Refutation:Zaid Hamid says repeatedly to satisfy the students that Dr. Israr is with me

Claim: Zaid Hamid says repeatedly to satisfy the students that Dr. Israr is with me, he loves our mission and he also supported Yusuf Kazzab in his case. Reply: Dr. Israr is well known honorable Islamic scholar but we are not able to find a single statement of him to support either for yusuf Kazzab or Zaid Hamid. Molana Niazi’s statement for yusuf kazzab is on the record and he denied it next day, this is also on the record but there is not a single statement of Dr Israr to support yusuf Kazzab. Tanzeem e Islami officials said that Dr. Israr met Zaid Hamid only twice. People are contacting Dr. Israr on this matter and soon his official remarks will appear on his website or in video. We will add his remarks in this page as it appears. But till now we don’t have any proof of zaid hamid’s claim. We are 100% sure that as all of Zaid Hamid’s claims are false and lies, this claim is also a lie and nothing more than it insha Allah. Some of the latest updates as of now regarding Dr. Israr and Tanzeem-i-Islami can be read here and here. Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wassallam) said:

“A believer is not stung twice from the same hole”. [Bukhari, Muslim]

Document (English): reply-to-zaid-hamid-defense-of-yousuf-kazzab
Scribd (English): reply-to-zaid-hamid-defense-of-yousuf-kazzab Source

Refutation: Yusuf Kazzab was the member of Zai ul Haq’s Majlis e Shoora?

Claim:
Yusuf Kazzab was the member of Zai ul Haq’s Majlis e Shoora? While praising his “Murshid yusuf Kazzab”, zaid hamid says that Yusuf was so “big scholar” of his time that General Zia appointed him member of his Majlis-e-Shoora.

Reply:

We read one column of those days written by Major Retired Saeed Tawana exposing the reason of his membership of Zia ul Haq Shoora.

Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wassallam) said:

“A believer is not stung twice from the same hole”. [Bukhari, Muslim]

Document (English): reply-to-zaid-hamid-defense-of-yousuf-kazzab
Scribd (English): reply-to-zaid-hamid-defense-of-yousuf-kazzab

Source

Refutation: Zaid Hamid claims that the accusers Molvis did not have any proof except Khabrain news

Claim :

Zaid Hamid (Master of History Distortion) claims that the accusers Molvis did not have any proof except Khabrain news. (Below we provide some of the proofs presented in court)

Reply:

The above pages clearly tell that the Khabrain was not only newspaper reporting on this issue so zaid hamid’s this claim also becomes false that the accuser Molana Ismaeel Shuja Abadi did not have any proof except Khabrain news. Some of the evidences which were presented in the court are presented here.

1. Yusuf Kazzab’s audio speech

Yusuf Kazzab’s audio speech ( available on youtube) in which he says himself Muhammad SAW naoozbilah. We will request the readers to please listen this audio again by clicking this link.

Yusuf Kazzab says Sahabi for the present people and Zaid Hamid also speaks in this audio and confirms Yusuf Kazzab’sclaim. (After experts opinion court accepted it as evidence)

2. Yusuf Kazzab’s personal dairy

Yusuf Kazzab’s personal diary in which Yusuf kazzab wrote himself as Muhammad SAW naoozbillah.Here is one
page of his diary

In above page yusuf writes that all the prophets and Nabi were a continual of Muhammad SAW, then All great Sahabis Like Hazrat Abubakar, Umer Usman and Ali (RA) were also continual of Muhammad SAW Then all wali like Abdul QAdir ( jeelani), Mohiyidin, Fareed ud deen ( Gunj Shakar), Mujajad Alf Sani and Muhammad Yusuf Ali ( Himself) are also a continual of Muhammad SAW ( naoozbilah )

In the lower part of page he writes Muhammad SAW always remained in this world and he is also one of his form ( Naoozbillah)

3. Invitation Letter of so-called World Assembly of Muslim Unity

For the conference of his so-called World Assembly of Muslim Unity, Yusuf Kazzab sent an invitation letter to his followers ( was presented in court )

(this invitation was of the same conference in which Yusuf kazzab and Zaid Hamid can be listened in a same audio held on 28 Feb 1997)

Yusuf Kazzab got printed his name only Muhammad on that invitation card and even he put the short sign of (SAW) as we do in URDU.

