From: jodar@aludra.usc.edu (Nicholas Jodar)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Re. soc.religion.islam.ahmadiyya
Date: 8 Nov 1992 23:07:33 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: aludra.usc.edu
Summary: Why is this here?
Keywords: Irrelevant Postings....

I am finding it difficult to understand why there has been a
digression from the subject regarding whether there is a need for
a new newsgroup named 'soc.religion.islam.ahmadi'....  (That IS
the subject of this thread, isn't it?)

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
to believe that all muslims hate those who refer to themselves as
Ahmadis, then why the desire to be affiliated with
soc.religion.islam, whom some have maligned?

Then, in article <BxFHrw.8F6@ccu.umanitoba.ca>, Dr. Tahir Ijaz (M.D.)
(ijaz@ccu.umanitoba.ca) writes:

>It is because of my belief in the Quran and my belief in the Hadith, that I
>am an Ahmadi Muslim.

Okay.  But what has this got to do with the point of this
thread?  And please, people, let us avoid the aimless bickering
on a public forum.

Now, to the heart of your article:

>Let me note here, that in the past I have been unsuccessful in posting letters
>to SRI.  

So have I.  Many times.  And I have been flamed for some of those
that were accepted.  However, I have also always been given a
reason for why I was rejected.  I do not see the need for another 
group, in any case.

>Apparently, my postings do not support the medeival brand of Islam the
>moderators of SRI present, and hence are always rejected.

If that is the case, I can see your desire for a new group.
However, your conclusion is undermined by the fact that the Christian
refutations posted on SRI do not support any 'medieval brand of
Islam,' either.  Nor do postings asking for sources of
information, et cetera.  I HAVE noticed, however, that the postings 
which are accepted do not contain the insulting tone you use above.  
Perhaps there are other reasons you have not had your postings 
accepted.

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;
-Ahmadi beliefs contradict mainstream Islam;
-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.')

The above reasons are supported by strong evidence.

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....


-AQ

Newsgroups: news.groups