132KVE grid station inaugurated in Chenab Nagar (Rabwah)

Chenab Nagar (Rabwah): Wapda has completed the construction of a new 132 KVE grid station at Rabwah.The grid station inaugurated on Thursday 30-06-2016 by SA FESCO CH Basharat Ahmad with the operation of the new grid station the electricity voltages will improve and line losses lessen in Rabwah, Kot ameer shah, Kot qazi and Ahmad Nagar areas. Interesting fact is that new grid station start working on 30-06-2016 and same day whole electricity remains off in whole city. Lets see what happens in future.



Indonesia: Govt must help Sampang Shiites and Ketapang Ahmadis return home: Komnas HAM

Indonesia: Govt must help Sampang Shiites and Ketapang Ahmadis return home: Komnas HAM

The National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM) has called on the government to immediately help members of Muslim minority groups Shia and Ahmadiyah return to their hometowns and livelihoods. Their cases, says Komnas HAM, have been neglected for too long.

The two groups have been consigned to poverty after being stripped of the right to live their lives when they were expelled from their hometowns in Sampang, East Java, and in West Kalimantan, respectively, the commission chairman M. Imdadun Rahmat said on Thursday.

“Both cases have been long neglected because there is no set scheme from the government for returning them to their hometowns,” Imdadun said in a press conference.

“This can’t be allowed. The state has to be there for them.”

They have lived in poor conditions in shelters since being expelled from their hometowns for allegedly committing blasphemy. Their status as refugees has not only affected their livelihoods but also created a domino effect through their entire families.

“They cannot send their children to school, hampered by constantly improving their standard of living and finding jobs to meet their basic needs,” he added.

A mob of around 1,000 people attacked Blu’uran and Karang Gayam in Sampang on Madura Island in East Java in August 2012, forcing 270 Shiites to take refuge in low-cost apartments provided by the government in Sidoarjo, where they have stayed until today.

Meanwhile, over 110 followers of the Ahmadiyah group were violently evicted by a mob from their village in Ketapang, West Kalimantan in February 2006. They were relocated to a shelter in Mataram, West Nusa Tenggara and remain there. (vps/rin).

iRabwah | News Watch |
Source/Credit: The Jakarta Post
By TJP | June 30 2016

Canada: Ahmadiyya celebration will demystify Canada Day traditions some Syrian refugees

Canada: Ahmadiyya celebration will demystify Canada Day traditions some Syrian refugees

TORONTO – Since arriving in Canada seven months ago, Abeer Al Hajj has learned a lot about her new country and how it differs from her native Syria.

Celebrating their adoptive country is both a major milestone and a source of uncertainty for many Syrian newcomers, said Safwan Choudhry, spokesman for the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama’at, an organization that has helped several families settle in.

“I can tell a lot of them are anxious, they want to see what do Canadians do,” he said.

“And I understand where they’re coming from because typically, every country celebrates their national day very differently,” in many cases with a strong emphasis on military glory, he said.

“So the majority are just curious to see what’s going to happen…and I got the sense that a lot of them just want to stand back and watch and soak in how we celebrate Canada Day.”

Many Syrian families in the Toronto area are expected to attend the annual Canada Day celebration hosted by the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama’at, a massive event that typically draws thousands and is set to take place outside a mosque in Vaughan after afternoon prayers.

Choudhry said the Friday sermon will centre on Canada Day and loyalty to one’s country.

The festivities will see a group of children sing the national anthem, Abeer among them. The girl said she has been practising on top of the daily singalong at school.

But a key part of the celebration — the barbecue — will be off-limits for Muslims fasting for Ramadan. The month-long ritual precludes participants from eating or drinking between sunrise and sunset and its timing is set by the lunar calendar.

The last Friday of Ramadan is particularly significant and turnout is expected to be even higher than usual since most people will have the day off because of the statutory holiday, Choudhry said.

Next year, Canada Day will not fall during Ramadan, he said.

“The timing of it and the way that it’s falling together, I think there is some significance, but I think particularly for Syrian refugees, I get the sense every time I talk to them, it’s very emotional for them,” he said.

The knowledge that they can pay tribute to their new country while also maintaining their religious practices comes as great comfort to Abeer’s family, her father Muhammad Al Hajj Abdullah, 40, said.

