Original Articles

A brief, and incomplete, historical context to Zaid Hamidism – by Khawer A. Khan

First published on Khawer’s blog

Here are some important events that we need to use to understand Hamidism. This is a work in progress. Im sharing it for feedback.

1903: “Protocols of the Elders of Zion”, a known forgery, is published in Russia. Alleges that Jews want to take over the world. This work is based on satirical work that no one took seriously.

1917: Russian Revolution.

1917-1923: Russian Civil war between “Red” and “White” factions. “Whites” accuse “Reds” of being Jewish proxies.

After and during the Civil War the “Whites” find refuge (among other places) in Germany. They translate the “protocols” as a propaganda tactic to discredit the “Reds”

1917-1920: “First Red Scare” in America in the context of a declining economy. American copies of the “Protocols” replace the word “Jew” with “Bolshevik”

1918: Ottoman Caliphate abolished. Right Wing political activists invent the “Islamist” narrative that articulates Islam as a “political and economic system” that stands opposed to both Capitalism and Communism. As such, Islamism is a modern phenomena.

Notable Islamists that shape the narrative include: Abul Ala Maududi (India) , Syed Qutb (Egypt) and Taqi-ud-din Nabhani (Palestine).

Maududi is the most moderate of the three, not explicitly denouncing democracy but displaying opportunism and an unprincipled approach towards questions of democracy and dictatorship.

Qutb is radicalized by torture at the hands of the Egyptian state and understands those Muslims working with the “System of Disbelief” to have become Kafirs. (See: Takfir / Takfiri)

Nabhani revises the concepts of the Khaliphate introducing such modern notions as ‘statehood’, ‘constitution’ and ‘separation of powers’. Despite the innovations he gives most importance to the concept of an Islamic “system” that is intransigent and opposed to both Capitalism and Communism. Nabhani rejects concepts such as the “Dajjal” and the “return of Jesus” as external influences.

1930s: The rise of the Nazi Party and Hitler in Germany. The “Protocols” are used as a propaganda tool against both the Jews and the Communist Party of Germany.

Holocaust: The events of the Holocaust make anti-semitism unfashionable in the West. Protocols find favor in the Arab and Muslim world. Used extensively by Islamist scholars.

1940s-1990: Cold War replaces the anti-Semitic narrative with a cosmic battle even greater than the battle even greater than “God and Evil”, “Jew and Goy”…namely it is now a battle over the concept of private property.

Some still hold on to the notion that both “Communism and Capitalism” are Jewish inventions of control. This view is re-articulated by people such as Zaid Hamid and Ali Azmat today, but first found mass currency under Hitler.

1980: Islamist militants wage the American Jihad against communism. Fighters include those inspired by Qutb (Azzam / Al-Zawari/ Bin Ladin), those influenced by Maududi (Zaid Hamid, a former JI student activist, among them) and local Afghans. Both Americans and Islamists claim credit for the destruction of the Soviet Union. Azzam hopes for political revolutions, but after his assassination and as these revolutions fail to materialize, a more strongly Qutbist (and hence Takfiri) movement begins to replace it in the 1990s.

1991: The First Gulf War sends shock-waves across the world. Final nail in coffin of the age of Two Superpowers in which most movements were alined with either one or the other “big other”. As a new unipolar world order sets the old narrative collapses. The naked chaos and anarchy of the global system lays apparent for those that want to see it, other continue to search for a new narrative of a cosmic battle.

Early 1990s: An audio “documentary” known as “From the Shadows” is released by former members of Hizb-ut-Tharir (founded by Taqi-ud-din Nabhani). While they promote an intransigent Islamist system, the documentary replaces the narrative of Islam as an economic system distinct form “Capitalism and Communism” with a post-cold war narrative of a class of the “Islamic System” with the “System of Dajjal”. The “Freemasons” are identified as the “forerunners” of the Dajjal (straying from Nabhanism). This new “big other”, namely the Freemasons and Dajjal, are viewed as anthropomorphisms of the object of oppression. The documentry has many factual errors, including insisting that the French Revolution took place BEFORE the American Revolution. This is done to prove that FreeMasons the real and only agents behind both.

