Continued from below:

6) Now coming to your claim that Mr. Jinnah had secular state in mind is very hollow. If that was really on their mind there was no need for two states. the facts of the past 63 years prove that otherwise. From the day one the Pakistan had set out to persecute non-muslims. The Ahmedi leadership at that time was not concerend about the non-muslims, until they were declared as not Muslim. My reaction to the happenings was one revulsion whether the persecuted were Hindus, back then or Ahmedis now.

7) Mr. Jinnah was in it for himself, he would rather be a big fish in a small pond than be normal fish n a big pond.

The problems sir is in faith. All religion is vile, granted some are more viler than other. Just try looking at people for what they are "people" first and foremost. But religion promotes only in-group morality and that is the bane of this humankind.

Continued from below:

4) I always ask this question of people about the very motivation for Pakistan. There is no doubt that there were a substantial numbers of Muslim bigots who wanted it along with a significant numbers of people who might have been genuinely afraid of discrimination. Even at that, the great fathers of Pakistan must have known that, not all the Muslims of India would have been able to migrate to Pakistan. Then what of the even smaller numbers of Muslims left in India, under an even greater Hindu majority? if these leaders were really had the welfare of the community at heart they would not have resorted to what they had succeeded in doing. These so called leaders were only motivated by two things, bigotry and opportunism. They could not stomach the idea of continuing to be ruled by kafirs. If they were truly secular at heart the founding documents of Pakistan would have enshrined safe guards for the minorities that were there.

5) In contrast Indian leadership was true to its rhetoric both in spirit as well as in word and has made it its cardinal value the safeguards for the minorities. This is not to say that there are no bigots in India, but all people have opportunity to flourish and thrive there.

Continued from below:

2) You also claimed "Ahmadies were at the forefront of the Pakistan Independence movement and we are proud of it." This seems to be in direct contradiction with 1). As I read your faith's admonishment your loyalties back in 1940s should either have been with colonial British India or soon to be liberated India. I cannot see where in your faith there is a provision for division of a nation.

3) What about more practical issues, at the time of division of India, did the Ahemedis' subscribe to the view that they along with the Muslims would be oppressed by the majority Hindus? On what grounds was that? But when you look from the in-group morality and ethics, it becomes quite understandable.

Mr/Ms wb_usahmadimusli, I am very pleased that you have tried to respond to my post directly. While I respect your views I should beg to differ with you on many fronts.

1) you claim that it is part of your faith to be loyal to your country. This I find very unsettling that your loyalty to your country is dictated by the faith. SO if by accident of your birth you were born to parents of different faith then your loyalty to the country may be in jeopardy? I just cannot stomach that.

With due respect to the commenter "Secular" I would like to state that as Ahmadi Muslims it is part of our faith to be loyal to our respective countries i.e USA, Pakistan, India etc. Ahmadies were at the forefront of the Pakistan Independence movement and we are proud of it. As naturalized US citizens we have natural love for our country of origin Pakistan, but we are against its anti religious freedom laws. We condemn these types of laws and think that these are the vehicles used by groups like Taliban to legitimize there extremist ideologies and actions. These laws give sanctuary to the state sponsored persecution of minorities in Pakistan and elsewhere. We appeal to and urge all the just goverments of the world to put pressure on Pakistan and other Islamic governments to nullify these laws for the safety of their citizens and for the overall peace on the planet.
The founding fathers of Pakistan including Jinnah had a secular state in mind much like US or India. Afther they passed away soon after the independence of Pakistan, the so called mullahs and corrupt rulers promoted there religious intolerance agendas to strengthen their hold on power.
We respect Indian Independence leaders like Gandhi and expect that the commentators refrain from using deragatory language in their comments about Pakistani leaders.

