From: nadeem@igpho (Nadeem Malik)
Subject: Re: Re. soc.religion.islam.ahmadiyya
Organization: Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Zurich, CH
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 15:17:09 GMT

jodar@aludra.usc.edu (Nicholas Jodar) writes:
: 
[deletion]

: First we have a Brother posting news of Ahmadis being persecuted
: in Bangladesh.  My understanding is that the Brother posted this
: as evidence of the need for a newsgroup called 'soc.religion.-
: islam.ahmadi'  How is this relevant?  Because of violence?  We
: don't have a 'soc.culture.islam.kashmiris' newsgroup, and thousands
: of them are being killed, on a daily basis.  If we are supposed

Such violence clearly establishes a separate identity -- this is the
most basic requirement to justify NEED for a newsgroup.

The example you give is irrelevant; although majority of Kashmiris are
Muslims, they are fighting for NATIONAL recognition, not to establish
their own religon or sect etc.

[deletion]

: Arguments made against the creation of 'soc.religion.islam.ahmadi' 
: seem to include:
: 
: -Naming the group S.R.I.Ahmadi would defeat the reasons for creating it;

what does this mean?

: -Ahmadi beliefs contradict mainstream Islam;

A real classic this one!

The natural answer is that *mainstream* Islam contradicts Islam :-)
(By the way by mainstream, do you mean Sunni mainstream, Shia 
mainstream, or some other mainstream :-) )

: -SRI is an open forum for everyone, including Ahmadis;
: -That a newsgroup with this name would be nonsensical.
: (A similar example would be 'soc.religion.christianity.condoms.')

What a load of rubbish!
You are actually doing yourself a lot of damage by comming up with such
self-evident non-sense. To the neutral it only demonstrates that
you have a deep hatred for Ahmadi Muslims which is clouding your thoughts;
: 
: The above reasons are supported by strong evidence.

The above (your) reasons are not supported by any reasons at all!
: 
: Those arguments made for the creation of 'soc.religion.islam.ahmadi' 
: seem to include:
: 
: -The Ahmadis are not allowed to post to SRI, so they need a newsgroup;
: -The Ahmadis have the only real version of Islam;
: -Ahmadis are being killed and they need a newsgroup of their own;
: -There's nothing wrong with having a newsgroup called S.R.I.Ahmadi.
: 
: The above reasons have yet to be supported by strong evidence.
: 
: My own experiences with SRI contradict reasons #1 and #4, but
: perhaps I live a charmed life.  Personally, I am still waiting
: for somebody to come up with a valid reason for the creation of 
: 'soc.religion.islam.ahmadi.'  Indeed, I fear this whole 
: discussion seems quite entertaining to the Kufar....
: 
 You are entitled to have your opinion as to why s.r.i.a. should be set-up;
actually you haven't done a bad job with the four above reasons. I would actually
re-arrange the ordering and make stronger statements about them. Here is my
(ordered) list of needs and justification for s.r.i.a., which I can assure you
is shared by most (if not all) of the Ahmadis on the net:

(1) unique status in Islam -- this at least is acknowledged even by those
    who are opposing us.
(2) Ahmadi Muslims have the true version of Islam;
(3) freedom of speech and representation includes right to choose own name.


(1) above id the most obvious and I don't think anyone now denies that we have
a unique and separate identity to `mainstream' Muslims. The point about Ahmadis
being killed, persecuted by mainstream is evidence that this is true (since
STRONG proof has been demanded). (See one of my earlier articles on this issue --
or I can post it on request to individuals.)

(2) is off course a matter of debate between mainstream Muslims and us;
but the point is that this is our very genuine and sincere faith -- just as
sincere as the other Muslims. Since they justify themselves using Islam in their
name on this basis, it is only right that we should also be given this right with
equal force and rigor.

(3) again again obvious. The real impact of (3) is that it turns the table
180 degrees; the Muslims have been demanding that we justify our position wiht
strong proofs; in reality if one reflects over (3) the defacto situation should
be that since freedom of name is a natural right, it is they who should produce
exceptionally strong arguments and proofs to justify why this basic human right
should be denied to us! (This in itself strengthens (1) above even more.) I should
think that a neutral should vote in favour of our right to name our own group
unless such strong arguments are forth-comming.

But to this point I have yet to come across a single substantial argument against
the name of our group as s.r.i.a. other than that the mainstream Muslim simply
FEEL that their version of Islam is being slighted by using such a name. But
since this is a matter of opinion, and holds equally well the other way round
with us, then I cannot see that they have significant case against the 
establishment of s.r.i.a.

: 
: -AQ
: 

Love to all
Nadeem Malik
nadeem@p.igp.ethz.ch
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.policy,rec.music.synth