Lekin - 10th June 2012 - Hamid Mir, Najam Sethi, Iftikhar Ahmed, Saleem Safi & Muhammad Malick - Me

[AsifAmeer]

If Y wants to declare their assets, their IQ, their number of kids, their wives, number of their kids, the size of their waist.. so on.. Hey.. all power to them.

No argument there. Haan if a journalist group want to create a Standard of higher journalism where declaration of asset is a must, then journalists can make their own call if they want the prestige of being a member of a certified and reliable group.

You know how you got the "Certified Financial Analyst" or MCSE in IT... Govt doesnt force u to take the exam but you do it to increase your chances of landing a better source of income.

Keep Govt out!

No worries. The point I was coming at was that the person you were arguing against may have been suggesting something that although sounds wrong from a libertarian perspective, but it is actually finding practical feasibility in circles that matter.

So while the person (whose name I can't recall) was perhaps wrong in suggesting that he felt that he had a right to demand journalists to disclose their wealth and sources of income, I was appealing to you and others to ignore the fact that he was missing the point that you were making, but rather appreciate that journalists themselves are looking to disclose their assets and sources of income. What I was trying to suggest was that the journalist community is increasingly coming to a consensus on this matter and although no individual would have the right to demand such a thing, but it hardly matters if you are either a libertarian or conservative in this debate. So in terms of boolean algebra it would be like this:

Libertarian (A) believes that no individual has the right to demand journalists (Y) to disclose their assets.
Conservative (B) believes that individual has the right to demand journalists (Y) to disclose their assets.
However, Journalists (Y) themselves are increasingly agreeing amongst themselves to disclose their assets.

So it doesn't matter what A and B think because the decision has to be made by Y!

On another note, I was hearing someone who was making a very compelling case as to why TV anchors ought to disclose their assets and that they should not be treated as private citizens. They argue that: (i) Media is increasingly becoming a 4th pillar of governance (Judiciary, Legislature and Executive being the other 3) ; (ii) Any person/organization who is playing the role of opinion-maker and influencing a society or community needs to come clean on their source of funding and ideology.

While the above points can be debated till the cows come home, I feel that there is some substance to the above arguments. This is perhaps why conspiracy theories are becoming such a farce in western societies to the extent that now we have organized groups being led by such opinion-makers that are now becoming a threat to society at large. For instance, the anti-vaccination groups in the West is a serious challenge to governments of the West (episodes like UBL and Shakil Afridi dont help the cause though).

In a more local context, people like Zaid Hamid are operating because of the freedom that they are allowed to spew all kinds of nonsensical rhetoric without being answerable to anyone. Zaid Hamid was just that big an idiot that he was involved in the Yusuf Kadhdhab issue and got exposed by the Anjuman-e-Khatm-e-Nubuwwat folks. Otherwise this guy was just having a field day with his nonsense!

Tags: @AsifAmeer, @Temojin

 

[mrk123]

No worries. The point I was coming at was that the person you were arguing against may have been suggesting something that although sounds wrong from a libertarian perspective, but it is actually finding practical feasibility in circles that matter.

So while the person (whose name I can't recall) was perhaps wrong in suggesting that he felt that he had a right to demand journalists to disclose their wealth and sources of income, I was appealing to you and others to ignore the fact that he was missing the point that you were making, but rather appreciate that journalists themselves are looking to disclose their assets and sources of income. What I was trying to suggest was that the journalist community is increasingly coming to a consensus on this matter and although no individual would have the right to demand such a thing, but it hardly matters if you are either a libertarian or conservative in this debate. So in terms of boolean algebra it would be like this:

Libertarian (A) believes that no individual has the right to demand journalists (Y) to disclose their assets.
Conservative (B) believes that individual has the right to demand journalists (Y) to disclose their assets.
However, Journalists (Y) themselves are increasingly agreeing amongst themselves to disclose their assets.

So it doesn't matter what A and B think because the decision has to be made by Y!

Pakistan is a peculiar case. Nothing works as the way its supposed to or intended to. I am sure if some formalized process is in place it will be abused.
We do have similar laws for folks holding public offices and ones working for the government. I can tell you now that it will have no effect and it will only be used to manipulate the media by the powers to be. Its a step in the wrong direction. What we need is not these stop gap and one off solutions. We need strict adherence to rule of law and accountability. Unless no one is above the law or could find loopholes in the law so big that planes could fly through them then no amount of regulations and laws are not enough.

Voluntary declaration is good but would it be unanimous? A crook or a "sufaid poosh" could decide for divergent reasons to not make their finances public - why would we need to put the sufaid poosh through the same scrutiny as a crook if we can't implement the rules and laws already in place?

