The Deoband Declaration on Terrorism: Why Now?

#96 Eklavya

[ajeya, for a country like the US there cannot be permanent alienations nor permanent friendships.]

Permanent in this context means for an appreciably large number of years. LIke Cuba has been in the shithole for decades. I think we all know that nothing is permanent in the world - one day the sun will burn out.

[Consider what the 'first sign of trouble from Pakistan' (or from any other state) would consist of? Does being played, being double-dealt, constitute sign of trouble? Do you think the US has had at least some inkling of these things over the last decade or so?]

But that's not what you said. You were talking about "threatening US interests". Pakialnd will be in the shithole so fast that it won't know what hit it.

[Ajeya, like any other state, the US wants to keep its cost of doing business around the world as low as possible. And Pakistan, as an ideological state, with close links to global Islam, can potentially increase or reduce that cost.]

I don't think so. If it did, it would not be getting bombed by the US army on it's own soil. Although I can sense your affinity for Pakistan (for whatever reason - religious, family-related or otherwise), you are way wrong on this issue. It is obvious to the blind that Pakiland has been bending over whenever Uncle Sam wants it to. Like when the American general threatened to bomb Pakiland back to the Stone Age.

Sorry. Your Pakiland is being used like a condom. And will be discarded eventually.

ajeya, without realizing it perhaps, you are taking the Islamist line: the US is using Pakistan. The Islamist line is that the (bad) US is using Pakistan. While your line is that the US is using Pakistan (like a condom).

The truth is that Pakistan has consistently used the US, as well, with unusual success. They have done that by being very very intelligent in their dealings with the US. It cannot be easy to be a 'leader' of the Ummah, and to pursue the Islamic agenda Pakistan has pursued, and STILL be an 'ally' of the US.

It will be very foolish for a state like Pakistan to issue direct threats to the US.

Give Pakistanis credit where they truly do deserve, including credit for being reasonably intelligent like the rest of us.

HAHAHA....perfect reply to pakiland's protests...

seriously..change your name to condomistan

Afghanistan fires 4 more missiles at Pak village

By Ali Afzal Afzaal

PARACHINAR: Four more missiles fired from Afghanistan fell on the border village of Boraki in Kurram Agency on Friday evening, a day after a strong protest was lodged with the US-led coalition forces over the attack on a Pakistani village that had killed four persons.

Official sources said the missiles fell near a checkpoint manned by the paramilitary Frontier Corps (FC). The troops, however, remained safe as none of the missiles exploded. A senior official of the political administration, while requesting anonymity, told The News that the missiles were fired from the neighbouring Paktia province of Afghanistan. He said they did not know who was the target of these missiles.

"We have informed senior government functionaries of the firing of missiles from across the border," said the official. He said the missiles fell about 500 meters inside Pakistani territory and frightened the soldiers and residents of the adjoining villages.

The official said senior military officials based in Parachinar, the regional headquarters of Kurram Agency, also visited the border village and took the missiles into possession. Top military spokesman and DG ISPR Maj Gen Athar Abbas, when reached by telephone, told The News he, too, had received similar reports but the local military officials in the area could not confirm the same. "It cannot be confirmed whether these were missiles or mortar shells and also there were no details about reports that these missiles were fired from across the border," explained the DG ISPR. He said the attack didn't cause any casualty.

It may be mentioned here that four people, including two minor girls and two women, were killed in North Waziristan Agency a few days back when five artillery shells fired from across the border by the US-led coalition forces hit a home in the border town of Lawara Mandai. The government for the first time admitted foreign aggression and lodged a strong protest with the military representatives of the coalition forces based in Islamabad.

Ref ajeya #92

#91 by ISlamIslam

{[India will be allowed to grow as a counterweight to China, just like China was allowed to grow to counter the Soviet Union.]

This is a very uninformed, "aam junta" view of how things work in this world.}

I waited breathlessly for your "informed" view of geopolitics. Fortunately, I could start breathing again within seconds.