Mid to Late 1990s: Taliban take over Afghanistan and establish a premodern state. Bin Ladin takes over Azzam’s group and declares Jihad on America. The group is initially a lose gathering of people, but after the first WTC bombings it is increasingly known as “Al Queda”.

9/11: WTC and Pentagon attacked with hijacked airliners. Bin Ladin eventually accepts responsibility. Surveys of Muslim opinion show that even today most Muslims believe it was an “inside job”. George Bush launches the “Global War on Terror” (GWOT)

2003: The Bush administration extends GWOT to Iraq alleging it has nukes. The nukes are never found. This gives increased currency to conspiracy theories that 9/11 was an inside job based on lies.

2008: “The Arrivals”, an internet documentary based on “From the Shadows” is released. This documentary conflates “Freemasons” and “Dajjal” with “Zionism”.

Zaid Hamid hits the Pakistani airwaves. He re-spins the narratives of the “Protocols”, “Islamic system”, “Freemasons”, “Dajjal” into one cohesive narrative. He claims that “Freemasons” are secretly “Jewish Zionists”. Zaid Hamid’s narrative pits the “Islamic System” and Muslims on the one hand, against the “System of Disbelief” and Christian Zionists, Jewish Zionists and “Hindu Zionists” on the other.

Months after the Neo-Cons are swept from power, Hamid contiunes to conflate the terms “Neo-con” with “Zionists” and ultimately Jews. The ultimate source of Evil in Hamid’s narrative.

About the author

Abdul Nishapuri


Click here to post a comment
  • Real Face of Zaid Hamid [in the light of his most favourite weapon Islam] Part – 1

    zaid hamid ..
    1)complete book on yousuf kazzab and
    2)speach of yousuf ali praising zaid zaman hamid
    ملاحظہ کیجئیے
    فتنہ ء یوسف کذاب پر یہ مکمل دستاویز ہے جو 1997 مین شائع ہوئی تھی۔ اس کی اہمیت اب بھی ہے۔ بالخصوس زید زمان حامد کے ہاتھوں دوبارہ اس گروہ کی تنظیم اور ٹی وی ون پر اسلامی اسکالر اور ماہر دفاع کے طور پر طاقتور حلقوں کے تعاون سے ابھارے جانے کے بعد اس کی اہمیت بڑھ گئی ہے۔
    یوسف کذاب کے کیس کا فیصلہ نامی انگریزی کتاب کا دیباچہ اسماعیل قریشی ایڈووکیٹ نے لکھا۔یہ کتاب بھی 2000 مین شائع ہوئی۔دیباچہ کا اردو ترجمہ ملاحظہ کیجیئے۔زید حامد صاحب اس میں بھی موجود۔۔۔یاد رہے 2000 سے
    چلئے صاحب جن کو یوسف صاحب کی آواز سنے بغیر یقین نہیں آ رہا تھا کہ وہ اپنے ساتھیوں(زید حامد) وغیرہ کو صحابی کہتا تھا۔اب اس کی اور زید حامد کی تقریر سن لیں ۔ جو فروری 1997 میں بیت رضا لاہور میں نام نہاد “ورلڈ اسمبلی” بلا کر کی گئی۔یوسٍف کذاب نے زید زمان حامد کو صحابی کہہ کر بلایا اور زید بے غیرتی کی آخری حدوں کو چھو کر یوسف علی کی تعریفیں کرتا رہا۔ یہ تقریر سیشن کورٹ لاہور میں سنی اور جرح کی گئی اور کورٹ ریکارڈ میں محفوظ ہے۔
    اب سنیے پہلے یوسف علی کو،پھر عبدالواحد کو اور پھر زید زمان کو ۔
    انا للہ وانا الیہ راجعون
    Here is the audio recording of the speech of Yousuf Kazzab and Zaid Zaman Hamid delivered in a “world assembly” held at “bait e raza” Lahore in February 1997.yousuf announces Zaid Zaman(ZZ Hamid) as “Sahabi”. Zaid Zaman Hamid in response praises him.
    The audio was presented and testified in session court Lahore