Given how things work in Pakistan I think that this is a slippery slope and will be abused as many other laws or regulations have been.

On another note, I was hearing someone who was making a very compelling case as to why TV anchors ought to disclose their assets and that they should not be treated as private citizens. They argue that: (i) Media is increasingly becoming a 4th pillar of governance (Judiciary, Legislature and Executive being the other 3) ; (ii) Any person/organization who is playing the role of opinion-maker and influencing a society or community needs to come clean on their source of funding and ideology.

What we need is a culture of accountability even within private organization with an eye towards safeguarding the interests of the larger public. Lets say if a company is producing sub-standard medicine and endangering public's health then there are laws that should take care of it. Similarly if disinformation is deliberately being provided which endangers the public then there should be laws to check that. The elites in the power corridors have become lazy. There is no deliberation on any of these issues. I agree that media could be considered the 4th pillar of the state but then whats needed is to define the role of the media and its responsibilities and laws have to be crafted after considering all aspect and sensitivities involved. I doubt that it will ever happen in Pakistan.

While the above points can be debated till the cows come home, I feel that there is some substance to the above arguments. This is perhaps why conspiracy theories are becoming such a farce in western societies to the extent that now we have organized groups being led by such opinion-makers that are now becoming a threat to society at large. For instance, the anti-vaccination groups in the West is a serious challenge to governments of the West (episodes like UBL and Shakil Afridi dont help the cause though).

Generally I do agree with your argument. One thing that needs to be determined as to what amounts to freedom of speech or opinion and whats the larger public interest - given how polarized our society is at present this will be very difficult to define if not completely impossible. I am sure you understand that this debate may devolve into a debate on collective vs. individual responsibility.

In a more local context, people like Zaid Hamid are operating because of the freedom that they are allowed to spew all kinds of nonsensical rhetoric without being answerable to anyone. Zaid Hamid was just that big an idiot that he was involved in the Yusuf Kadhdhab issue and got exposed by the Anjuman-e-Khatm-e-Nubuwwat folks. Otherwise this guy was just having a field day with his nonsense!

Tags: @AsifAmeer, @Temojin

Zaid Hamid is a hack - he used to be the jamiat nazim in the university I attended. Though they(khatam-e-nubbuwat) did a service by calling this hack out I have my suspicions about why he fell out with that crowd with a solid background in Jamiat.

 

[mrk123]

Well, all along I suspected a zionist connection you being a financial wizard ;-)

and all this time I was competing against the Pakistani jewish community!

 

[mrk123]

Great - precise and accurate.

This is exactly what I was thinking though I forgot to list the point about an association or body of media organizations setting standards that its members have to adhered to.

[MENTION=28031]Aleph[/MENTION]

If Y wants to declare their assets, their IQ, their number of kids, their wives, number of their kids, the size of their waist.. so on.. Hey.. all power to them.

No argument there. Haan if a journalist group want to create a Standard of higher journalism where declaration of asset is a must, then journalists can make their own call if they want the prestige of being a member of a certified and reliable group.

You know how you got the "Certified Financial Analyst" or MCSE in IT... Govt doesnt force u to take the exam but you do it to increase your chances of landing a better source of income.

Keep Govt out!

 

[AsifAmeer]

Jews, Memon and Gujratis

You want smart kids, find a girl in these communities. I am glad my dad took this advice!

Well, all along I suspected a zionist connection you being a financial wizard ;-)

 

[Temojin]

@Waseem @Adeel

Guys, your forum is great for exchanging great ideas. I have learnt alot of stuff which I wouldnt have bothered or cared to know otherwise. Lekin Temojin is absolutely right about consistent inferior quality of comments from a specific growing numbers of users. I am not sure what you Admins can do about it. But it would be nice to have something like where there would be some sort of a warning system for flagged users by senior members/admins.

Something to the lines of Wikipedia/Crowdsource-filtered content on the site.

@Temojin agar Nazia hassan ka number ho to baat kero!

Nazia Hasan to bhai gayee udher jidher number nahi hota. Your suggestion is very good though, flagging or warnings should be there. Jitni marzi larai ho jaye but language should always be taken care of.

 

[Temojin]

Tags: @AsifAmeer, @Temojin

Journalists are professionals and professionals work for money, as simple as it gets.

About anti-vaccination, when I formed a relationship between vaccinations done during when we were children and the number of hepatitis patients today i.e a large number of customers for pharma industry today, I was told to keep quiet or life is too precious to lose. So things are fishy out there. When millions are saying something, there has to be something true related to it. One thing is for sure i.e corporate giants never do anything which doesn't provide them with long-term benefits and we also can't deny the fact that governments are actually run through corporations, this malik riaz thing being a very very little example of it who is nothing when compared to the likes of chevron or merck.

