting during the program! Mr. Khan said that the Ahmadiyya Community has an official Facebook and Twitter page, which is the truth. He also talked about how individual Facebook accounts have indeed been discouraged because of various security, privacy and other issues, which, too, is the truth. So I’m not really sure I accept the notion that Mr. Khan “lied” about Facebook. That’s a distortion of what was said. You ignore his complete and thorough answer.”

(Don’t take anything I’m about to write for granted as you can see the video for your self at the below link)

The cultists have been flocking onto their blog to talk about how hard done by they were and how the Ahmadi representative was not truthful in his statements. Their response is somewhat pitiful and clearly demonstrates their inability to read a situation exactly as is. Regarding the Ahmadi representative’s response, I think he was completely honest in what he said. The question put to him was regarding the allegation that the head of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community has barred facebook. He was quite clear and concise in saying that no such ban exists and that members are permitted to open certain types of accounts, but asked not to open individual personal accounts. He then clarified this point by stating that the latter point was in direct response to the fact that a significant number of Ahmadis have been the subjects of various attacks on facebook. I would like to add that there is ample literature out there on the biological, sociological and psychological dangers of social networking in support of the current stance taken by the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama’at. See the following articles for example:

1. Well Connected

2. The Dangers of Facebook

3. Trust and Privacy Concerns Within Social Networking Sites

I even recall listening to a recent Five-Live show (popular English talk radio station) about this subject and there were lots of parents who said that they did not permit their children to sign up to social networking sites due to the inherent social problems involved, which included an increase in bullying and the sexualisation of children. The reality is that many non-Ahmadi Muslim groups and scholars also discourage the use of facebook with some even going so far as to say it is haram on the basis that the Qur’an instructs Muslims not to approach fornication (i.e., temptation that leads to fornication).

The cultists have also been saying that the Ahmadi representative lied when he said that the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community does not hold that all non-Ahmadis are disbelievers in Islam. On the contrary, the representative was absolutely correct in what he said and evidence of this can be viewed in my earlier post ”The Status of One Who Denies the Imam al-Mahdi.”

Their final allegation is about Ahmadis creating an Islamiphobic stereotype of non-Ahmadi Muslims in which Ahmadi Muslims systematically refer to them as Mullahs or terrorists. Firstly, I have never once, in my entire life, heard a single Ahmadi Muslim refer to non-Ahmadi Muslims as terrorists. In fact, I have observed Ahmadi Muslims consistently telling the public and media that terrorists and terrorism can in no way be associated with the average Muslim and Islam. Furthermore, whenever I have observed an Ahmadi use the term ”Mullahs,” it was with reference to the minority of violent driven non-Ahmadi Muslims who have themselves proven to be as much of a danger to non-Ahmadi Muslims as they have to Ahmadi Muslims.

There are also a couple of other points which I would like to bring up regarding points that the non-Ahmadi representative fudged. He himself avoided the presenter’s question about whether or not non-Ahmadi Muslims permit marriage to Ahmadi Muslims. Following on from my post Qadiani Marriages, it is obvious why he would avoid such a question. Secondly, his statement that Ahmadis have nothing to do with the wider Muslim community is completely outrageous! He said that as if the world Muslim League and specific supposedly ”Islamic” countries have not taken systematic and consistent steps to outcast Ahmadi Muslims. Finally, was it just me or did the non-Ahmadi guest, someone who represents a group that accuses Ahmadis as being the lemmings of Israel (with no base), sided with the Israeli government against the Palestinians in stating that Israel has the: ”…right to determin who is a Jewish citizen.” At best he very naively made a sweeping statement about a very complicated and emotional subject.

In conclusion, I would like to offer the cultists some simple advise. You utterly failed in the Al-Jazeera Programme because you were far too petty, inconsistent and questionable. On a human rights level you will always have no leg to stand on as it is pure fact that Ahmadi Muslims have, and continue to be, persecuted. All of this freedom of speech and authoritarian nonsence is far too petty and cannot be substantiated. You should have simply focused on the absolute core issues (i.e., Finality of Prophethood and the Death of Hadrat Jesus (as)). Your arguments would still have been somewhat questionable, but at least you would have been taken seriously.