Living in Canada has also offered Abdullah, who is in a wheelchair, another type of freedom, he said.

After an explosion in the Syrian town of Aleppo left him paralyzed from the waist down, the father of three found himself unable to get around easily despite having a manual wheelchair, he said.

“In Syria and Turkey, it’s so so hard, you can’t ride the bus, you can’t ride the subway,” he said.

On his arrival here, the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama’at gave him an electric wheelchair which, along with accessible transit, have allowed him to regain his independence, he said.

On a recent weekday evening, he played ping-pong with his youngest son, five-year-old Bashir, on a coffee table in the family’s living room in north Toronto, while Abeer did her homework and the oldest child, Abdul Karim, bounced a soccer ball.

“New community, new society, new language, new weather,” Abdullah said with a laugh. “Everything has changed.”

iRabwah | News Watch |
Source/Credit: 570 News / Excerpts
By Paola Loriggio | June 30, 2016

Jihad in Istanbul | The Wall Street Journal

Turkey pays a price for the slow campaign against Islamic State.

Turkey suffered its 10th terrorist attack in less than a year on Tuesday when a coordinated suicide assault on Istanbul’s Ataturk Airport killed 41 people and injured more than 200. The choice of target is noteworthy. Ataturk airport is one of the world’s busiest, processing some 42 million passengers and 314,000 commercial flights last year. Among the dead were citizens of China, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Ukraine and Uzbekistan, in addition to Turkish nationals. As terrorist atrocities go, it’s hard to get more global than that.

All of this suggests the attack was the work of Islamic State, though the group hasn’t taken credit at this writing. It fits a template of recent Islamic State attacks on the Brussels airport in March, on tourists near Istanbul’s Blue Mosque in January, the downing of the Russian airliner over the Sinai peninsula in October, and the Bardo National Museum in Tunis in March 2015.

These terrorist spectaculars achieve multiple aims at once: They inflict casualties on multiple nationalities, shake confidence in government security forces, harm local economies and demonstrate the reach of Islamic State.

That should temper hopes that Islamic State’s recent military setbacks in Iraq will offer relief from these sorts of attacks. The opposite might be true. Islamic State has now been territorially entrenched for years in Iraq and Syria, during which it has been able to radicalize and train thousands of recruits, including many with foreign passports. These jihadists will be paying lethal calls on crowded civilian targets for many more years, a deadly price for the Obama Administration’s gradualist policy against Islamic State and its willingness to allow Syria to descend into chaos.

iRabwah | News Watch |
Source/Credit: The Wall Street Journal
By WSJ | June 29, 2016

Ghana: Wednesday July 6 Is Eid-Ul-Fitr – Declared Public Holiday

Ghana: Wednesday July 6 Is Eid-Ul-Fitr – Declared Public Holiday

Wednesday July 6, 2016 has been declared as the date for the celebration of this year’s Eid-ul-Fitr by the National Chief Imam and the Ameer and Missionary in charge of Ahmadiyya Muslim Mission as well as the National Hilal Committee (NHC) of Ghana as such has been declare a public holiday.

Eid-ul-Fitr is an Islamic festival celebrated to mark the end of Ramadan, a month-long fasting period for Muslims. A statement from the office of the NHC signed by its chairman, Sheik Mahmoud Gedel wished the nation a Happy Eid-ul-Fitr.

The end of Ramadan, the fourth pillar of Islam is determined by the sight of the moon on the 29th day of fasting. However, fasting continues to the 30th day if the moon is not sighted on the 29th.

“The general public is hereby, informed that Wednesday July 6, 2016, has been declared a public holiday and should be observed as such throughout the country.”

iRabwah | News Watch |
Source/Credit: GhanaStar / All Africa
By Kwame Dankwah | June 30, 2016

Switzerland: Muslim Girls Denied Swiss Citizenship for Refusing to Swim With Boys

Muslim Girls Denied Swiss Citizenship for Refusing to Swim With Boys

GENEVA — In the latest move to deny citizenship to those who balk at Swiss culture, authorities rejected the naturalization application of two Muslim girls who refused to take school swimming lessons because boys were present.