This was the same session of above invited conference in which Yusuf Kazzab used the words Sahabi for the present people and also invited ZAID Hamid as the first SAHABI.

4. Kazzab’s letters to his followers

Yusuf Kazzab’s letters to his followers in which he claims to be Muhammad and continual of Muhamamd SAW
Naoozbillah were another proof presented in court and the court called experts opinion on the handwriting and it was proved by matching yusuf kazzab’s other documents that the handwriting is same. Here is an example of letter presented in court.

5. Fake Identity Card mentioning Muhammad S/O Ali

Some certificates of school and college were presented in court by which his real name was appearing Yusuf Ali. Later he added Muhammad with his name after retirement and at the end he used only name Muhammad. Even he arranged a fake National Identity card for him which mentioned his name only Muhammad S/O Ali. Copy of that card is below.

6. Statements of Eye Witnesses

zaid hamid claims the only Khabrain news reports were against yusuf Kazzab and Ulema did not have any evidence.. Lets read some statements of eye witnesses presented in court in front of yusuf kazzab (zaid hamid also used to be present in the court as he was following the case) there were total 14 eye witnesses who told the court that yusuf claimed in front of them as Muhammad SAW NaoozBillah.(No witness was the enemy of Yusuf and no one belonged to Molvis) all were ex-followers of Kazzab.


A Little about yusuf Kazzab’s background and personality

Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wassallam) said:

“A believer is not stung twice from the same hole”. [Bukhari, Muslim]

Document (English): reply-to-zaid-hamid-defense-of-yousuf-kazzab
Scribd (English): reply-to-zaid-hamid-defense-of-yousuf-kazzab

Source

Refutation: Yusuf Kazzab case was a problem of Deobandi Brelvi maslak?

Claim:

Yusuf Kazzab case was a problem of Deobandi Brelvi maslak?

Zaid Hamid’s second biggest lie is that yusuf kazzab was targeted by Deobandi Molvis because he was a Brelvi and No Alim of other maslaks talked against him.

Reply:

If it was an issue created by Deobandi Molvis against a “Brelvi scholar” then it means any Alim of any other Maslak had not delivered Fatwa or press release against Yusuf? But if we read history of news reports of those days we find every maslak taking against yusuf including Brelvis also.

Lets have a look on a detailed Fatwa report of daily Ummat (not Khabrain, as zaid hamid says khabrain had some “personal issue” with yusuf)

Please pay little attention to the start of the report, as report starts with these words, “Karachi (staff reporter) Daily Ummat and Weekly takbeer………….”

See this Fatwa cum press release shows that Yusuf’s news was not reported in Khabrain till this report that’s why reporter describes only Ummat and Takbeer.

Otherwise he might mention the name of Khabran also… Zaid Hamid says only and only Khabrain reported all of this…

Then read all red boxed names of Ulema and their maslaks…….

Report is continued below


The above report from Daily Ummat ( 19 March 1997) includes the fatwa and press releases of Jamiat Ulema Pakistan (brelvi), Sunni Tehreek (Brelvi) , Jamiat Ishaat toheed o Sunna (Ahle-Hadees) Ahle Sunnat wal jammat, Shiya Muslim Mutahida Mahaz Pakistan (Shiya).

This clearly shows that yusuf kazzab case was not an issue between Brelvi and Deobandi as Zaid Hamid claimed.

If it was an issue against Brelvis then read the statement of Molana shah Ahmad Norani (The Most authentic and Mohtram name of Brelvi Maslak)

Book Fitna Yusuf Kazzab page 84,


Please necessarily read above the remarks of Dr. Ghulam Murtaza Malik Shaheed (a well know Islamic Scholar on that
time)

After all this some one can say that Yusuf Ka Deoobandi Molvis as he was Brelvi? and Zaid Hamid says if he raises this issue again then Deobandi-Barelvi riots may happen.