The most poignant words of the Ahmadi representative were:

SPURIOUS & FRIVOLOUS 

Advertisements

16 thoughts on “Al-Jazeera’s Stream Discussion After-Thoughts

  1. I just watched this video – well done to Amjad for remaining calm in the face of fabrication, clear distortion, calumny and just plain lies! Why, why, why do they outrageously lie?! Why did Akber claim that women are not allowed to hold office nor participate in elections for example? That’s a blatant, blatant lie! I am an office bearer. My mother is an office bearer. My sister is an office bearer. We voted on our local Lajna Sadr last year. We have a national female President who liaises directly with Huzur and the national Amir. We vote on who is elected as national president. If you were an Ahmadi Muslim, even an ex-Ahmadi, you would know this.

    WHY LIE?!!

    Credit to Amjad for answering all the allegations so clearly and holding his composure. I could never do that – would get too wound up!

  2. ႈI would like to make a bold about this ” Hazrat Mossa (as) there was hazrat Haroon as a prophet , but hazrat Haroon did not laid down the foundation of any new religion “. It seems like the culties even want to make a fire between two prophets, one came with new religion when one already had existed with a religion. 🙂

  3. Great review! You actually touched some valuable things on your blog. I came across it by using Google and I’ve got to admit that I already subscribed to the site, it’s very great 🙂

  4. Assalamu Alaikum brother Qasim, Essence of Islam as you already might know is a collection of excerpts from the writings of Promised Messiah (as). This particular reference that you have given is from a letter that Promised Messiah wrote to one of his companions. We need to look at this in a logical way. What does the word “Muslim” literally mean? It means the one who submits to the will (of Allah Almighty). So the person who rejects somebody who has been sent by the will of Allah Almighty even after getting the true message does NOT submit to the will of Allah Almighty and hence is not a Muslim in this sense. It surprises me how these anti-Ahmadiyya clan attack our beliefs without knowing the impact of it. They take things out of context and give them their own twisted and unfair interpretations. If their interpretation is taken here, then there are hardly any Muslims in the world who are not KAFIRS according to ahadith of Holy Prophet (pbuh). I will explain to you how:

    The Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam) said: “Between a person and disbelief is discarding Salah”. Buradah reported that the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam) said: “The pact between us and them is Salah, whoever gives it up becomes an unbeliever (Kafir)”. So one who relinquishes salah becomes a Kafir according to hadith, what about the one who rejects a true prophet of Allah?

    The fact is that we as Ahmadiyya Muslims never go around in the streets, or television programs to ask the governments to call every non-Ahmadiyya a Kafir. These are the ways of our enemies. Our beliefs are entirely based on the teachings of Holy Quran and our Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Their acts however are in the following of the enemies of Islam and Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

    I hope it has clarified any misunderstanding that you might have had about that reference.

    Wassalam

  5. The cultists made a joke out of themselves. This should serve as a reminder that head-to-head, truth is always the one manifest.

  6. It was a good programme . i thouroughly enjoyed it . the book essence of islam vol 4 pg 80 qouted by chaudry does it exit. where can we get it for thorough examination. there are onle vol 1-3 in nigeria.

  7. the culties lost the debate very clearly. if you look at their blog entry about it they are fuming with anger! very pathetic indeed.

    Akber Chaudhry did not appear to be a likable character, he seemed childish and clownish. one of the moderators actually had to tell him to stop yelling at one point. his immature laughing didn’t help the situation either. the debate about facebook didn’t make a strong case in his favor. his babbling about “ummul momineen” stuff brought nothing solid to the table.

    after all done and said, anyone who is in favor of the persecution of a peaceful community is not going to appeal to a wider audience. no matter how he twists his arguments.

    it was a serious blow to the culties. may Allah have mercy on them and guide them to the right path

  8. Your assumptions are correct. In my opinion the reason it did not go well for them was that the Cult representative displayed no compassion, restraint and humility. Rather than sticking to the core differences, he defended the completely authoritarian and inhumane laws / initiatives adopted against Islam Ahmadiyya. Their main oversight was that they did not factor into their preparation, if there was any, that the Arab world, almost championed by Al-Jazeera, has spent this year filling the streets with their blood for the single purpose of creating societies for their children and granchildren which are free of the very authoritarian regimes the Cult representative was defending. I encourage all to please pray avidly for the Cult members – that they may be cleansed of their blinding bitterness and address more balanced concerns to Ahmadis and the Jama’at. There is always great benefit to be found in discussion and debate, but only if at least some goodwill exists between them.