The girls, ages 12 and 14, who live in the northern city of Basel, had applied for Swiss citizenship several months ago, but their request was denied, Swiss media reported Tuesday.

The girls, whose names were not disclosed, said their religion prevents them from participating in compulsory swimming lessons with males in the pool at the same time. Their naturalization application was rejected because the sisters did not comply with the school curriculum, Basel authorities said.

“Whoever doesn’t fulfill these conditions violates the law and therefore cannot be naturalized,” Stefan Wehrle, president of the naturalization committee, told TV station SRF on Tuesday.

The case shows how those who don’t follow Swiss rules and customs won’t become citizens, even if they have lived in the country for a long time, are fluent in one of the national languages — German, French or Italian — and are gainfully employed.

In April, members of an immigrant family in the Basel area were denied citizenship because they wore sweatpants around town and did not greet passersby — a sure sign that they were not sufficiently assimilated, the naturalization board claimed.

Another recent case sparked widespread outrage in Switzerland when two Muslim brothers refused to shake hands with their female teacher, also citing religious restrictions. Shaking hands with a teacher is a common practice in Swiss schools.

After that incident was widely publicized, authorities suspended the naturalization request from the boys’ father, an imam at the Basel mosque.

The swimming case involving the two girls is the first to deny naturalization applications for not complying with a school program, setting precedence for future cases, Wehrle said.

This is not the first time Switzerland’s Muslim community has stirred controversy over swimming lessons. In 2012, a family was fined $1,500 for forbidding their daughters to participate in swimming classes.

The matter eventually ended up in the Supreme Court, which ruled that no dispensations from swimming lessons should be made on religious grounds.

In Switzerland, unlike in the United States and many other countries, integration into society is more important for naturalization than knowledge of national history or politics. Candidates for citizenship must prove that they are well assimilated in their communities and respect local customs and traditions.

In Switzerland, local town or village councils make initial decisions on naturalization applications. If they decide a candidate is not an upstanding member of the community, the application will be denied and not forwarded to canton (state) and federal authorities for further processing.

That’s what happened in 2014 to Irving Dunn, an American who has lived in Switzerland for nearly 40 years. He was denied Swiss citizenship because he could not name any of his Swiss friends or neighboring villages, authorities said.

“The applicant’s answers have shown that his motive for naturalization is not about integration but about the personal advantages it offers,” the naturalization commission ruled.

Dunn did not deny the charge, telling the English-language news service, The Local, “It can be expected that persons mainly want personal advantages from citizenship,” such as the right to vote and live indefinitely in Switzerland.

iRabwah| News Watch |
Source/Credit: USA Today
By Helena Bachmann | June 28, 2016

UK: Siobhain McDonagh leads parliamentary debate on anti-Ahmadiyya hate preachers’ entry into Britain

Siobhain McDonagh leads parliamentary debate on anti-Ahmadiyya hate preachers’ entry into Britain

Siobhain McDonagh MP (Mitcham and Morden, Labour) has led a parliamentary debate today on hate-preachers being allowed into the UK and posing as a threat to religious minorities. She raised has raised this important issue in the wake of the murder of Glasgow shopkeeper, Mr Asad Shah, who was an Ahmadi Muslim. It was the first murder of an Ahmadi on UK soil.

Targetting of Ahmadis and other religious minorities is common in Pakistan, and Siobhain used her speech to draw a parallel between increased anti-Ahmadi hatred and radicalism and poor Home Office entry clearance procedures that have allowed hate-preachers into the UK.

You can read Siobhain’s speech below.

With extremism on the rise, and increasing threats to our national security, tightening up UK entry clearance procedures should be top of our priority. But sadly, we have increasingly taken for granted that our borders are policed and secure from non-UK threats.

Mr Speaker, I sought to bring this issue before Parliament following the brutal murder of the Glasgow shopkeeper Mr Asad Shah in March this year. Mr Shah was murdered by an Islamic extremist who violently hated Mr Shah’s peaceful Ahmadi Muslim views. His killer, Tanveer Ahmed, declared he killed Mr Shah in order to (and I quote) ‘protect the honour of Islam’. Mr Shah’s brutal murder, the first of its kind on UK soil, holds terrible implications for this country.