About ZH's issue, he has been assigned a duty as we all know intel agencies go with multi-pronged approach so he is performing it. About Yousuf's issue, when I delved into it and confronted the so called flag-bearers of this case, they had nothing to say but threats only. All case was absurd, no proof provided whatsoever but only an audio tape which also had nothing particularly blasphemous while Yousuf had publicly announced through newspapers that He didn't commit such a thing and believed in khatam e Nabuwwat, LeJ killer specially assigned to kill him and him getting vanished after his assassination and a lot more other points for which none of them had answers.

Moreover, my direct confrontation of Ashrafi & co. about them challenging ZH on youtube ridiculously than going to his place (he lives in ISB not NY) and directly asking him for an explanation. ZH never confronted by them until he started vehement speeches for Pakistan, during these years, they knew he existed and his support for yousuf also existed (according to them) but they let such a person lose for so many years. There were no answers but the same attitude, zindagi bohat pyari hoti hai but itni hee pyari hoti to mein 2 saal iske peechey lagata :) Vese Ashrafi, Imtiaz Alam ka bohat pyara aadmi hai and there are other factors involved too which I wouldn't mention here.

 

[nomishah]

In our society journos are very strong opinion makers and they must be accountable and i would also appreciate some comments on the program or a new thread can be started :) .

 

[Aleph]

Few quick things:

1- Just because vaccination is a money-making enterprise and in the hands of what some would say are unscrupulous elements, it doesn't make it an evil. The fact of the matter is that there is an overwhelming majority of experts from the medical field who are pro-vaccination. Those opposing it are: (a) divided; (b) confused; (c) represent not a minority from the medical community, but almost a tangential fringe. Half the people whose opinions and papers are being quoted to conduct anti-vaccination campaigns are themselves pro-vaccination!! They just happen to be against A particular type of vaccine (for example, MMR).

2- Zaid Hamid issue: I trust the 'ulama from the khatm-e-Nubuwwat on this matter. I am sure you are aware that the body cuts across subcontinental religious divides and represents deobandis, barelwi, ahl-e-hadith et al alike. It was this same body that got the qadiyani community excommunicated.

Zaid Hamid's bluff has been called out on many fronts. Initially, he was outright denying that he ever knew of a person by the name of Yousuf Ali. He kept on denying it until the audio and some video proof emerged linking the two. So that should have been embarassing enough. He was then pressed to disassociate completely from the ideology of Yousuf Ali as he did claim prophethood from himself. Now this is a very delicate matter from the point of view of the shari'ah and what Yousuf Ali did was claim that the Prophet (SAW) ruh would come into him. The experts will tell you how this matter is clear cut kufr and irtidaad. Qadi Iyad in his monumental Ash-Shifa' has enumerated examples of what could and what coulnd't be classified as irtidaad. What Yousuf saheb did was irtidaad by the standards of Qadi 'Iyad, Sanussi and other jurists. So when the 'ulama confronted him and asked him to repent (as if the proper modus operandi for it) he was adamant and kept dodging the bullet, which led to his conviction in a court of law.

Now anyone who knows Islamic law will tell you that once your contacts with a CONVICTED murtad - who claims prophethood either directly or indirectly - is established and refuses to repent then his entire 'tola' cannot just go scott free by simply stating that they believe Rasulullah (SAW) to be the last Messenger. They HAVE to ALSO disassociate with the kadhdhab (in this case Yousuf saheb). So until Zaid Hamid doesn't clear himself then good luck to him when he is six feet under.

This is why the Ahmadis continue to be non-Muslims. They also, like Zaid Hamid, continue to accept Rasulullah (SAW) as the last Messenger and take Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyan as only a reformist (unlike Qadiyanis who openly declare him to be a Messenger of God). Ahmadis continue to be considered non-Muslim because there in incontrovertible and categorical evidence of Ghulam Ahmad saheb declaring himself as a Messenger. So no matter what excuses and ta'weelaat the Ahmadis give the fact remains that they REFUSE to disassociate themselves from the kadhdhab and therefore the takfir (excommunication) stands.

There was an interesting debate between Ahmadis and Qadiyanis in the early 80s in Lahore regarding whose stance on Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyan was correct. The Qadiyanis won the munazarah hands down as they came up with all the proofs from his books declaring himself as a Nabi! Much to the Ahmadis embarassment and excuses to explain such categoric statements with twisted logic, they got a battering. It would have been only to their own benefit if they would have walked out of that munazarah disassociating from the kadhdhab.