This is time to say “Ina Lillah he wa inna alia he Rajeoon”

Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wassallam) said:

“A believer is not stung twice from the same hole”. [Bukhari, Muslim]

Document (English): reply-to-zaid-hamid-defense-of-yousuf-kazzab
Scribd (English): reply-to-zaid-hamid-defense-of-yousuf-kazzab

Source

A minor victory but the struggle continues…

“Verily truth has come and falsehood perished and falsehood is bound to perish”– Alhamdollilah Zaid Hamid has himself released the video which we had in our possession and our team had made public clips of it. This video proves our point of view that Zaid Hamid did have a deep link with Yousf Kazzab, a fact which he completely denied previously. The purpose of Mulana Jalalpuris book ‘Rahbar ki roop ma Rahzan’ is complete.

First of all we would like to make it clear that Zaid Hamid never would have released this video on his own. He just did it save his face after we started to air clips from it. Our friend who made this video from his Nokia Cell phone was threatened for the past 1 ½ month by Zaids supporters.

Day before yesterday Zaid Hamid personally called that friend, who is a 2nd year medical student, and said “I warn you and I threaten you…If you release that video there will be bloodshed”. When our comrade told him that the video is out then he had another meeting with his challas (according to our sources) and then decided to make that video public. We make it very clear that the video was leaked not published. Neither is it made to be released. He himself instructs in that video not to have it made public.

The other fact about the video is that it is 58 min clip. Zaids video shows 68 min. The audio he shows is 48 min. I haven’t seen the video on takmeel.pk except for first 4 min. If there is some problem with the video I will Inshallah make a note and publish it.

This is a minor victory, but we should remember that the greater struggle is still there. This fight has now taken new dynamics as now the discussion will be more focused on Yousf Kazzab case. I also think that Zaid Hamid will no longer complain that these people have not met me as he has already made public what he had to say. I will talk to Hazrat Mulana Jallal puri sahib tomorrow inshallah and discuss this. He is already working on a booklet on Yousf Kazzab. All the arguments given in this video are false.

What makes me wonder is that why on earth are official Jihadi groups i.e Lashkar e Taiyyaba and Jaish e Muhammad supporting Zaid Hamid. They claim to do jihad and support some one who attacks the aqeeda of Khatm e Nabuwat. They support some one who abuses the Ulema publicly. In my sight they are nothing more than mercenaries.

I also draw attention to the fact that Zaid Hamid has the ISIs and establishments full support. There providing support to a mulhid is not such a surprise, but what is sad is that our people still harbor expectations from these tyrants.

Brothers and sisters when ever you come across a fitna, then struggle against it. Allah will give you victory. Look we were so few in number. Just Zaid Hamid’s paid staff is twice our size (20-25 according to our sources). But Allahs nusrah came and today the entire nation is with us.

When we fight fitnas we should always keep in mind that it is a part of a greater struggle for shariah. This is because it is hypocrites like Zaid Hamid who make a Jammah which then fights Khilafah and the movement for shariah.

I will keep you all updated on any latest developments inshallah.

Talha Saad
Published Date: 04-March-2010

Document (English|pdf): a-minor-victory-but-the-struggle-continues

Refutation: Zaid Hamid says Yusuf was accused of ZANA (adultery) but Molvis could not prove it so according to Sharia Molvis should be lashed

Claim:

Zaid Hamid says Yusuf was accused of ZANA (adultery) but Molvis could not prove it so according to Sharia Molvis should be lashed ( korray marne chahiye) ( In video Zaid Hamid’s most focused point)

Reply:

Yusuf was not accused for Zana by majlis e Khatam Nabuwwat because according to FIR there is no section of Pakistan Penal Code regarding Zana put on him. There were some eye witness who told Ulema and media that Yusuf kazzab tried to commit adultery with their women. But no one was ready to say this in court because of our traditional hesitation on such sensitive issue. This was an indirect allegation of “Try to commit adultery, not the direct blame of adultery” He was having some “ Roohani nikah” with some of his ladies followers and saying them “Azwaj Mutahraat” Naoozbillah. But it was hard to prove so Majlis e Khatam e Nabuwwat did not insisted on this allegation and if we read the FIR, there is also written the sentence “ tried to commit adultery” and there is no section of PPC regarding adultery put in FIR. Here we present the details of all sections of Pakistan penal Code put in FIR against yusuf Kazzab by Khatam-e-Nabuwwat.