    Zaid Hamid is a Fraud Par Excellence – 1
    http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/11/zaid-hamid-is-fraud-par-excellence-1.html [go to the end and click the tag new for the next part]

    A very simple solution to counter such Fascists and i.e. Reading History, Quran/Hadith [plain Quran/Hadith], recent History of War in Afghanistan and then nobody would be able to fool anyone what to talk of Zaid Hamid. Amazing is this that he is being followed by Literate people belonging to middle class and that is very disturbing.

    What amazes me the most that Mr Zaid Hamid is/was invited on many channels and from start to end talks continuously [particularly on BrassTacks launched on TVONE/NEWSONE] without any moderation or any counter question from the host [most of the time Female – where is the veil???? from the Islam of whose Glory Mr Zaid want to revive]. In one of the Final Episode of that Program on NEWSONE a grand episode was telecast as a conclusion wherein several leading journalists [often appear on different TV Channels as “Expert”], 2 Retired Military Officers [often appear as “Defence Analyst”] and one leading Editor of an English Financial Daily who used to be a Host on the same TV Channel and Newscaster/”Financial Expert” of the same Channel participated and they were asking questions [rather putting words in the mouth of Mr Zaid Hamid] the same words/theories on which Mr Zaid Hamid is very fond of lecturing. All the guests most of time were sitting like “Summun, Bukmun, Umyun” [Deaf Dumb Blind] and listening to the Lecture of Born Again David Koresh or Rev. Jim Jones of Pakistan.
    Nobody questions the content! Why? whereas [I am no fan of GEO] but famous GEO TV Host Iftikhar Ahmed had resigned in protest from GEO on this:
    Geo ‘Jawabdeh’ host Iftikhar Ahmed resigns in protest
    Monday, November 17, 2008 http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008\11\17\story_17-11-2008_pg7_34
    LAHORE: Iftikhar Ahmed, the host of Geo TV show ‘Jawabdeh’, resigned on Sunday after the channel administration refused to air an interview with former Pakistan Television managing director Shahid Masood. The interview was recorded last week and was being advertised in the group’s The News and Jang newspapers. On Sunday, the Geo TV administration seized the original recording and declined to run it. Iftikhar Ahmed told Aaj Kal he was being pressured to censor parts of the interview but he did not compromise on principles and resigned. aaj kal report

    Zaid Hamid and Hadith of Ghazwa-e-Hind!!!!