By the way, Ashrafi saheb is a moderate and I think we need more mullahs like him who don't go around doing takfir. That is why when Ashrafi saheb supports the takfir on Yousuf Ali then there is something seriously grave about the matter. And I do know how Zaid Hamid bandwagon makes a big hue and cry over his relations with SAFMA. Zaid Hamid needs to stop worrying about SAFMA and start worrying about his own imaan.

Tags: [MENTION=24375]AsifAmeer[/MENTION], [MENTION=14890]mrk123[/MENTION]

Journalists are professionals and professionals work for money, as simple as it gets.

About anti-vaccination, when I formed a relationship between vaccinations done during when we were children and the number of hepatitis patients today i.e a large number of customers for pharma industry today, I was told to keep quiet or life is too precious to lose. So things are fishy out there. When millions are saying something, there has to be something true related to it. One thing is for sure i.e corporate giants never do anything which doesn't provide them with long-term benefits and we also can't deny the fact that governments are actually run through corporations, this malik riaz thing being a very very little example of it who is nothing when compared to the likes of chevron or merck.

About ZH's issue, he has been assigned a duty as we all know intel agencies go with multi-pronged approach so he is performing it. About Yousuf's issue, when I delved into it and confronted the so called flag-bearers of this case, they had nothing to say but threats only. All case was absurd, no proof provided whatsoever but only an audio tape which also had nothing particularly blasphemous while Yousuf had publicly announced through newspapers that He didn't commit such a thing and believed in khatam e Nabuwwat, LeJ killer specially assigned to kill him and him getting vanished after his assassination and a lot more other points for which none of them had answers.

Moreover, my direct confrontation of Ashrafi & co. about them challenging ZH on youtube ridiculously than going to his place (he lives in ISB not NY) and directly asking him for an explanation. ZH never confronted by them until he started vehement speeches for Pakistan, during these years, they knew he existed and his support for yousuf also existed (according to them) but they let such a person lose for so many years. There were no answers but the same attitude, zindagi bohat pyari hoti hai but itni hee pyari hoti to mein 2 saal iske peechey lagata :) Vese Ashrafi, Imtiaz Alam ka bohat pyara aadmi hai and there are other factors involved too which I wouldn't mention here.

 

[Aleph]

Dude, the Jamiat (especially back in the days) was a bastion and parking space for all would be reformists and inquilaabis. Hamaray pyaare Hussain Haqqani bhi Jamiat ka hissa huwa kartay thay.

These days you have all kinds of people parked under PTI. One of the reasons why I have grown tired of these tehreeks and tanzeems is because the moment the leader is laid to rest, the wackos take over and make a complete mockery of the tanzeem. Look at Tanzeem-e-Islami of Asraar saheb marhoom. Asraar saheb himself splintered with Jamat-e-Islami due to differences with Maududi saheb and now his own tanzeem has 2 separate camps and is rapidly deteriorating into 2 splinter groups. With the PTI as it stands today (liberals and conservatives under one roof) does one really think that it will all be hunky dory after IK exits the scene?

In any case, ZH association with Yousuf Ali was enough to get him out of Jamiat circles. At the end of the day, the Jamiat is not a group of scholars, but rather follows scholarly opinions of the actual ulama who continue to disassociate themselves from politics.

Pakistan is a peculiar case. Nothing works as the way its supposed to or intended to. I am sure if some formalized process is in place it will be abused.
We do have similar laws for folks holding public offices and ones working for the government. I can tell you now that it will have no effect and it will only be used to manipulate the media by the powers to be. Its a step in the wrong direction. What we need is not these stop gap and one off solutions. We need strict adherence to rule of law and accountability. Unless no one is above the law or could find loopholes in the law so big that planes could fly through them then no amount of regulations and laws are not enough.

Voluntary declaration is good but would it be unanimous? A crook or a "sufaid poosh" could decide for divergent reasons to not make their finances public - why would we need to put the sufaid poosh through the same scrutiny as a crook if we can't implement the rules and laws already in place?

Given how things work in Pakistan I think that this is a slippery slope and will be abused as many other laws or regulations have been.



What we need is a culture of accountability even within private organization with an eye towards safeguarding the interests of the larger public. Lets say if a company is producing sub-standard medicine and endangering public's health then there are laws that should take care of it. Similarly if disinformation is deliberately being provided which endangers the public then there should be laws to check that. The elites in the power corridors have become lazy. There is no deliberation on any of these issues. I agree that media could be considered the 4th pillar of the state but then whats needed is to define the role of the media and its responsibilities and laws have to be crafted after considering all aspect and sensitivities involved. I doubt that it will ever happen in Pakistan.