[Nobody "allowed" China to grow.]

I guess that same "nobody" is "allowing" Cuba under Castro all sorts of growth opportunities.

[The US, with it's economic and geopolitical compulsions, had absolutely no choice.]

There was plenty of choice. Just like in the 1950s through the 1970s, it was Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Hong Kong, in the late 1980s, it could have been Indonesia or the Philippines instead of China, if it was economic rather than geopolitical considerations.

[Not that it changed my view, but I used to work with an American guy whose father was pretty high-up and actively involved in diplomatic negotiations with the Chinese for many years.]

That (having known him) and $4.50 would get you a latte at the local Starbucks.

[The US actaully grabbed on to the Chinese option like manna from heaven.]

If the US wants to destabilize a powerful country such as Russia, it is not going to be through through a tiny country half-way around the world from the Soviets. Outer Mongolia just wasn't an option even though your friend's daddy might have considered that very carefully. China's geography (long borders with the Soviet Union), military power (nuclear weapons and huge army) and willingness to take punishment in a war (Mao is quoted as saying that he was prepared to lose 400 million Chinese in a war) made it the choice of US... short of arming Japan with nuclear weapons. That was not an option since the US was trying to prevent the spread of nukes.

[Similarly, nobody "allowed" India to grow by "aiding" India.]

Yes, it is the "brilliance" of its software engineers that has allowed India to capture the world markets. Ninety percent of the frikking code coolies I have interviewed cannot tell me why operator overloading and inheritance are both needed in an object-oriented language. I am sure, if you are a code coolie, you don't know it either.

I have found better code coolies in Russia, Romania, and even Uzbekistan. And they work for cheaper rates than Indians despite having a rigorous education as opposed to fake degrees from "universities" in Jharkhand or Andhra or the quota graduates of Tamil Nadu.

[Political figures in Washington have only so much power over international trade and commerce. The best they can do in intervene here and there strategically. But for the bulk of it, the big financial corporations shape the trade policies to their own advantage.]

I suppose that is why they are trading with Cuba, importing its sugar and exporting it basic things like automobiles. (For those clueless idiots on Chowk, such trade does not exist!)

The US could have slapped heavy duties on China-made goods if the US corporations were going to import from China. When did China join WTO? Look it up. How about GATT?

The US could have banned investments in China. It could have banned travel to China like it does with Cuba. Mattel is NOT bigger than the US government. Even IBM is not bigger than the US government and had to get permission to sell off its Personal Computer division to Lenovo, a Chinese company. And China was NOT allowed to buy Unocal or 3Com Corporation.

I await your next "informed view" of how the world works with bated breath.

Ref Eklavya #94

[ajeya, on the other hand, your #92 was pretty good.]

Already formed a Mutual Admiration Society with ajeya, haven't you.

Too bad you couldn't have waited six hours to let me catch up on my beauty sleep.

Read #100

Eklavya#73:

"How could Gandhi/Nehru not have encouraged muslims, as a group, to have an identity that was separate from non-Muslims, and was ummah-oriented?"


I think that the Singapore model could have worked. Before you ask, this is what I think is the Singapore model in brief:

- Muslims are treated as equal citizens and 'almost' no discrimination in jobs, housing, social services etc. 'Almost' because at least when they had friction with Malaysia, Muslims were not allowed in the air force to save them from any potential "dharma sankat".

- Muslims had full religious freedom to practice the five pillars of islam - shahadah, namaz, zakat, rozas and hajj.

- Muslims got holidays to celebrate their religous occasions, could wear hijabs, beards, etc.

- Muslim schools could only teach approved syllabii and were closely monitored for adherence.

- Mosque sermons have to follow strict guidelines approved by sarkari muslims and are closely monitored.

- No ummar oriented demonstrations or activities are allowed.

I might add that Muslims in Singapore seem to be quite a happy lot.