    Hafiz Ibn Kathir [Author of Tafseer Ibn Kathir] in his another book “Al Bidaya Wan Nihaya” [From the Beginning to End]’s last Voluem “Al Nihaya Wal Bidaya” had discussed this Hadith of Ghazwa-e-Hind and in total have given names of more than 20 such Islami Military Campaign on Hind. Zaid and other Mullahs [they misinterpret Ghazaw-e-Hind Hadith and this misinterpretation was started by Maulana Akram Awan before the start of Kargil to hound Nawaz Shairf – Akram Awan’s party accept disciples in their Jamat after they take approval from Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) and that too after arranging a meeting of would be disciple with Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) just imagine Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) is dead and dead don’t come back]. Let me tell you one more thing Akram Awan have two more important member in his Jamat i.e. Major General (R) Zahirul Islam and Brig {R} Mustansir Billah [both were fixed in a false case of Treason by a Former General and DG of MI i.e Ali Quli Khan]. Ali Kuli Khan wanted to become COAS therefore he designed this whole conspiracy case against Abbasi and Billa that they are paving way for Islamic Revolution in the country [go through the newspapers/magainzens (Pakistani) from 1990 to 1994] but Al Quli Khan couldn’t become COAS.
    These Officers had also approached Mufit Nizamuddin Shamzai [May Allah have mercy on his soul – Chief of Binnori Town Karachi] for his help and also Mawlana Yousuf Ludhiyanvi [May Allah have mercy on his soul] and asked for help for Islamic Revolution and both of these officers got a very befitting replies from both the Scholars
    In their own words
    “Yeh Aap Logoon Ko Islami Inquilab Ka Khayal Us Waqt Kiyon
    Aata Hai Jub Wardi Utar Jati Hai” [Why is it so that you came up with the idea to bring in Islamic Revolution after you are no more in Uniform]
    Please keep one thing in Mind that First Islamic Army rather a Trade Delegation had arrived in South India [Malabar] during the Rule of Hazrat Uthman [May Allah be pleased with him] – The first ship bearing Muslim travelers was seen on the Indian coast as early as 630 AD. H.G. Rawlinson, in his book: Ancient and Medieval History of India claims the first Arab Muslims settled on the Indian coast in the last part of the 7th century AD. Reference :
    Ancient and Medieval History of India by H.G. Rawlinson
    Sturrock, J.,South Canara and Madras District Manual (2 vols., Madras, 1894-1895)
    Cultural Heritage of India Vol. IV
    And before Muhammad Bin Qasim’s Army.
    Abdullah Shah Ghazi is considered to be patron saint of Karachi, Sindh, Pakistan. The dargah of Abdullah Shah Ghazi is located in Clifton neighborhood of Saddar Town in Karachi. The real name of Abdullah Shah Ghazi was Abdulla bin Nahban and he was Muslim Umayyad general who died at Debal while trying to conquer Sindh in 711 CE. This army was led by Abdulla bin Nahban and Badil bin Tuhfa, respectively and were both defeated at Debal. According to Dr. Daud Pota the tomb of Abdullah Shah at Clifton in Karachi is of this General, Abdulla bin Nabhan. [Nuzahat ul Khawatir by Abul Hasan Ali Nadvi Former Head of Daul Uloom Deoband and his father Abdul Hai Nadvi]

  • Real Face of Zaid Hamid [in the light of his most favourite weapon Islam] Part – 2

    These nincompoops often forget that Siljoq, Tughlaq, Ghaznavis, Lodhis, Behman, Mughals occupied India and ruled over India successfully particularly the Mughals ruled India with impunity for more than 200 years. What would be the status of their Armies and their War. They are least bothered to even pay attention to the word in that Hadith “Ghazwa” – Ghazwa are those battles wherein Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] participated. Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] is dead hence such battles cannot be called “Ghazwa”.

    The commentary by Ibn-e-Kathir [Mohaddis] on that “Ghazwa-e-Hind Hadith is worth reading and he interpreted that Hadith [with Historical References and Health of the Narrators Chain] and clearly written that all those Islamic Armies who launched expedition on Hind [Ibn Kathir was an Scholar of Hadith and History] were Jihad and he included Mohammad Bin Qasim and Mahmood Bin Subugtagin [Mehmood Ghaznavi] and many other Turks Kings. He included China and Central Asia while interpreting these Hadiths.

    Historian are often critiques and it is good to be a critique when you write a History. Zaid Hamid’s Faith [if he says that he is a Muslim then matter ends here until he openly announced otherwise and tell Muslim to follow him then he can be dealt according to Law and should not be touched by anybody except Law] but when he start sermoning Pakistani Public on TV Channels with Wild Stories while completely and conveniently forgetting Follies Committed by our Military Establishment [played havoc like Hulegu Khan and Golden Horde in every sphere of Pakistan] then he must be questioned on ground realities. There is a very thin line between Zaid Hamid’s Methodology and Fascism.

