Dear friends,

Mr. Chaudry in his post 77 writes

"The Ahmadi problem in Pakistan did not take place because of Islam or its proper (or lack of) understanding in the country, but its origin was a political struggle (by Z. Bhutto)."

See how all the blame is shifted to politics and the religion, yet again, comes out spotless and blame-free? The only problem in Mr. Chaudry's claim is the timeline. Of course, it was during Bhutto's government that Ahmadies were declared non-Muslims (which is true for many other countries where Bhutto was not even Prime Minister) but the 'problem' had been created much before. I wonder if Mr. Chaudry is even aware of the anti-Ahmedi riots of 1953 that were fueled by the "advocate of democracy" Maulana Maududi. What was making the rioting Muslims kill Ahmadies and burn their houses and properties if not their religious feelings? Ahmadies were not a political power by any stretch of imagination. It was Majils-e-Ahrar and Jamaat Islami who were in forefront of the riots and not ZA Bhutto who was not even a political entity at that time. Even if the religious parties had political goals behind these riots, what they were exploiting was general population's hatred towards Ahmadies for bringing another Nabi to the world. I wonder how would my intellectual friends at FOTH who are always asking us to see everything in the context of history would react to Mr. Chaudry's claim that Z A Bhutto's political struggle was the "origin" of "Ahmadi problem".

Regards,

Rafi Aamer