Censorship in Pakistan has a long history and its first victim being the founder of the nation Mohammad Ali Jinnah. On 11 August 1947 when he delivered his first speech “You are free, you are free to go to your temples…..” before the Constituent Assembly; within hours some shadowy figures became active and “tried to have some secularist passages of the speech blacked out in the press” (Press In Chains P. 35-39) But luckily the then editor Dawn Altaf Hussain came in their way and threatened to go to Quaid. So the attempt to muzzle Qauid’s voice failed. The second major attack was the closure of illustrious Civil & Military Gazette(C&MG) in 1949 after it carried a story by its Delhi correspondent that Pakistan and India are devising a formula to partition Kashmir. Pakistan denied the report so the paper published the denial, regretted the report and fired the correspondent. But on 6th May 1949, 16 West Pakistan newspapers carried a joint editorial by the title of “TREASON” and asked government to suspend the (C&MG) publication “for a suitable period.” The East Pakistani editors “refused to join the chorus” and the government closed the paper for a period of six month and the paper where once writers like Rudyard Kipling (1882-1887) had worked never recovered from the closure. Pakistan was perceived by Mohammad Ali Jinnah as a secular, democratic welfare state, but ironically even when Jinnah was alive his speeches were censored by the Radio Pakistan on the instructions of bigots – and it has been documented by eminent journalist Zamir Niazi in his valuable book, “Press in Chains”. REFERENCES: Press in Chains: History of media gagging in Pakistan
http://thoughtlines.wordpress.com/2009/03/14/press-in-chains-history-of-media-gagging-in-pakistan/ Pakistan transformed into a brutalised society Shahid Husain Thursday, January 05, 2012
http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=85912&Cat=4 ‘Censoring the Quaid’ by Dr M. Sarwar, Aug 7, 1991 The Frontier Post)
http://beenasarwar.wordpress.com/2009/08/30/jinnah-revisited-thank-you-jaswant-singh/ Censoring the Quaid, August 7, 1991
http://drsarwar.wordpress.com/dr-sarwar-writings/#censorQuaid
If you talk of Islam and Excellent books then for Guidance [Hidayat] only Two sources are sufficient enough i.e. Quran and Hadith [for day to day advices Riaz As Salehen, Al Lu Lu Al Marjan and Mishkat (These three books are Compilation of Authentic and Verified Hadiths] and any other book which we cannot corroborate with Quran and Rightful Sunnah can only be called Bida’at [Innovation] Sufi books like Kashf Al Mahjub by Ali Hajweri, Ahya ul Uloom by Ghazali, Mathnavi by Rumi, Fissusl Hikm and Fathoohat-e-Makki by Ibn Arabi, Tawaseen by Mansoor Al Hallaj and last but not the least Ghunyatut Talibeen by Abdul Qadir Jeelani are full of False, Concocted, Fabricated and Weak Hadiths.
Dr. Masooduddin Usmani Exposes Blasphemous Barelvis-Deobandis.
Monday, October 17, 2011, Ziqad 18, 1432 A.H.
http://www.jang.com.pk/jang/oct2011-daily/17-10-2011/col5.htm
Saturday, October 22, 2011, Ziqad 23, 1432 A.H.
http://www.jang.com.pk/jang/oct2011-daily/22-10-2011/col2.htm
Hadhrat Uthman (May Allah be pleased with him) narrates that Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) said: "The best amongst you is he who learns the Quran and teaches it." (Bukhari, Abu Daud, Tirmidzi, Nasa'i, Ibnu Majah). Uthmaan, may Allah be pleased with him, said that the Prophet (sallAllahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) said: The best of you are the ones who learn the Qur’an and teach it to others” [Al-Bukhari] Narrated Aisha, may Allah be pleased with her : The Prophet said, Such a person who recites the Quran and masters it by heart, will be with the noble righteous scribes (in Heaven). And such a person exerts himself to learn the Quran by heart, and recites it with great difficulty, will have a double reward.” (Bukhari)
Jang Group's Haroon Rasheed often quote Mansoor Hallaj e.g. on Osama Bin Laden whereas Osama and others like him were Ikhwanis (Jamat-e-Islami) and for them Mansoor Hallaj was an Heretic:) more shameful is the fact that Historically Mr. Haroon is wrong because there was time gap between the death of Sufi Master Junaid Baghdadi and Mansoor Hallaj and their meeting cannot be proved through any narration. Patriotic Reverse Gear of Kamran Khan & Jang Group/GEO TV.