According to FIR all the sections of Pakistan Penal Code
implemented in this case are as below
1. 295A insulting religion
2. 295B Insult of Quran
3. 295C insult of Prophet SAW
4. 298 Uttering word to wound religious feeling
5. 298A use of wrong words about ahl-e-bait and Azwaaj Mutahraat
6. 505(2) creating, spreading rumors against religion or state
7. 805 seems to be misprint (because we could not find this section in PPC) we think it was 508 (Forcing or threatening some one)
8. 420 committing fraud
9. 406 criminal breach of trust

Here is copy of FIR

Below if we see the sections provided by court on which he was sentenced are also among those from FIR.

So how Zaid Hamid says that Ulema accused Yusuf Kazzab for adultery in court and they were not able to provide sharia proof so they should be lashed in public. Did Ulema put a single section of PPC regarding Zana in FIR ? If not then Zaid himself should be lashed for Qazzaf as he is blaming baseless.

Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wassallam) said:

“A believer is not stung twice from the same hole”. [Bukhari, Muslim]

Document (English): reply-to-zaid-hamid-defense-of-yousuf-kazzab
Scribd (English): reply-to-zaid-hamid-defense-of-yousuf-kazzab

Source

Refutation: Zaid Hamid said,”Molvis should come to me to clear it”

Claim:

Zaid Hamid said,”Molvis should come to me to clear it” and in zaid hamid’s words “Why they don’t come to meet me? Why they run away? Why they are hiding?”

Reply:

Zaid Hamid is any “Sharia court” or Sharia authority where ulema should go to “clear their doubts?” Ulema claimed that yusuf is guilty, they dragged him to the court and presented sufficient proofs with all material (Audio,Video, Written Material, eye witnesses) and court gave a sufficient time to yusuf kazzab to present his view, so he was guilty and was sentenced to death, Now ulema and Pakistani People have no doubts on Yusuf Kazzab. So, If zaid hamid have any objection to the court decision then he should go to higher court, If he thinks that courts are Non-Islamic then he should go to Ulema and present them proof of yusuf kazzab “innocence”. This seems to be ludicrous and total non-sense that Ulema should come to zaid hamid.

And everyone knows Ulema are not “hiding” or “running away” on kazzab’s issue instead Zaid Hamid was hiding to accept the truth from last 2 years. And running away from the questions of his dark past.

Note:- (when Molvi Fazzal Ullah and Sufi Muhammad claimed that courts of Pakistan are non-Islamic and they ordered all advocates and Judges to leave Swat immediately then zaid hamid was shouting in his TV shows that these are Takfeeri people and Govt should retain its writ. Now Mr.zaid hamid what are you doing to say courts as Non-Islamic?) If they were wrong then you are right? Or may be you are actual son of those fasadees and takfeeris?( as Zaid Hamid said ulema as the sons of Mulla fazal Ullah)

Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wassallam) said:

“A believer is not stung twice from the same hole”. [Bukhari, Muslim]

Document (English): reply-to-zaid-hamid-defense-of-yousuf-kazzab
Scribd (English): reply-to-zaid-hamid-defense-of-yousuf-kazzab

Source

Refutation: Zaid Hamid says he never met Yusuf Kazzab after 1992 till Yusuf was captured in 1997

Claim:

Zaid Hamid says he never met Yusuf Kazzab after 1992 till Yusuf was captured in 1997.”yusuf may had some fraud but he didn’t claim to be prophet” said zaid hamid in video.

Reply:

This is the most interesting statement made by “great scholar” zaid hamid If he never met Yusuf kazzab after 1992 till his arrest in end of 1997 then how can he say that yusuf did not claim to be a prophet? How can you say what was he doing and saying in Karachi and Lahore as according to you, you were in Rawal Pindi after 1992? When you accept that you don’t know whether he had some fraud or not then how can you say with confidence that he didn’t claim to be a prophet?