Generally I do agree with your argument. One thing that needs to be determined as to what amounts to freedom of speech or opinion and whats the larger public interest - given how polarized our society is at present this will be very difficult to define if not completely impossible. I am sure you understand that this debate may devolve into a debate on collective vs. individual responsibility.



Zaid Hamid is a hack - he used to be the jamiat nazim in the university I attended. Though they(khatam-e-nubbuwat) did a service by calling this hack out I have my suspicions about why he fell out with that crowd with a solid background in Jamiat.

 

[Aleph]

[MENTION=23319]Temojin[/MENTION]:

Here is an excerpt from the diary of Yousuf Ali, which should seal the deal for Zaid Hamid saheb. Yousuf Ali denied in court that this diary belonged to him, but it was proved beyond a shadow of doubt that this book was authored by him and was found with all his close 'sahabis':

Under the caption Mard-e-Kamil, Sallallahu alayhi wasallam:

"Rasul ul Allah or Nabi or Marde Kamil is the complete manifestation of Allah Tabark-Wa~Taala and Muhammed Alehe Salat Wassalam. He is the physical perfect personification of transcendent Allah and Muhammed. All the physical beings has been created due to him. He is always present in the world. His apparent name may be different but his^ real name is always Muhammad. Adam, Noah. Moses, Abrahim, Jesus were the names of dresses but in reality each and everyone of them is Muhammad. Then came Muhammed Bin Abdullah. That was the first time that the real and apparent name became one. Then came Abu Bakr, Umar. Usman, Ali, Twelve Imams, Ibne Arabi. Abdul Qadir. Mueen-ud-Din. Fareed ud din. Mujadad AlifSani and Muhammed Yousaf Ali. The name of Mard-e-Kamils may vary but in actual He is the glorified form of Muhammed.

There are one lack twenty four thousand Rasuls and Nabis but the name of only thirty three are known. Thai is why, always in the world one lack twenty four thousand Aulias are present but only thirty three of them are Murshide Kamils and known. Each one of them is on the model of one Prophet. The one who is by all means on the model of Muhammed Rasul ul Allah is the Mard-e-Kamil of his times. This name may be different but in real and apparent he is the most splended form of Muhammad.

Muhammed has been always present in physical. After the apparent death of the physical body. It rolls back into the real body of Muhammed Mustafa. Thus Noor goes back to its origin. Immediately, the transcendent Muhammed + Noor of physical Muhammed descends on the most chosen individual, who became Nabi/Rasool/Mard-e-Kamil of his times. Thus the next form of Muhammed is similar (rather glorified) to the previous form in apparent and in real. So it can be said that Muhammed is still alive in physical. His first form was Adam and the current is Muhammed Yousaf Ali. "

Furthermore, if you follow the court documents you will see the shahadah of at least 17 people (some of whom were army officers to the level of Brigadiers!) who testified that they heard Yousuf claim prophethood. These people were his OWN followers! You can search the complete judgement and its details online.

Tags: [MENTION=24375]AsifAmeer[/MENTION], [MENTION=14890]mrk123[/MENTION]

 

[Aleph]

[MENTION=23319]Temojin[/MENTION]:

And here is the testimony of THE CLOSEST 'sahabi' of Yousuf Kadhdhab who was referred to as 'Abu Bakr As-Siddiq' by this liar. You can clearly see how his closest follower (even closer than Zaid Zaman Hamid) became disenfranchised with Yousuf's bakwas and spilled the beans that led to his conviction (including producing a copy of the diary above):

R.O. & A.C. 27.5.2000
(PW-7) Mohammad Abubakar Ali, (Recalled on oath).
XXXXX By Mr. Saleem Abdur Rehman, learned counsel for accused.
I went for ‘Umra’ in November, 1994. I stated before police that I went for ‘Umra’ in November, 1994. Confronted with Exh. DH, where.it is not so recorded. I came back after fifteen days. I had informed to Yousaf, accused, that I alongwith my family is proceeding for ‘Umra’. I did not take any permission from Yousaf, accused, to perform the ‘Umra’ I have sated earlier that when I asked for permission from Yousaf,-accused, he stated that what is the need to perform ‘Umra’, whereas Umra’ can be performed here and further stated that in ‘Madina’ there is ‘Makan, while the ‘Makeen’ is here. I Was surprised to hear these dialogues by the accused. In March or April, 1995 after performance of ‘Umra’ by me Yousaf, accused, had said that he will arrange my Meeting with Holy Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him). Yousaf, accused, used to say that the Nazool of Holy Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) is expected and that he can arrange a meeting with Holy Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him), on which I thought as to how it is possible, so I was much surprised. I could not understand as to how it could be possible. The claim of Yousaf, accused, to be the Holy Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) looked to. me as highly objectionable and bad. When Yousaf, accused, claimed himself to be. the Holy Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) I was much surprised and I was shivering an sweating. I had asked Yousaf, accused, about his claim because some time he posed himself to be ‘Libaas’ and some times to be ‘Mushabba’ and stated that his ‘Nazool’ as Holy Prophet is expected. Yousaf, accused, is too intelligent that he can over power any simple lay man like me, as I have been looted by him.