http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2011/05/patriotic-reverse-gear-of-kamran-khan.html . When you insert the patchwork of Religion in Politics then these efforts always end up in more confusion:) Mr Irfan Siddiqui [Noted Columnist of Daily Jang and Mentor of Dr. Shahid Masood, and Former PRO of President House Islamabad and earlier he was a Regular Columnist of Weekly Takbeer] is quite Islamist when in Pakistan while lecturing the Pakistani Politicians about Governance and Rule and Revival of Islam whereas he hismelf relaxed Islam's very basic prinicple i.e. Tawheed Monotheism while narrating his journey of Saudi Arabia and particularly his visit of Masjid Nabawi in Medina where he literaly presented Pakistan's Case before Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]'s Grave and wanted his intercession to "SAVE PAKISTAN". Mr. Irfan Siddiqui was least bothered about a FACT that Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] had passed away more than 1400 years ago and he [PBUH] cannot help Pakistan from his grave. Period. Irfan Siddiqui's Request to Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] & Polytheism [Shirk].
http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2010/04/irfan-siddiquis-request-to-prophet.html
Sunday, October 23, 2011, Ziqad 24, 1432 A.H.
http://www.jang.com.pk/jang/oct2011-daily/23-10-2011/col5.htm
Sufis are known to be Habitual Liars, and Haroon ur Rasheed is a Sufi and not only that his Tilt is toward Deviant Mawdudi and his Kharji Cult Jamat-e-Islami - Imam Muslim's Sahih Muslim (Traditions of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) defines that "
وحدثني محمد بن أبي عتاب قال حدثني عفان عن محمد بن يحيى بن سعيد القطان عن أبيه قال لم نر الصالحين في شيء أكذب منهم في الحديث - ص 18 - قال ابن أبي عتاب فلقيت أنا محمد بن يحيى بن سعيد القطان فسألته عنه فقال عن أبيه لم تر أهل الخير في شيء أكذب منهم في الحديث قال مسلم يقول يجري الكذب على لسانهم ولا يتعمدون الكذب
الصفحة الرئيسية » الحديث » صحيح مسلم » مقدمة » باب أن الإسناد من الدين والرواية لا تكون إلا عن الثقات وجواز جرح الرواة وأنه ليس من الغيبة المحرمة
http://hadith.al-islam.com/Page.aspx?pageid=192&TOCID=3&BookID=25&PID=38
Explanation of The Preface of Sahih Muslim - Shaykh Yahya al-Hajooree
http://ilmal-yaqeen.com/muslim.htm
God’s Curse on a Liar – Says Haroon ur Rasheed
Courtesy: "PKpolitics" Haroon Rasheed, a senior journalist and columnist claimed on 27th January 2010 as a guest in Kashif Abbasi’s program Off The Record that he received three plots from the government, which he was ready to return to set a good example. PKPolitics highly appreciated Haroon’s offer towards becoming good role model in journalist society. Respectable journalist Haroon Rasheed was again a guest in yesterday’s program of Kashif Abbasi, where he claimed that he never received any plot and sent God’s curse on liar. God’s Curse on a Liar – Says Haroon Rasheed OCTOBER 31, 2011
http://pkpolitics.com/2011/10/31/gods-curse-on-liar-says-haroon-rasheed/
Dr Safdar Mehmood & Haroon ur Rasheed have been trying their best so construct a bridge between Secular Jinnah & Deobandi Scholar Ashraf Ali Thanvi to Islamize Muhammad Ali Jinnah and Pakistan, and each time Dr Safdar Mehmood & Haroon ur Rasheed create/concoct a lie to achieve the desired result ends up in more confusion. Pakistani Scholars are strange, they have several version of Ideologies/Islam to concoct Alleged Islamic Ideologies of Pakistan e.g. on Blasphemy Law they follow Traditionalists, while executing/implementing the Blasphemy Law these ideologues target the most marginalized section of the society i.e. Minorities whereas spare Blatant Blasphemers within the Mullah Community (Deobandi, Barelvi, Shia books are riddled with Blasphemy and their Mullahs often resort to worst kind of Blasphemy in the name of respective Fiqh), same Ideologues adopt a criminal silence on the practice of Blatant and Brazen Apostasy/Disbelief e.g. Practice of Sorcery openly in Pakistan & Promoted through Pakistani TV Channels. Above mentioned Alleged Scholars shamelessly quote Apostate Masnoor Hallaj & Blasphemer Ali Hajweri in their Daily Jang Column without any check or any threat of use of Blasphemy Law from any quarter for quoting Blasphemous Sufis. Dr Safdar & Haroon ur Rasheed & their partners in crime e.g. Mujib ur Rehamn Shami (Dunya TV) and Irfan Siddiqui (Daily Jang) take one more giant step they often praise Mawdudi (Founder of Jamat-e-Islami) whose Blasphemous Views on Prophets (Peace be upon them) & Companions of Prophet Mohammad (May Allah be pleased with all of them) are not a secret. Irony is that Dr Safdar/Haroon ur Rasheed are praising Mawlana Ashraf Ali Thanvi & Jinnah's alleged connections, conveniently forget about the Religious Edicts (Fatwas), Books, even Fatwa of Apostasy issued by the very same Deobandi Scholars on Mawdudi and Jamat-e-Islami. It is requested that Dr Safdar Mehmood & Haroon ur Rasheed would also reveal the Fatwa of Apostasy against Jinnah and Fellow Alleged Founders of Pakistan, and Fatwas were issued by Barelvi, Deobandi, Jamat-e-Islami Scholars.