Ref dost_mittar #102

[I think that the Singapore model could have worked. Before you ask, this is what I think is the Singapore model in brief:

- Muslims are treated as equal citizens and 'almost' no discrimination in jobs, housing, social services etc. 'Almost' because at least when they had friction with Malaysia, Muslims were not allowed in the air force to save them from any potential "dharma sankat".]

In a similar manner, Malaysia doesn't take Chinese into its Armed Forces.

They just want to ensure that there aren't any chinks in their armor. :-)

Ref dost_mittar #102

Can you tell me if India does not allow the first three items on your list?

Not doing the other three was just more sops to the Mozzies.

Eklavya #77

Pakistan's Domain of Relevance -

That is a very important topic. It is another myth that has been created by the fertile minds in Pakistan. Almost a spin off of TNT that requires persons to be in a "different" world in order to appraise Pakistan. It is like Musharaff refusing to accept that Kargil was a disastor , instead considered it to have achieved its objective.
That is the schizophrenic attitude that has been taken by Pakistani government, military and the entire establishment that puts the portrait of Jinnah and mouth praises to TNT in order to justify their existence.

To think that Pakistan has created a world of its own that requires its own standards of appraisal is the typical relativist propaganda of the Islamist.

#102 Posted by dost_mittar,

I might add that Muslims in Singapore seem to be quite a happy lot.

And why not because Singapore after all has a Crescent on its flag!

Its a white wash by deobandians.......jehad can never be ejected from Islam how so ever ugly it be globaly for ummah.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=g4GjrwQmxAA&feature=related

Pakistan ka jhanda Lal Kile par pheharaeinge......Hindustaani kutte....kashmir ki azzadi tak jang rahegi..bhaarat ki barbaadi tak jang raheegi.........pakistan ka bachha bachha larega aur khoon bahaega......


Every one must watch the seeds of hatred sown in the minds of young in Pukistan by its Jehadi civilian masters!!!

My good friends from across the border are busy repeating the fallacy that we know as "Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc".

The history of Islamic militancy in the subcontinent is quite clearly Deobandi specific. This is why they need to come up with a fatwa in the first place. Barelvi Islam - the adherents of which formed the mainbody of those TNT-ists everyone here loves to hate- never considered terrorism and militancy halal.

I don't like repeating the history lesson but I am afraid I have no option because such lies and misinformation should not go unchecked.

Achyuth Patwardhan, one of the Socialist stalwarts in the Congress, has given a remarkably candid and self critical analysis of the Congress Party vis-a-vis Khilafat: ’It is, however, useful to recognise our share of this error of misdirection. To begin with, I am convinced that looking back upon the course of development of the freedom movement, THE ’HIMALAYAN ERROR’ of Gandhiji’s leadership was the support he extended on behalf of the Congress and the Indian people to the Khilafat Movement at the end of the World War I. This has proved to be a disastrous error which has brought in its wake a series of harmful consequences. On merits, it was a thoroughly reactionary step. The Khilafat was totally unworthy of support of the Progressive Muslims. Kemel Pasha established this solid fact by abolition of the Khilafat. The abolition of the Khilafat was widely welcomed by enlightened Muslim opinion the world over and Kemel was an undoubted hero of all young Muslims straining against Imperialist domination. But apart from the fact that Khilafat was an unworthy reactionary cause, Mahatma Gandhi had to align himself with a sectarian revivalist Muslim Leadership of clerics and maulvis. He was thus unwittingly responsible for jettisoning sane, secular, modernist leadership among the Muslims of India and foisting upon the Indian Muslims a theocratic orthodoxy of the Maulvis. Maulana Mohammed Ali’s speeches read today appear strangely incoherent and out of tune with the spirit of secular political freedom. The Congress Movement which released the forces of religious liberalism and reform among the Hindus, and evoked a rational scientific outlook, placed the Muslims of India under the spell of orthodoxy and religious superstition by their support to the Khilafat leadership. Rationalist leaders like Jinnah were rebuffed by this attitude of Congress and Gandhi. This is the background of the psychological rift between Congress and the Muslim League’.