    These Hadiths of Ghazawa-e-Hind is narrated by Hazrat Thuban [May Allah be pleased with him] in Sunnan Nisa’i Chapter Ghazwatul Hind] wherein Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] had said


    “Muslims would wage a Jihad in Hind and if it happens in my [PBUH] life then I [PBUH] will spent my [PBUH] life and money and I [PBUH] am martyred then I will be “Chief of Martyr” and If I return alive then I will be like Abu Huraira [May Allah be pleased with him] who is free from Hell [Yaani Abu Huraira ko Jannat Ki Basharat thi]

    All narrators in the chain of narration are truthful [in Arabic Term for Hadith Narrator is “Thiqqa and Saduq”] but one narrator’s background is unknown “Majhool ul Hal” and his name was Abu Bakar Al Zubaidi. [Al Taqreeb by Asqalani, Al Kashif by Imam Zahbi, Sahih Jameh As Sagher by Albani with the reference of Musnad Ahmed, and Imam Muqdasi’s Zia Mukhtara] Read two comment wherein I have quote Haifz Ibn-e-Kathir and his commentary on this Hadith to clear the confusion.

    Note: Any mistake in literal translation would be unintentional and regretted, if I am wrong somewhere please correct me.

    Aurangzeb is often projected as the most ruthless Mughal King but a Hindu Researcher proved that wrong and that’s what books and research do and that cannot be done through listening sermons of Zaid Hamid. Read..


    Excerpted from Prof B. N. Pande’s speech in the Indian Upper House of Parliament, the Rajya Sabha, made on 29 July 1977. At the time of the publication of this article in Impact International (1987), Dr Pande was Governor of the Indian state of Orrisa. Dr. Pande died in New Delhi on June 1, 1998.

    Dr Pattabhi Sitaramaiah, in his famous book ‘The Feathers and the Stones’ has narrated this fact based on documentary evidence. Dr. P. L. Gupta, former Curator of Patna Museum has also narrated this incident … Every civil building connected with Mahommedan tradition should be levelled to the ground without regard to antiquarian veneration or artistic predilection. Letter No. 9 dated 9 October 1857, from Prime Minister Palmerston (1784-1865)to Lord Canning Viceroy of India, Canning Papers.
    However, before I reached a definite conclusion, I thought it to be in order to consult Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru, a renowned scholar of Persian language. Sir Sapru studied the Jagdambri Shiv Mandir documents and again found Farmans of Aurangzeb which bestowed a Jagir on this temple. A new Aurangzeb was unveiled before me and through further research and investigation, I discovered many more Farmans of like nature with regard to Mahakaleswar temple in Ujjain, Balaji Temple in Chitrakoot, Amparand Temple in Gauhati, Shatranjay Jain Temple and various Gurdwaras. These Farmans were issued between the year 1656 and 1686. [Aurangzeb’s father Emperor Shah Jahan is famous for having built the Taj Mahal, considered as one of the wonders of the world]….

    The story regarding demolition of Vishwanath temple is that while Aurangzeb was passing near Varanasi on his way to Bengal, the Hindu Rajas in his retinue requested that if a halt is made for a day, their Ranis may go to Varanasi, have a dip in the Ganges and pay their homage to Lord Vishwanath. Aurangzeb readily agreed.
    The Ranis took their dip in the Ganges and went to the Vishwanath temple to pay their homage. All the Ranis returned except one, the Maharani of Kachh. When Aurangzeb came to know of it, he was very much enraged. He sent his senior officers to search for the Rani. Ultimately, they found that the Statue of Ganesh which was fixed in the wall was a movable one. When the statue was moved a flight of stairs led to the basement. To their horror, they found the missing Rani dishonoured and crying. The basement was just beneath Lord Vishwanath’s seat. The Hindu Rajas expressed their vociferous protests. They demanded justice. Aurangzeb ordered that Lord vishawanath may be moved to some other place, the temple be razed to the ground and the Mahant be arrested and punished.