Wednesday, February 22, 2012, Rabi-ul-Awal 29, 1433 A.H.
http://jang.com.pk/jang/feb2012-daily/22-02-2012/col2.htm
Tuesday, February 14, 2012, Rabi-ul-Awal 21, 1433 A.H.
http://jang.com.pk/jang/feb2012-daily/14-02-2012/col2.htm
Barelvism originally emerged as a reaction against the propagation of several new streams of Islamic thought-including, though not limited to, the Deobandis. Ahmed Raza himself painstakingly developed refutations of Deobandism, the Ahl-e-Hadith (whom the Barelvis decry as the "Wahhabis" of South Asia), as well as the minority Ahmadi sect. What has conventionally distinguished the Barelvis from the Deobandis and Ahl-e-Hadith is the latter two's notoriously puritan understanding and austere practice of Islam, which the Barelvis reject as unorthodox. While performing the Hajj in 1906, Ahmed Raza asked the ulemas of Mecca and Medina to endorse his fatwas and refutations of the teachings of Deobandis and other new schools of thought in South Asia. (Mecca and Medina were then under Ottoman rule, and the authority of the religious scholars in these two holy cities was at the time recognized across the Islamic world.) The Arab scholars, according to the Barelvis, agreed fully with Ahmed Raza's propositions, and a total of twenty clerics from Mecca and thirteen from Medina endorsed Hussam al-Harmain, a book of fatwas compiled by Ahmed Raza
http://www.nooremadinah.net/UrduBooks/HussamulHaramain/Download/HussamulHaramain.pdf . Most of these fatwas concern what constitutes the proper veneration of the Prophet Muhammad, and by these standards, Ahmed Raza accused the Deobandis of not bestowing sufficient respect upon the Prophet-and thus, found them guilty of heresy. After Ahmed Raza returned from Arabia to India, his anti-Deobandi fatwas began to circulate, and this put the puritan Deobandis on edge. The Deobandi scholars reacted by developing their own refutations of Ahmed Raza's teachings, accusing the Barelvi movement as well of heresy. This launched what came to be known as the "Fatwa War" between the Barelvis and Deobandis. From 1925 until now, it has been claimed, a virtually "uncountable" number of fatwas were issued by Barelvi and Deobandi scholars renouncing the other school of thought for their deviant, "un-Islamic" beliefs and practices. These fatwas have addressed a range of matters-from religion to politics, both great and small-and they have only further divided the two schools of thoughts on nearly every issue. REFERENCE: The Assertion of Barelvi Extremism by Ismail Khan Published on Wednesday, October 19, 2011 ARTICLES Current Trends in Islamist Ideology, Volume 12
http://www.currenttrends.org/research/detail/the-assertion-of-barelvi-extremism
Barelvi Scholar's Fatwa Against Jinnah - 1
http://youtu.be/q0VPZ9fJWlQ
Barelvi Scholar's Fatwa Against Jinnah - 2
http://youtu.be/rLSc9oc_8J0
A reference to Maulana Hussain Ahmad Madni in a recent meeting in Lahore has incensed the Deobandi ulema belonging to the JUI. Unintentionally, a debate has been revived whether the followers of the ulema who opposed the Pakistan Movement before 1947 can now rule Pakistan efficiently or will their vision actually harm its security? This was the question asked by Allama Iqbal’s son, Justice (Retd) Javid Iqbal, in front of an audience in Lahore recently. The fact that the ulema did not support the Pakistan Movement sets history against them, but today the most powerful claim on the destiny of Pakistan as an Islamic state has been by the very ulema whose organisations were at the forefront of the anti-Pakistan reaction before 1947. Who reformed himself, the makers of Pakistan or the ulema? We can see that, 1949 onwards, it is the makers of Pakistan who “corrected” themselves by suiting their ideology to the expectations of the ulema. In the past fifty years, Pakistan has gradually moved away from the norms of democracy accepted by it in 1947 and has moved closer to the vision of the ulema. Today, our destiny is in their hands. According to “Nawa-e-Waqt”, (December 10, 2002), during a meeting in Lahore chief editor Majeed Nizami was told by Lahore’s famous cleric Dr Israr Ahmad that he was not a follower of Maulana Hussain Ahmad Madni, upon which Mr Nizami told him that he used to praise Madni in his sermons in his mosque after which he (Mr Nizami) had stopped going to that mosque. Daily “Jang” featured a column by journalist Hamid Mir in which he revealed that in 1937, in the Uttar Pradesh elections, Congress was one short of the majority vote, whereupon Hussain Ahmad Madni persuaded a Muslim Leaguer, Hafiz Ibrahim, to defect to Congress. When the Muslim League objected, Madni got Ibrahim to recontest and win the seat for Congress. Quoted in “Khabrain”, Sahibzada Zahid Mehmood Qasimi, secretary general of JUI and head of Deoband Action Committee in Lahore, stated that a newspaper editor (Mr Nizami) had insulted the memory of Hussain Ahmad Madni and should take back his words. He said Madni studied hadith at the mausoleum of the Prophet (PBUH) for 18 years and today his pupils were active in Palestine, Chechnya, Kashmir and Bosnia. He said the followers of Deoband were greatly incensed at the remarks made by the editor.