and

’Since the Khilafat agitation, things have changed and it has been one of the many injuries inflicted on India by the encouragement of the Khilafat crusade, that the inner Muslim feeling of hatred against ’unbelievers’ has sprung up, naked and unashamed, as in years gone by’.

and

A terrible and gruesome fallout of the disastrous Khilafat experiment of Mahatma Gandhi was the Moplah Rebellion in Malabar District in 1921. According to the Report of the ENQUIRY COMMITTEE OF SERVANTS OF INDIA SOCIETY, the number of Hindus murdered by Moplah Muslims was 1500, the number of Hindus forcibly converted 20,000 and the value of property looted about Rs three crore. When the national and local leaders appealed to the virulently anti-Hindu Moplah Muslims in the name of Mahatma Gandhi to follow the ways of peace and non-violence, they replied bluntly with Islamic fervour: ’GANDHI IS A KAFIR, HOW CAN HE BE OUR LEADER?’ Dr Anne Besant declared: ’The Moplah Muslim marauders murdered and plundered abundantly, killed or drove away all Hindus who would not apostatize. Somewhere about 100,000 people were driven from their homes with nothing but the clothes they had on, stripped of everything’. She also accused all the Khilafat religious preachers for all this terrible atrocities. J Campbell, chief of the Intelligence Department, Government of India, held the Khilafat leaders squarely responsible for inciting racial hatred resulting in Moplah carnage.

http://www.newstodaynet.com/2006sud/06aug/2208ss1.htm

Mahatma Gandhi’s attempt to harness the feeling for the cause of national independence backfired and led to the uprising in Kerala known as the Moplah Rebellion. It took the British several months to put it down at the cost of thousands of lives.



Moplahs were very much part of the grand Khilafat Movement that Gandhi was spearheading and Gandhi kept apologising for them


The Dravidian Moplahs had directed their revolt with class venom against some Aryan high-caste Hindus with property as well as Britishers: Brahmanical elements tried to use that to spark a crisis in Hindu-Muslim relations all over India. Gandhi tried to hold a balance: like the U.S. press and the Negro nationalists who read it he stressed that the Moplah uprising could be made part of a united drive for independence by Indians of all sects.But he was also aware of the pan-Islamic dimension: in a December 1921 call to the British to suspend their attacks against the Moplahs, he was to observe that the Moplahs saw themselves as fighting for a religion with methods they considered religious: Yogesh Chadha, Rediscovering Gandhi (London: Century 1997) p. 254.


And lets not forget the Tehreek-e-Hijrat Fatwa that Gandhi’s right hand man Azad gave to Muslims which gave Muslims two options "JEHAD" or "HIJRAT".

The Muslim Ulema, thinkers and activists called for the boycott of foreign goods and non-cooperation with the British government. Meetings were organised in order to rally the masses to support these issues. The meetings were organised under the banner of Mo’tamar al-Ansar (The Workers Conference) and various newspapers such as Al-Hilal of Maualana Abul Kalam Azad and The Comrade of Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar. Both Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad and Maulana Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar were put behind bars for publishing anti-British articles in their newspapers. The latter spent four years in prison between 1911 and 1915CE.


The allegiance of the Muslim intelligentsia of India at that to the Khilafah is unquestionable. Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad summed up their view when he wrote in his newspaper al-Hilal on 6th November 1912 that the Ottoman Sultans possessed the only sword which Muslims had for their protection. Insofar as the “caliphate was essentially a religious integration of the shari’a”, it became “necessary by revelation, is of God’s institution and that obedience to its authority is farz, or positively commanded”.