    There is a movement going on in India amongst Scholars/Historians on verification of History after 2002 Muslim Pogrom of Gujarat and Murli Manohar Joshi’s [BJP]’s Fascist Campaign against Muslim History in their text books.
    Material is as under and much I have published and posted on my own blog —
    Educating to Hate: The impact of fundamentalist ideas on the school text books in India and Pakistan http://www.sacw.net/HateEducation/index.html

    Two years ago Zaid Hamid in one of his program “Ghazi” on NEWSONE/TV ONE was quoting History to justify his Theories. Now read as to how this Islamic History was compiled and how Traditionalist Religious Scholars view “History”


    Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari: “I am writing this book as I hear from the narrators. If anything sounds absurd, I should not be blamed or held accountable. The responsibility of all errors or blunders rests squarely on the shoulders of those who have narrated these stories to me.” Tabari’s Tareekhil Umam Wal Mulook (The History of Nations and Kings) popularly called “Mother of All Histories” is the first ever “History of Islam” written by ‘Imam’ Tabari (839-923 CE) at the junction of the third and fourth century AH. He died in 310 AH. [Preface of Tareekhil Umam Wal Mulook (The History of Nations and Kings) by Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari.]


    Ahmed Bin Hanbal, Islamic History and Zaid Hamid’s Lecture through Islamic History.


    Ahmed Bin Hanbal says:Three kinds of books are absolutely unfounded, Maghazi, Malahem and Tafseer.” (The exalted Prophet’s Battles, Dreams and Prophecies, and Expositions of the Qur’an). [Ahmed Bin Hanbal as quoted by ibn Rajab al-Hanbali in Dhayl Tabaqat al-Hanabila (Appendage to the Encyclopedia of Hanbali Scholars)]
    Hafiz Ibn Kathir says: Had Ibn Jareer Tabari not recorded the strange reports, I would never have done so. [Tafseer Ibn Katheer (Commentary on Quran) and Al Bidaya Wal Nihaya (History – From Start to End)]


    Ibn Khaldun, House of Shah Waliullah, History and Lies of Zaid Hamid through Lecture of History.


    Ibn Khaldun says: The Muslim historians have made a mockery of history by filling it with fabrications and senseless lies. (Muqaddama Ibn Khaldun)
    Shah Abdul Aziz Dehelvi says: Six pages of Ibn Khaldoon’s History have been deliberately removed since the earliest times. These pages had questioned the most critical juncture of Islamic history i.e. the Emirate of Yazeed and the fiction of Karbala. [Even the modern editions admit in the side-notes that those pages have been mysteriously missing from the ancient original book. [Tohfa Ithna Ashri by Shah Abdul Aziz Dehelvi]

    Shah Waliullah Dehelvi says: Imam Jalaluddin Sayyuti’s Tarikh-ul-Khulafa is the prime example of how our Historians, Muhaddithin and Mufassirin, each has played like Haatib-il-Lail (One who collects firewood at night not knowing which piece is good and which one is bad). [Izalatul Khifa A’N Khilaafatil Khulafaa by Shah Waliullah]


    Zaid Hamid’s Lecture through History and Veracity of Islamic Historians:


    Muhammad ibn Ishaq ibn Yasar [Birth:85 AH 704 CE Death: 150-153 AH (767)]
    The earliest is Ibn Ishaq’s Sira, his biography of the Prophet. It is also the longest and the most widely quoted. Later historians draw, and in most cases depend on him. [Uyun al-athar, I, 7, Ibn Sayyid al-Nas (d. 734A.H.) A contemporary of Ibn Ishaq, Imam Malik [d 179 AH], the jurist, denounces Ibn Ishaq outright as “a liar” and “an impostor” just for transmitting such stories. [`Uyun al-athar, I and ibid, I, 16].