 

[AsifAmeer]

Nazia Hasan to bhai gayee udher jidher number nahi hota. Your suggestion is very good though, flagging or warnings should be there. Jitni marzi larai ho jaye but language should always be taken care of.

Now you may differ in this opinion but I feel that if used correctly, cuss words magnify the message of the conversation. I hold this opinion after reading alot of material from Michael Lewis, the fixed income trader/financial reporter who used to work for Solomon Brothers. Such a soft spoken person but when you read his material, he would place words in sentences which you wouldn't wanna use in front of your mom. Infact the very word "Big swinging d!cks" for arrogant executives for coined by Michael.

Language is like fire. Either you can burn down your house or if used proportionally, it adds flavor to thoughts!

 

[Temojin]

Now you may differ in this opinion but I feel that if used correctly, cuss words magnify the message of the conversation. I hold this opinion after reading alot of material from Michael Lewis, the fixed income trader/financial reporter who used to work for Solomon Brothers. Such a soft spoken person but when you read his material, he would place words in sentences which you wouldn't wanna use in front of your mom. Infact the very word "Big swinging d!cks" for arrogant executives for coined by Michael.

Language is like fire. Either you can burn down your house or if used proportionally, it adds flavor to thoughts!

When an adolescent I somewhat thought so though I was never fond of such language but then I looked at the best of the best and it didn't contain any such manner starting from Quran e Paak to Hadith and then other things and they are the most convincing ones so I strongly believe otherwise.

 

[AsifAmeer]

We are all woven out of different threads. and that makes a vibrant culture!

When an adolescent I somewhat thought so though I was never fond of such language but then I looked at the best of the best and it didn't contain any such manner starting from Quran e Paak to Hadith and then other things and they are the most convincing ones so I strongly believe otherwise.

 

[Temojin]

[MENTION=28031]Aleph[/MENTION]

The difference of opinion comes when we talk about things and I am actually part of those things. I was part of this situation when pharma goons threatened me and many newspapers biggies told me to take care of myself (they said it in goodwill). As told earlier, I am not the kind who would only rely upon what others have said but personally delve into the matter. Remember, they don't even provide you with water without benefit. You start taking a med today and you are a customer after a decade for another upcoming product.

About ZH, again, I would say that everybody has his point of view but none can deny the fact that no proof whatsoever was ever presented in court and I repeat, it wasn't except a tape and some people who went to testify despite denial of Yousuf and in this matter, the person who is being convicted either has to say it in front of masses to be declared guilty or it has to be a video proof of the same. That tape doesn't contain anything which can show that he claimed himself to be a prophet. Presenting a diary which the person is totally denying was his (on what bases it was proven that diary was his?). You exactly know that within Islamic system of justice, if he denies this, none can prove that the thing belongs to him unless or until more than many have watched him possessing and writing his diary which is next to impossible and it wasn't so. Moreover, if a person simply denies all allegations and recites shahadat, on what bases was he declared guilty? Why an LeJ person was sent to kill him? LeJ killer is not my story but if anyone read a newspaper of that time, it was mentioned in it that a convicted murderer of LeJ killed Yousuf.

About SAFMA, it is not ZH who is worried. He is being used to do something with regards to SAFMA. Well, here too, I know a lot about SAFMA as I know many people from SAFMA including Imtiaz Alam since the time I started speaking (well, we knew him even before that but I didn't) and they certainly are a threat.

Ashrafi being a darling of Imtiaz Alam is just not another normal thing, I believe if people actually see them doing what they do, the word sahab will be omitted forever from his name. I repeat, he and his kind still support the massacre going inside Pakistan in the name of Jihad. It is not about Yousuf or anything related to him but it is about the state of Pakistan against who are trying to dismantle it and may Allah provide you with an opportunity to see these things in person. Mazay ki baat Imtiaz Aalam ba'baag e Duhul jihad to bakwas kehta hai, ashrafi mein itni ghairat e eemaani to honi chahiye ke usko munh pe condemn kere but he doesn't.

I also revered these people, I too got happy when I heard about the assassination of Yousuf, talked about it with my tablighi and SSP mates right after Asar prayers and we all rejoiced at fidayan e jhangvi doing the right thing but then Allah gave me an opportunity to look at all these things from another angle while sitting right besides them, eating, praying and roaming around with them so things got different for me from then onwards.