This is not anything new here. Pakistan, the land of the pure from the very concept a loosing proposition. After 63 years, actually just 24 years only, that an experiment by the bigots, & opportunists like Jinnah had really ended in a dismal failure with the rectification of geographic anomaly that it was - birth of Bangladesh, yet another shining example of an islamic paradise. Now we are seeing the death knells being driven into the coffin. I only wish that Mr. 10%Zardari, would have the good sense to voluntarily turnover the nuclear weapons to US before it plunges into another Afghanistan - not a tear from me mind you.

A few years ago the Pakistani ambassador to US was on our local NPR station, taking Q&A. I asked him if he in personal view would agree with me that Pakistan was a failed state, given its stated goals? Of course he dodged my question and claimed any Pakistani in Karachi or Lahore would disagree. I reminded him that i was asking for his personal view not official or that of an average Pakistani. he agin dodged the question. By looking at the posts in this blog, the ambassador was dead wrong about average non-sunni Pakistani.

So you Ahmedis, Shias, et al don't you wish that your forefathers had a little more brains to have not jumped on the Jinnah bandwagon? Don't you think that infidel land called India would have been a more ideal place for you to be living? But then you still probably don't think so. It is always more tolerable if the cousin kicks your teeth in rather than to suffer the benevolent rule of the infidel. Unless of course the infidel is a western infidel, that is why you guys have emigrated to the land of great Satan. Ahmedis lets face it you guys are screwed, you have no place to go, at least Shia can go to the other shining paradise islamic republic of Iran. What did you say, them Iranians are not very fond of the Urdu speaking Shia either? Then there is always the wonderful Mesopotamia, the paradise run by Al Sadr.

This is not anything new here. Pakistan, the land of the pure from the very concept a loosing proposition. After 63 years, actually just 24 years only, that an experiment by the bigots, & opportunists like Jinnah had really ended in a dismal failure with the rectification of geographic anomaly that it was - birth of Bangladesh, yet another shining example of an islamic paradise. Now we are seeing the death knells being driven into the coffin. I only wish that Mr. 10%Zardari, would have the good sense to voluntarily turnover the nuclear weapons to US before it plunges into another Afghanistan - not a tear from me mind you.

A few years ago the Pakistani ambassador to US was on our local NPR station, taking Q&A. I asked him if he in personal view would agree with me that Pakistan was a failed state, given its stated goals? Of course he dodged my question and claimed any Pakistani in Karachi or Lahore would disagree. I reminded him that i was asking for his personal view not official or that of an average Pakistani. he agin dodged the question. By looking at the posts in this blog, the ambassador was dead wrong about average non-sunni Pakistani.

So you Ahmedis, Shias, et al don't you wish that your forefathers had a little more brains to have not jumped on the Jinnah bandwagon? Don't you think that infidel land called India would have been a more ideal place for you to be living? But then you still probably don't think so. It is always more tolerable if the cousin kicks your teeth in rather than to suffer the benevolent rule of the infidel. Unless of course the infidel is a western infidel, that is why you guys have emigrated to the land of great Satan. Ahmedis lets face it you guys are screwed, you have no place to go, at least Shia can go to the other shining paradise islamic republic of Iran. What did you say, them Iranians are not very fond of the Urdu speaking Shia either? Then there is always the wonderful Mesopotamia, the paradise run by Al Sadr.

Of course, the urge of Sarah Malik is full of force. I have the honor to agree with it. Yes, the United States should urge Pakistan to repeal these laws that encourage hatred, extremism, and violence. What is the foundation of these laws? It is must to point it out here. The foundation of these laws is the Article 2 of the Constitution of Pakistan in which it is stated that “Islam shall be the State Religion of Pakistan”. Thus, repeal of the State Religion is must because it is the foundation. Yes, it would be in the fitness of things to hit the foundation, and, then, the whole structure built on it will fall down on the ground. The point, which needs consideration, is that till the writing of these lines, the Government of the “United States, the land of the free” has not deemed it fit and proper, due to reasons best known to it, to declare publicly its stand on the State Religion of Pakistan. The so-called “fight on terror” has not even touched the foundation, namely, the State Religion. I hope the Government of the “United States, the land of the free” would heed the urge of Sarah Malik.