The radical extremist Islamist views that inspired this have been fanned by extremist preachers from outside the UK being allowed to come into this country and spread their hate. And our entry clearance regulations and failed to stop this from happening. Anti-Ahmadi hate preachers are being let into the UK as we speak, calling on Ahmadi Muslims to be killed on account of their faith.

For instance, just a month after Mr Shah’s murder, a prominent, anti-Ahmadi preacher from Pakistan was touring London mosques with his message of hate. After this discovery, I requested an urgent meeting with the Home Secretary and senior representatives from the Ahmadiyya Muslim community earlier this month. I was grateful to have met with the Secretary of State, but I was extremely disappointed by the fact that reforming entry clearance policies did not seem to be a priority whatsoever. Nor did she seem to be aware of this particular radical extremist preacher having been allowed into the UK. Indeed, it is no exaggeration to say that I left that meeting with a genuine fear for UK security, and a grim surprise that we have not seen even more anti-Ahmadi terrorism on UK soil.

I have no reservation in saying that inadequate Home Office entry clearance procedures are allowing entry of individuals who pose a direct threat to our democracy and our social cohesion – and I will be highlighting why it is so urgent that the Home Office tackles this immediate problem now.

As a side-point, it is extremely ironic that while individuals who spread hate are allowed into the UK, every MP will be aware of large number of completely law-abiding Pakistani citizens refused entry clearance to attend weddings, funerals and other important family events – also as a result of problems around Home Office entry clearance.

The case of Hanif Qureshi 

I want to turn now to a case study which highlights the gravity of this situation. Mufti Muhammad Hanif Qureshi is a radical Islamist cleric from Pakistan, who has repeatedly been allowed into the UK, to spread the sort of anti-Ahmadi hate that murdered peaceful Mr Asad Shah.

To clarify, the Ahmadiyya Muslim community, which Mr Shah belonged to, is a persecuted religious group in Pakistan.

The Ahmadis live by their message of ‘love for all, hatred for none’ – and they categorically reject terrorism in any form. But despite how well-established and peaceful this community is, Ahmadi Muslims are victims of terrible injustice. As they do not believe that Mohammed was the final prophet sent to guide mankind, they face accusations of heresy amongst orthodox Muslims. And at worst, they face extreme violence in Pakistan, and now, sadly, in the UK too. Anti-blasphemy and anti-terror laws are wrongly used against them in Pakistan. They are murdered on the grounds of their faith.

To this day, they are branded worse than apostates by hardliners and forbidden by the state to call themselves Muslims. Indeed, the intolerance and hatefulness has made its way to the UK. The Muslim Council of Britain has long been criticised for not acting to counter anti-Ahmadi hatred, partly because it does not recognise the Ahmadis as Muslims either. But Mr Asad Shah in Glasgow, was the first Ahmadi Muslim to be murdered on UK soil on grounds of his faith.

And Mufti Hanif Qureshi is an individual who is greatly responsible for spreading these messages of hate. He is the founder of ‘Shabab e-Islami’, and is well known for his virulent anti-Ahmadi preaching in Pakistan, the sort which inspired the murder of Mr Shah.

For instance, in a recording of a sermon Qureshi delivered in 2014, which is freely available on YouTube, he said, with regard to Ahmadi Muslims:

“Let them know those who consider Sunnis as cowards that Allah has honoured us with the courage and power to strangulate those involved in blasphemy, to cut out their tongues, and to riddle their bodies with bullets. For this, nobody can arrest us under any law”

Indeed, these sorts of highly inflammatory and hateful sermons have indeed incited others to commit violence and murder.

In 2011, Pakistani politician Salmaan Taseer, who opposed Pakistan’s anti-Ahmadi laws, was shot dead by his bodyguard, Mumtaz Qadri. After his arrest, Qadri said he had been inspired to act by a 2010 sermon delivered by Qureshi in Rawalpindi, in which the cleric branded the likes of Taseer as ‘deserving to be killed’ under Islamic law.

Qureshi was arrested after Taseer’s murder, but was later released, and continued to defend the murderer in public sermons before Qadri was executed in January of this year.