Don't know why are you again tagging asif in this matter as he or mrk aren't part of this discussion apparently. I hope one day I , you, Asif, Mrk and some other mates can sit down and discuss these matters in person as internet only makes it worse to discuss issues. I am not defending Yousuf, even those who declare him guilty aren't wrong in my opinion as they are going with right thing (defending khatam e Nabuwwat) while people like me who spent a couple of years running after all of this matter are also going with the right thing. Vese why doesn't everybody ask Ashrafi to get rid of this dangerous ZH once and for all exposing him while going right at his place and challenge him for a dialogue on TV. Agar mujhe pata ho ke koi jhooti nabuwwat ka mudd'ai hai to mein to bilkul uske peechey perne ki koshish keroonga jabke mere lakhon followers hon aur mujhe aalim bhi samajhtey hoon, get my point? Sab siasat hai mere bhai, things are way different than what we look at them as.

kher choro is baat ko, till you remain a hardcore supporter of what you read, larai ho jayegi :) I have presented my point and you have presented yours, the only difference is that I have been on your point of view and you haven't still tried mine.

After a road accident some years ago and having a severe head injury, my battery has been down to less than half of what it used to be, otherwise yeh ashrafi ZH aur yeh sab tanta to abhi tak mein ne khatm ker hee dia hota. Now I can't travel and get indulged into activities as vigorously as I once did so I need to rely upon private meetings with power brokers which don't happen so frequently. I myself sound funny to myself when I write all this ke yaar internet forum pe mein yeh sab kion likh raha hoon, whyyyyy but it has to be like this, order order hotey hain.

A brotherly advice, I am serious, stop believing in whatever mass media or its opposition tells you, start spending as little time as you can spare going after facts yourself and you'll be amazed at how your views change within a year or so. I am telling it to you as I think you have the potential to do this and there aren't many who i say this to. I know limitations hoti hain family se le ker job tak but again, not difficult if one wants.

Abb idher discussion band kerein verna apna mazaq ban jayega :)

 

[Aleph]

[MENTION=23319]Temojin[/MENTION]:

The point of tagging [MENTION=24375]AsifAmeer[/MENTION] and [MENTION=14890]mrk123[/MENTION] is so that they can add their own takes into this. As you saw, [MENTION=14890]mrk123[/MENTION] contributed by telling us how he personally knew Zaid Hamid from University days.

I will also politely turn things around and ask you if you are pretty sure that I am not a power broker or if I am just an ordinary guy with no high-level contacts. You would be surprised if I were to tell you how close I am to powers-that-be in not just Pakistan, but in many other Muslim countries. In fact, you might be even shocked to know that I actually worked for the 'deep state' at one point of my career.

I don't mention these things because it adds zero value to the discussion at hand. What does it matter if I knew fulan ibn-e-fulan? How does that prove anything? I mean Bilawal Bhutto probably knows more people than all of us put together. Does that mean anything? In my humble opinion, it doesnt mean cuck. It is not who you know that defines how valuable your information is, but it is your objectivity that makes your information invaluable.

As regards Zaid Hamid's case, I am surprised (but maybe I am not) that you say that there was "hardly any eivdence"?? The details of the Yousuf Ali case goes in HUNDREDS of pages of legal documents! And the guilt of Yousuf Ali is established on MANY counts! He wasn't just lying about the nubuwwah matter, but his blatant lies was exposed on many other fronts (for example him being Director General of WAMY in Cyprus - World Assembly of Muslim Youth). The diary of his is proven beyond a shadow of doubt to be his work as it bears his signature, handwriting and the 17 people who testified against him (all of whom were his followers who just couldn't take his bakwas anymore). At least 5 of his closest followers (including Abu Bakr Ali) produced this SAME book and bore witness that it was distributed to them by Yousuf Ali.

I invite you (and anyone else) to re-visit the entirety of the legal documents in this case and you will see that unequivocal and categorical proof is presented against Yousuf saheb. If you have the time please do go through this book "Judgement of Yousuf Kazzab Blasphemy Case" Published in 2000 by Al Ma'arif Publications. This book is available online too and it details everything in the minutest of details: http://zaidhamidexposition.org/yusuf-kazab-blasphemy-case/

You will find in it copies of all the original court documents, which you can crosscheck with the archives of the session courts in Lahore. I hope you are aware that the case against Yousuf Ali was opened and deliberated by his OWN followers? The Khatm-e-Nubuwwat, LeJ et al came to the party very late in the day. The petitioners are (were) all close 'companions' of Yousuf Ali.

 

[InsafianPTI]

ohh common, bahadur log maidan chor ker nahi jaatey.