The fact is that Zaid Hamid was his right hand and he was always with him either Yusuf was in Lahore or in Karachi.

Dr. Mohsin Ansari Medical (Director, Clinical faculty, University of Maryland School of Medicine USA) a friend of Zaid Hamid in University days claimed in his article on 2 Feb. 2010 that Zaid Hamid attended his marriage in 1994 in Karachi with his some friends who all were according to Dr. Ansari “following a Peer Yusuf Ali who later claimed to be a prophet.” Dr. Mohsin ansari also claims that Zaid Hamid was suffering from a mental disorder called Bipolar Manic Disorder in his university days in which the patient considers himself “a redeemer, a savior and some one who possess grandiose personality.”

Dr. Mohsin Ansari’s article is available on this link
http://teeth.com.pk/blog/2010/02/02/zaid-hamid-would-be-a-nightmare

How zaid hamid says he didn’t go to Karachi after 1992 while he attended marriage of Dr. Ansari in 1994?

The audio speech presented in court was recorded on 28 Feb 1997 in Lahore one month before Yusuf arrested in which Zaid Hamid also delivered a speech as the first Sahabi ( naoozbillah ).

How can Zaid Hamid say that he never met yusuf kazzab after 1992?

The biggest and continuous liar Zaid Hamid says the Ulema of Khatam e Nabuwwat “ The most ghatya molvi on the earth”

Mr. Zaid Hamid !!!!

These were Ulema who gave their lives to stop the Qadiyani Fitna in British era, then these were the ulema ( Molana Madudi and Molana Niazi and others ) who was sentenced to death by Gen. Ayub when they refused to give up their struggle against Qadiyanis. These were the Ulema of khatam-e-nabuwwat who gave their lives to force Bhutto to announce Qadiyanis as Kafir.

These were the Ulema who stopped Gohar Shahi Fitna.

We are not Molvis who are uploading these researches, we are students of those institutes which are run on western pattern. But we think that If we know some thing about Islam and even if we are Muslims, this is only because of Ulema who always remained torch bearers of Islam. Black sheep are always in every sector of society even in Ulema also but abusing them all is as worst as abusing Islam itself..

But this is a fact that if Islam could not be protected in traditional Madrasahs by these molvis then most of us would be Christians, Sikhs or Hindu.

We hope still you may have a chance from Allah to get Tauba and again become Muslim.. you have qualities to motivate and mobilize people but alas Shaitan captured you to follow his way.. Allah guide you and those who follow you blindly to the right path and protect Ummah from such fitnas.

Amen.

Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wassallam) said:

“A believer is not stung twice from the same hole”. [Bukhari, Muslim]

Document (English): reply-to-zaid-hamid-defense-of-yousuf-kazzab
Scribd (English): reply-to-zaid-hamid-defense-of-yousuf-kazzab

Source

Refutation: Only “Khabrain” reported Yusuf Kazzab Case?

Based upon the videos that has been released by Zaid Hamid in defense of Yousuf Kazzab which are posted here. We refute the following claim as per our post here:

Claim:

Zaid Hamid claims again and again in video that Only Khabrain reported news of yusuf kazzab and no single newspaper of Pakistan covered it and even no news is from any other news paper because ‘Khabrain reporter’ Mian Ghaffar had some issue of money with yusuf kazzab. According to zaid hamid “ khabrain ne chaar molvi sath mila ke yusuf ko phansa dya”.

Reply:

We again use the book “Fitna yusuf Kazzab” ( published in October 1997 containing all reports and articles regarding yusuf kazzab’s case) and see in 1997 when yusuf was just put in trial and he was not killed, what the writer says on it.

This is very first page of that book after title. The writer Arhsad Quraishi ( died in 2003 May Allah bless him Jannah) first says thanks to Daily Takbeer and the editor of Takbeer “Sarwat Jamal Asmai” then He says thanks to reporter of Daily Ummat “Muhammad Tahir” then he says thanks to Zia Shahid and Mian Ghaffar of Kabrain.

