Conspiracies against Islam: From Qadian to Taliban

On 4th of June, 1858, John Bright, one of the greatest orators in the British House of Commons, raised a question: “How long does England propose to govern India? Nobody can answer that question. But, be it 50 or 100 or 500 years, does any man with the smallest glimmering of common sense believe that so great a country, with its 20 different nationalities, and 20 different languages, can ever be bound up and consolidated into one compact and enduring empire confine? I believe such a thing to be utterly impossible.”Read full Article in PDF format

14 thoughts on “Conspiracies against Islam: From Qadian to Taliban

  1. abrar says:

    @Jalal ul Deen – what is dreamy mr jalal ul deen ? – and newspapers, then or now, are written by men, not Allah (swt)

  2. noman says:

    who ever wrote this article has put the history in somehow right order but their is something ….either he doesn’t have enough knowledge about islam or he doesn’t want to pratice the religon….because he noted the prayer as ritual….prayer is not a ritual…it is the one of the five pilars of islam….so please try to get some knowledge….
    i agree with your order of historical events…but not for the aurangzeb…because he was and is a repectabel person in the muslim society…and i wonder how you missed the akbar who tried to originate his own religon….
    i agree wahabees are what the scholars call a fitna….
    by the way you missed yazid who was the symbol of imperialism..

  3. Muhammad says:

    A well written article, indeed.
    It, however, takes liberties with historical facts and opinions are dished without preparing the relevant base. The author’s overall thrust and direction of thought process is praiseworthy, but it should not happen at the cost of academic integrity and historical evidence.

    1. Asar says:

      Thanks for reading the article critically. I appreciate your opinion. Regrettably, it was intended to be an article for the common reader of newspaper articles. For sake of brevity, I did not give references of books. The word ‘Historical Evidence’ needs to be examined. Is it not all hearsay? Evidence is what our modern day Courts will admit as Evidence. As Hugh Walpole said,”All History is a Lie.” Wikepedia, in our modern times is the best example of what will become ‘authentic recorded history’. And Wikepedia is far more open to examination and criticism. ‘Historical Evidence’ was written by the Church and State, with an agenda, and critics were banished or punished. Commonsense and commonsense alone gives us insight into the Truth. That is the only way, how all ‘Historical Evidence’ needs to be examined. A Momin is someone who critically examines and refuses to accept anything as Truth, on its face value, even it was the word of God. “They refuse to accept blindly, even if the word of God was presented to them”. [ Quran, Alfurqan 25: 73] This has been my approach in examining everything, be it history or a scientific paper. Asarul’Islam

Leave a Reply