  9. Shahid, Assalamu ‘Alaikum, I have addressed this subject in my post on the Status of one who denies the Imam al-Mahdi. The issue with the book by Hadrat Khalifah al-Masih al-Thani (radi Allahu ‘anhu) is that it is not a book that can be understood by the masses. What he has written is quite technical and completely correct when studied in light of the fiqhi categories of belief. The exact position of the Jama’at, as far as my limited knowledge is concerned, was clearly stated by Hadrat Khalifah al-Masih al-Rab’i (rahmat Allah ‘alayh) in the video, amongst other places, that I have included in the above mentioned post. To my knowledge, my beloved Hudur (ayyadahu Allah ta’alah bi-nasrihi al’aziz) has not added to, nor taken away from the position upheld in that video. What is problematic is not what Hadrat Khalifah al-Masih al-Thani (radi Allahu ‘anhu) said, but the fact that the detractors of the Jama’ah continue to bring up this allegation despite the fact that Hadrat Khalifah al-Masih al-Rab’i (rahmat Allah ‘alayh), the previous head of the Jama’ah and successor and son of his father, has very clearly clarified the matter. As I have consistently argued, the only core issues which exist between Qadiani – Lahori – non-Ahmadi Muslims are the status of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (‘alayhi al-salam) as a Zilli Prophet and the account of Jesus (‘alayhi al-salam) from the time he was arrested to his death or resurrection. Please do continue to post here, you are more than welcome.

  10. Unfortunately, the cause of the trouble is the Qadianis community itself. Their first khalifa Mirza Bashir ud Din Mahmud Ahmad clearly said that all those who do not take his baiat are heretics and out of the fold of Islam.

  11. I have not seen the program yet but judging from lack of jubilation on their site on the subject I am thinking it didn’t go the way the antis wanted it to go.

  12. jazakallah brother , i have been reading the non-ahmadies allegations that this is a blatant lie that Ahmadies has not banned the Facebook. I was wondering why brother khan said so .
    but then when i heard the real conversation I came to know how stupid these culties are . so stupid that brother khan did say in the end ….
    MY GOD , i was really bewildered to the way these culties work.

    first , as soon as borhter khan said NO , facebook is not ban , Mr akbar kept talking and talking and did not let brother khan to speak clearly.

    but when brother khan talked , he said there is restrained on the individual accounts making and maintaining and also that AHmadiyya community do have a webpage on twiteer and Facebook.

    but I wonder if and when jamate ahmdiyya comes forward to protect its member from the evils of the society, evils of the social networks they make it an issue.

    our women cannot have any office is another blatant lie . My mom has been the president of women office for quite sometime.

    he says when ever a prophet comes , it lays down a separate religion is a pathtic lie as we know that with hazrat Mossa (as) there was hazrat Haroon as a prophet , but hazrat Haroon did not laid down the foundation of any new religion .

    our hazoor showed a right and islamic path to the those people who protested unislamically in recent Arab revolution, but culties says that why ahmadies are guiding musims towards the real ISLAMIC PATH .

    really a disgusting face of these culties

  13. Mr. Chaudhry said on live television that Pakistan presently has a separate electorate for Ahmadis and other minorities. Where does he get his information from? He obviously has no knowledge of the present state of affairs in Pakistan and is living in the past. President Musharraf ABOLISHED the separate electorate in February of 2002 (see Chief Executive’s Order No. 7) and imposed a joint electorate system for all Pakistani citizens. Three months later, in June of 2002, he said that the joint electorate applies to all Pakistani citizens EXCEPT Ahmadis (see Chief. Executive’s Order No. 15):

    See:
    http://pakistanconstitution-law.org/category/13-the-conduct-of-general-elections-order-2002/
    http://www.thepersecution.org/50years/jointelec.html

Join the Discussion

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s