The Khilafat Movement


In September 1919, Maulana Muhammad Ali and his brother Shaukat Ali, together with Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad, Dr. Mukhtar Ahmed Ansari, and Hasrat Mohani, started a new organization, the Khilafat Movement (1919-1924). Their avowed aim was to use whatever leverage they had to protect the Khilafah. They organized Khilafat Conferences in several northern Indian cities. It is noticeable that the scholars and activists that were part of the Khilafat movement came from different schools of thought and backgrounds, for example Maulana Abul Kalam Azad was known to be a ‘ghayr taqleedi’ (non-taqleedi – who believed Taqleed to Mazahib is prohibited) and Maulana Mahmood Hasan was Deobandi who are followers of the Hanafi Mazhab yet they were united in the objective of working for the maintenance of the Khilafah.


In 1919, the Bombay Khilafat Committee agreed on two important organisational goals: “first, to urge the retention of the temporal powers of the Sultan of Turkey as Caliph, and second to ensure his continued suzerainty over the Islamic holy places.”

Delivering the presidential address at the Calcutta meeting of the Bengal Provincial Khilafat Conference in 1920, Maulana Azad discussed the importance of Khilafah he declared, “the purpose of this institution was to organise and lead the Muslim community in the right path, to establish justice, to bring about peace, and to spread God’s word in the world. For all this it was absolutely necessary for the caliph to possess temporal power”. Maulana Azad had no doubt that “without an Imam, their lives were un-Islamic and that they would be damned after death”.


Maulana Azad published a book in 1920 called Masla-e-Khilafat (The Issue of Khilafah), he stated: “Without the Khilafah the existence of Islam is not possible, the Muslims of India with all their effort and power need to work for this”.

In the same book page 176 Maulana Azad said, “There are two types of ahkam shariah, the first is related to the individual like the commands and prohibitions, the fara’id (obligations) and wajibat in order to perfect oneself. The second is not related to the individual but is related to the Ummah, nation, collective obligations and state politics like the conquering of lands, political and economic laws”.

According to Peter Hardy, Maulana Azad believed that, “The Muslim who would separate religion and politics for Muslims is an apostate who works silently”.


The loss of political power in India and the threat posed by a combination of forces to the temporal authority of the caliph, was so worrisome for the leaders of the Muslim community that some of them felt compelled to issue fatwas ‘in favour of migration (hijra)’ from India.


Maulana Abul Kalam Azad issued a fatwa which was published in the daily Ahl-e-Hadith of Amritsar on 30 July 1920. In his fatwa he urged Hijrat from India as an alternative to non-cooperation with the British. (YLH’s note: Was the Hijaz Born Azad a "Wahabi"... note "Ahle-Hadith)

Maulana Abdul Bari’s fatwa said, “every Muslim residing here should adopt non-cooperation but if (that is) impossible, should proceed for hijrat”. Maulana Shaukat Ali issued a statement on behalf of the Central Khilafat Committee, “expressing the hope that all dedicated Muslims would stay in India and work for the non-cooperation. Only if it did not succeed would they consider resorting to hijrat”. The impact of the fatwa was electrifying and thousands of Muslims preferred to leave the Dar al harb of India where their religious rights symbolized in the position of the Turkish Caliph was being infringed.


And most amazing was the fact that Gandhi’s encouragement led to Deobandi ulema creating the Jamiat ulema Hind ... which in its numerous forms and heads plagues South Asia even today... and all these groups are spin offs of the same.

#109 Posted by MantoLives on March 15, 2008 5:00:42 am

So gandhi is responsible for the daily bombings, the US bombing of paki citizens, pakiland being on the top 10 dangerous places and lowest on the tourism index?

hmm..I might have to revise my opinion of gandhi...

More of the same flawed "magical" reasoning. All I am saying is that Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc vis a vis creation of Pakistan is false.

What we do today is the direct result of our actions today and not of people who do not belong to this spacetime location.

Re: # 111

Acually the history of TNT can easily be traced back to Mohammad.........blame him for creation of Pakistan and the Jehadism.....