On next page he gives a list of Pakistani news papers and magazines whose reports and articles were included in this book and all of them covered the yusuf kazzab’s story. And we see that top of the list is Takbeer, not Khabrain.

The fact is this that yusuf kazzab’s claim to be Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wassallam) naoozbillah was first reported by Weekly Takbeer and daily Ummat in Karachi.( most of Yusuf’s followers were in Karachi and Lahore)

See another Page of the same book

If only and only Khabrain (according to zaid hamid) was highlighting this issue and no other news paper reported it then why compiler of all news reports in a book is again writing the name of weekly Takbeer first and then Khabrain? And he also gives a list of more than 6 news papers and magazines which reported yusuf kazzab as false Prophet and the top of the list is Takbeer, not Khabrain.

We should know that Weekly Takbeer was the hot favorite magazine in 1990’s because of its courageous policy even the founder of this magazine Salah ud deen was killed by Karachi Mafias but they did not stop to expose the truth on different hot issues.

Daily Ummat Karachi is also well known because of its Islamist policy.

After reading news in Karachi newspapers, Khabrain started its own investigations because khabrain had started its new edition from Multan so Khabrain assigned this matter to Editor of Khabrain Multan Mian ghaffar ( zaid hamid says him a reporter instead he was editor of Khabrain Multan). Mian ghaffar met yusuf kazzab in lahore and got his point of view and after this meeting Mian ghaffar reached at the coclusion that yusuf Kazzab did not deny his claim to be Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wassallam) Naoozbillah.

Mian ghaffar in his report march 1997 himself accepts that takbeer and Ummat reported this first then he met yusuf Ali to investigate that matter. Read here the complete conversation of Mian ghaffar and yusuf Kazzab.

Mian ghaffaar’s last question and yusuf Kazzab’s silence was the turning point for Khabrain Editor because If he is not denying to be Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wassallam) strictly then what did it mean?

And some audio, Video and written material was also available to prove it. This is the story that why Khabrain gave it too importance because Editor was the witness of his Kuffr.

(Lets put ourselves on Mian ghafaar’s place and ask some one that some people think you are Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wassallam) ( naoozbilah).. and that person is silent on this question… Will we need some “ more” evidences?
We think even whole world stand with that guilty person we will not accept that he is innocent.( Khatam-e-Nabuwwat is the most sensitive and basic Islamic belief after Toheed and there is not room of compromise on it as muslim)

In reply to Zaid hamid’s biggest lie that only and only Khabrain was giving news of yusuf Kazzab’s case, we have so many other reports of other newspapers in 1997..

Lets have a look on some of them.

The above reports are from Daily nawa-e-waqt, Daily Jang, and Daily Din. In next pages we ll also provide reports from other newspapers to prove Zaid Hamid’s lies.

Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wassallam) said:

“A believer is not stung twice from the same hole”. [Bukhari, Muslim]

Document (English): reply-to-zaid-hamid-defense-of-yousuf-kazzab
Scribd (English): reply-to-zaid-hamid-defense-of-yousuf-kazzab

Source

Refutation:Reply to Zaid Hamid Defense of Yousuf Kazzab

A very detailed reply to the Zaid Hamid lies has been exposed here. We highly recommend everyone to read this and give time to it to know the truth in sincerity by taking away any pre-conceived, pre-assumed concepts regarding the subject and keep you loyalties to Allah (subhanwatallah), His Messenger (subhana’watallah) and beleivers. Indeed, this will be great success.

We’ll Insha’Allah be making each section of this document as a post for further clarification to the readers. We very much thank all those involved in making this document as well and ask Allah (subhana’watallah) to reward them who are preparing these replies to guide the Muslim Ummah and exposing and refuting this cult at the earliest possible and helping others not to be trapped again.

Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wassallam) said:

“A believer is not stung twice from the same hole”. [Bukhari, Muslim]

Document (English): reply-to-zaid-hamid-defense-of-yousuf-kazzab
Scribd (English): reply-to-zaid-hamid-defense-of-yousuf-kazzab

Source