    It must be remembered that historians and authors of the Prophet’s biography did not apply the strict rules of the “traditionists”. They did not always provide a chain of authorities, each of whom had to be verified as trustworthy and as certain or likely to have transmitted his report directly from his informant, and so on. The attitude towards biographical details and towards the early events of Islam was far less meticulous than their attitude to the Prophet’s traditions, or indeed to any material relevant to jurisprudence. The attitude of scholars and historians to Ibn lshaq’s version of the stories has been either one of complacency, sometimes mingled with uncertainty, or at least in two important cases, one of condemnatlon and outright rejection.
    The complacent attitude is one of accepting the biography of the Prophet and the stories of the campaigns at they were received by later generations without the meticulous care or the application of the critical criteria which collectors of traditions or jurists employed. It was not necessary to check the veracity of authorities when transmitting or recording parts of the story of the Prophet’s life.[Ibn Sayyid al-Nas (op. cit., I, 121)] It was not essential to provide a continuous chain of authorities or even to give authorities at all. That is obvious in Ibn Ishaq’s Sira. On the other hand reliable authority and a continuous line of transmission were essential when law was the issue. That is why Malik the jurist had no regard for Ibn Ishaq. [Kadhdhab and Dajjal min al-dajajila – Liar and Liar amongst Liars]

    His contemporary, the early traditionist and jurist Malik, called him unequivocally “a liar” and “an impostor”[Kadhdhab and Dajjal min al-dajajila – Liar and Liar amongst Liars] “who transmits his stories from the Jews”.[`Uyun al-athar, I, 16-7 by Ibn Sayyid al-Nas]. In a later age Ibn Hajar Asqalani further explained the point of Malik’s condemnation of Ibn Ishaq. Malik, he said,[Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, IX, 45. See also `Uyun al-athar, I, 16-7] condemned Ibn Ishaq because he made a point of seeking out descendants of the Jews of Medina in order to obtain from them accounts of the Prophet’s campaigns as handed down by their forefathers. [ibid.]


    Here is Sheikh Muhammad Akram Awan of Ghazwa-e-Hind and his website: http://www.naqshbandiaowaisiah.com/index.html http://www.ghazwatulhind.com/
    Note in the first URL that on the left side of the website [Copy of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH)’s Seal is engraved]

    Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] had stopped us to remake that seal [Bukhari].

    شيخ المکرم امير محمد اکرم اعوان

    Shaikh Silsilah Naqshbandiah Owaisiah

  • zaid hamid is a KGB + RAW agent deployed to cause instability in pakistan and make pakistan a pariah state similar to iran, north korea and etc… to protect russian interests….(in central Asia)

    he lived in iran during shiah era and helped toppled the regime and set off the Iranian revolution

    he is not from pakistan nor turkey, he in fact is a white person and propaganda agent of the KGB….

  • Zaid Hamid’s earlier work was excellent earlier but now he is more of an Un-official spokesperson for fuaj. Defending every right and wrong of the fauj. If Fauj is going to start an Operation(on the directions of allied forces anywhere in Pakistan) ,the first step is ZH’s media campaigning telling the nation about foreign funded elements in that area.
    And when he talks about Nationalism,he has an excuse for this Nationalism that we are the ONLY nation built on ideology. There is no place for Nationalism whether it be first or last nation on ideological grounds. Because on this basis every ethnic/geograhic nation divided by west can come up with a better excuse for their nationalism.
    As long as he works in the capacity of a defence analyst we can neglect his propaganda tactics but he is not leaving any front. He is a muhadith and a Muffasir too! He is frequently quoting HAdith about Ghazwa Hind, which many authentic scholars and Muhadiths consider not relevant to “Pakistan in current times”.
    At the end of every talk he will say” dont worry everything is under control” but actually nothing is under control.
    Constantly he brags about his days in afghanistan and his contacts with commanders there
    Our following should be objective based not on personalities . No doubt he is misguiding the nation now in the capacity of Army Spokeperson.