This same hateful preacher who inspired the murder of a prominent Pakistani politician just a few years ago, was last month allowed to enter this country without any problem, despite the murder of Ahmadi shopkeeper Mr Asad Shah in Glasgow just months before.
Could the Home Office not make the connection between the incitement of anti-Ahmadi hatred, and the committing of murder?

Just last month, Qureshi spoke at a Luton mosque on May 4th where, according to the mosque’s spokesperson, he made a ‘very impressive’ speech to an audience of hundreds.
This event also doubled up as the 36th annual Khatme Nabuwwat meeting at the Luton mosque. This movement (translated as the ‘finality of the Prophet’) has been implicated in the violent persecution of members of the Ahmadi religious sect in the UK and Pakistan. Despite this, it is a registered charity in the UK, and is listed on the Charity Commission’s website. Honourable Members may well be aware that ‘Khatme Nabuwwat’ is also well known for its anti-Ahmadi views, and regularly invites preachers from Pakistan to visit the UK on speaking tours to spread this message of hate.

Qureshi is just one example of failing Home Office procedures. His words have incited violence in Pakistan, and they will incite violence in this country too. Qureshi should be banned from ever travelling into Britain.

Given the context of anti-Ahmadi sentiment in the UK, and growing religious violence across Europe, his messages of hate have no place here. How on earth could he have possibly gained entry clearance?

A quick google search brings up hundreds of English-language news stories about his preaching – and yet this basic level of research was apparently beyond the Home Office last month. And yet, I was left stunned and petrified after my meeting with the Home Secretary, where she informed me that the Pakistani High Commission had only just hired a specialist Urdu speaker in their intelligence office.

So up until recently, it seems there was no one at the High Commission in Islamabad who could actually understand some of the watch-lists in the language, unless translated to English. How can our anti-extremism measures be so weak that such terrible oversights can occur? And does the Minister appreciate the terrifying prospects of such errors?

And while our UK authorities seem to lack the basic linguistic resources to identify extremist threats, we do know that extremist rhetoric can change to moderate for the English-speaking media, and then revert to extremism for Urdu speakers. It’s therefore much easier for radicals like Qureshi to switch between the two.

Home office visa checks in context 

The case study of Qureshi is important because we tend to take for granted that our borders are policed and protected from individuals who might cause harm to our country.

We all lead our lives in the hopeful confidence that the Home Secretary and immigration officials are able to refuse entry to any person they deem undesirable. We put our faith in government departments and agencies to protect our democracy and peace.

As far as I know, there is no exhaustive list of reasons why someone’s visa application can be rejected by UK authorities, but there is a list of ‘unacceptable behaviours’ which should lead to a person being refused entry to, or excluded from, the UK. Qureshi seems to me to fulfil all of these criteria. This includes using any means to express views which seek to justify or glorify terrorist violence, or incites or provokes others to commit such terrorist acts, or fosters hatred which might lead to inter-community violence in the UK.
Exclusion is not targeted against any specific group. They can, and have included, far-right extremists, homophobic extremists, and Christian, Jewish and Islamic extremists. In a speech delivered in late November 2014, the Home Secretary said that she had excluded “hundreds” of people from the UK, suggesting that these powers are sometimes enforced. She stated that 61 people had been excluded on national security grounds, 72 who were ‘not conducive to the public good’, and 84 who were ‘hate preachers’.

So why was Qureshi able to enter this country just a month after his brand of anti-Ahmadi hatred had inspired the murder of the peaceful Glasgow shopkeeper Mr Shah?

The current crisis 

The expressions of hatred we have seen across the country, particularly ever since the referendum vote was announced last week, should show to us the importance of preventing extremism by all means. Quite simply, it threatens the fabric of our democracy and social cohesion.

Even more so, Mr Shah’s murder demonstrates how high the stakes are.

Back in 2005, in the wake of the London bombings, the then Home Secretary, Charles Clarke, said that government departments and intelligence agencies were working together to establish “a full database of individuals around the world” of dangerous people, and that such information would be available to visa and immigration staff and added to the UK’s ‘Warnings Index’.

Of course, we cannot know the details of Home Office and intelligence workings, but we can assume, given the admission of Qureshi to the UK just last month, that it may not be working as it should be.

The historical precedent 

And history teaches us the consequences that occur when the Home Office does not do its job properly.