Hussain Ahmad Madni was the leader of the religious alliance that thought that Muslims could become “one nation” with the Hindus in their struggle against British Raj. His ability to persuade a Muslim Leaguer to desert the Muslim League points to an early influence of the ulema over the Pakistan Movement. Late Rafiullah Shehab writing in “The Nation” (September 11, 2001) stated: “Mr M. A. H. Ispahani, a close associate of the Quaid, who was present on the occasion writes about this important meeting in his famous book ‘The Quaid-e-Azam, as I Knew Him’ as under: ‘In course of the Parliamentary Board meeting at Lahore, I remember Mufti Kifayatullah and Maulana Hussain Ahmad Madni supporting Mr Jinnah and welcoming his move to bring the Muslim League in the arena of live politics but on the last day, one of these men of learning put forth the suggestion that to ensure success of the Muslim League as a party in the polls, effective and relentless propaganda would be necessary and for this purpose, (the ulema) of Deoband would place their machinery at the League’s disposal on the condition that the cost of the propaganda be borne by the League. At that time League was not in a position to arrange the required funds which disappointed the Maulanas and they drifted in the direction of the Hindu Congress.’ (Pages 23, 24.) It was after this separation that Maulana Hussain Ahmad Madni, in one of his addresses condemned the Two-Nation Theory, declaring it against the teachings of Islam. He advised the Muslims to gather under the flag of the Indian National Congress. Allama Iqbal promptly refuted the arguments of the Maulana by quoting from the teachings of Islam and established that this theory was in accordance with the teachings of Islam. But in spite of that, a majority of the Ulema following the instructions of Maulana Madni bitterly opposed the establishment of Pakistan.” Historian Ashiq Hussain Batalvi also notes in his book “Allama Iqbal Kay Akhri Do Saal”, the inclination of the pro-Congress religious parties in Punjab to lend support to the Muslim League only if the funds were forthcoming.
Talking to Tehreek Karkunan Pakistan in Lahore Justice (Retd) Javid Iqbal said in “Jang” (October 17, 2002) that the ulema of the MMA could either give security to Pakistan or destroy it. He said they had gained a political edge for the first time in the latest election but no one knew what Islam they would enforce in a country where Islam had already been enforced. He asked whether this new Islam would be of the Iranian, Taliban, Saudi or the Quaid-e-Azam model. He said under British Raj, the ulema mounted two campaigns, one Wahhabi and the other Khilafat movement, but both damaged the interest of the Muslims. In these two cases the ulema had no political power, but now they have and could actually do more damage because their Islam was not the Islam of Quaid-e-Azam. Justice Javid Iqbal is obviously referring to the clash that developed between the ulema of Deobandi and Ahle Hadith variety and the Pakistan Movement before 1947. Allama Iqbal had stayed away from the Khilafat Movement spearheaded by the ulema and Congress because he welcomed the new Turkish parliament. The Quaid also did not approve of the Khilafat views as he favoured the setting up of a national government in Turkey under Ataturk. The reference to the Islam of Taliban highlights the nature of the reforms being enforced by the MMA government in the NWFP. His observation about the possibility of the ulema giving security to Pakistan is rhetorical. The reforms in Afghanistan led to civil war and the eventual destruction of the country. REFERENCE: Second opinion: Will the Ulema destroy Pakistan? Khaled Ahmed’s Urdu Press Review Friday, January 10, 2003
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_10-1-2003_pg3_7