AAp sey behtay tu mein hun na, I don't give up, why do you??
if u don't want to write anything thats fine, but shouldn't give up.

Seems that you guys are clairvoyants. I am seriously contemplating cutting down or completely giving up on forum participation.

I guess we are humans and no matter how hard we try we tend to get pulled into responding to childish, pointless and personal discussions.

I know the feeling and echo what Asif, Temojin and Cefspan mentioned below. I must say that as Asif mentioned below, I have also learned a lot on this forum from friends and would probably be a silent observer to keep enriching myself. Its just hard to deal with the noise on here now.

@Tutor @Aleph

 

[mrk123]

LOL

No, I am not running away :-)

Its just that I have little patience for BS and idiocy and even though I can dish it back in kind and I have but then I think that I am better than this.

I will be selective on participation but not giving up. I love following this too much to completely give it up.

I can tell that you are definitely braver than me. Truth needs to be told - more now than ever before! Hope you will keep up the good work.

ohh common, bahadur log maidan chor ker nahi jaatey.

AAp sey behtay tu mein hun na, I don't give up, why do you??
if u don't want to write anything thats fine, but shouldn't give up.

 

[Temojin]

@Temojin:

The point of tagging @AsifAmeer and @mrk123 is so that they can add their own takes into this. As you saw, @mrk123 contributed by telling us how he personally knew Zaid Hamid from University days.

I will also politely turn things around and ask you if you are pretty sure that I am not a power broker or if I am just an ordinary guy with no high-level contacts. You would be surprised if I were to tell you how close I am to powers-that-be in not just Pakistan, but in many other Muslim countries. In fact, you might be even shocked to know that I actually worked for the 'deep state' at one point of my career.

I don't mention these things because it adds zero value to the discussion at hand. What does it matter if I knew fulan ibn-e-fulan? How does that prove anything? I mean Bilawal Bhutto probably knows more people than all of us put together. Does that mean anything? In my humble opinion, it doesnt mean cuck. It is not who you know that defines how valuable your information is, but it is your objectivity that makes your information invaluable.

As regards Zaid Hamid's case, I am surprised (but maybe I am not) that you say that there was "hardly any eivdence"?? The details of the Yousuf Ali case goes in HUNDREDS of pages of legal documents! And the guilt of Yousuf Ali is established on MANY counts! He wasn't just lying about the nubuwwah matter, but his blatant lies was exposed on many other fronts (for example him being Director General of WAMY in Cyprus - World Assembly of Muslim Youth). The diary of his is proven beyond a shadow of doubt to be his work as it bears his signature, handwriting and the 17 people who testified against him (all of whom were his followers who just couldn't take his bakwas anymore). At least 5 of his closest followers (including Abu Bakr Ali) produced this SAME book and bore witness that it was distributed to them by Yousuf Ali.

I invite you (and anyone else) to re-visit the entirety of the legal documents in this case and you will see that unequivocal and categorical proof is presented against Yousuf saheb. If you have the time please do go through this book "Judgement of Yousuf Kazzab Blasphemy Case" Published in 2000 by Al Ma'arif Publications. This book is available online too and it details everything in the minutest of details: http://zaidhamidexposition.org/yusuf-kazab-blasphemy-case/

You will find in it copies of all the original court documents, which you can crosscheck with the archives of the session courts in Lahore. I hope you are aware that the case against Yousuf Ali was opened and deliberated by his OWN followers? The Khatm-e-Nubuwwat, LeJ et al came to the party very late in the day. The petitioners are (were) all close 'companions' of Yousuf Ali.

Bhaijaan yahi exposition vala banda hai na yeh galian dene pe aa gaya tha jab iski taking ki thee mein ne :)

Knowing people matters. I don't know them as just knowing them but from inside out my mate. As I said, leave it, things generally go off topic on the internet. I reiterate, there was no evidence whatsoever. When it comes to dawa e nabuwwat my friend, it takes one to make statements like mirza quadiani did and you can't just walk out and tell through 20 people that someone is so and so. Zia Shahid and khushnood along with hasan nisar are the journalists with the worst reputation due to their blackmailing and false issues and this issue was raised through zia and khushnood. I know Imtiaz Alam the way you would know your chacha jaan so it adds weight, I know most big names just like this, now its not my fault, innit :)

I would be happy to know where you have been and who have you been working with. It is time that we become open about who and what we know as hiding it all has got us to to the point that we are in this chaos. LeJ didn't come late into the picture, they were only shown later in the picture as they didn't want it to be a sectarian issue. It was a sectarian issue which was brought up like this to teach others a lesson, mein ne kaha na chor do baatein bohat nikal aayeingee.