Take the example of Pakistani cleric Masood Azhar who delivered extreme messages across the UK back, across over forty mosques, in the early nineties. At the time of his tour he was chief organiser of the prominent Pakistani jihadist group Harkat ul Mujahideen. We now know that Azhar, who was himself close to Osama Bin Laden, planted the seeds of extremism from his 1993 UK tour to later inspire at least two Britons who went on to plan the London bombings of 2005, and the beheading of US journalist David Pearl.

One would hope that the UK authorities had learned their lessons – and yet the admission of Qureshi suggests that not much has changed.

Take the report ‘Student Rights: Tackling Extremism on Campuses’, published by the Henry Jackson Society earlier this year, which detailed the range of individuals, many of whom have expressed extremist and hateful views, who were given a platform at UK universities, mainly in London, in the last year. These included South African politician Mr Julius Malema, convicted of a hate crime just a few years ago, Mr Asim Khan who has compared homosexuality to incest and “burglary, theft and sexual abuse”, and Mr Sulieman Ghani who has expressed sectarian attitudes towards Ahmadiyya, claiming they are not Muslims.


The UK Ahmadi community, and the very fabric of our democracy, is under threat, now more than ever.

In April of this year, leaflets calling for members of the Ahmadi Muslim community to be killed have allegedly been distributed in universities, mosques and shopping centres in London. One leaflet distributed widely in Stockwell, for example, entitled “Qadanis [a pejorative name for Ahmadis]”, describes Ahmadis as “dualist infidels” and “worse than an apostate”. It prescribes the same punishment that is doled out for apostates (those who have renounced their own religion), giving Ahmadis three-days to denounce their faith, or else “be awarded capital punishment.”

We also know that Scottish mosques are becoming increasingly radicalised in the wake of Mr Shah’s murder. Meanwhile, anti-Ahmadi conferences have taken place in Slough just a few months ago. The threat posed to our society is real – and it is imminent.

And now inept Home Office entry clearance procedures have allowed hate preachers like Qureshi who has called for death penalties for Ahmadi Muslims, amongst UK Muslim communities. These are dangerous times for our democracy – and the precedent for racial and religious hatred is huge.

It is terrifying to see the British government has adopted such a double standard. At one end, it says it seeks to crush all extremism. We know from the recent terrible atrocities that this goal is more important than ever. And yet, the British government still gives visas to people like Qureshi who incite intolerance and even violence in our society.

There should have been an absolutely storm of anger following Mr Shah’s death. Just hours before he was murdered, he posted a message of peace and love on facebook to his Christian friends on the occasion of Good Friday. Hours later he was brutally murdered outside his shop by a religious extremist.

Why haven’t we called out Mr Shah’s murder for what it is – a religious hate crime? Is it because we can’t be bothered to understand that victims of Islamist extremism include other Muslims, as well as non-Muslims?

I am well aware that developing stronger Home Office entry clearance structures, to screen out individuals like Qureshi from ever being able to come to this country are just part of the problem. Internet and social media communication means that pan-national extremist and terrorist threats can spread beyond borders in seconds.

But allowing such hatred to enter our borders is almost like legitimising or endorsing their hate. Qureshi, and all those who express his hateful views, have no place in our country. Today more than ever we have to ensure that such individuals are not able to come here and spread their hateful messages under the banner of ‘free speech’.

In particular, I wish to ask the following questions of the Minister.

• To what extent can the Home Office check if a person has promoted hate and extremism when a visa application is made?
• How does the Government monitor hate speech in Pakistan, and elsewhere, to help inform their visa decisions?
• Does the UK Government give equal weight to hate speech whether committed online, on TV or in any media including social media?
• How can individuals or organisations in Pakistan or the UK provide information on such matters that would be of use in such matters? What procedures will it put in place to make this easier?

I sincerely hope that the Home Office sits up and takes seriously the deep flaws that are jeopardising our national security and social cohesion, as we speak. Only then can we claim to have a society which promotes ‘love for all, and hatred for none’, the Ahmadi ideal that we should all seek to live by.

iRabwah | News Watch |
Source/Credit: Siobhain McDonagh
By Siobhain McDonagh | June 29, 2016

Siobhain McDonagh MP (Mitcham and Morden, Labour)