insight-out
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2009
- Messages
- 981
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
^^^ So now we have three unfriendly neighbours. Great! 
Iran blames US, UK, Pakistan
- Thread starter DaRk WaVe
- Start date
PAFAce
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2009
- Messages
- 1,637
- Reaction score
- 0
Lol. Now we know how India feels!^^^ So now we have three unfriendly neighbours. Great!
I'm just kidding. But, seriously, Iran is in no position to make enemies with Pakistan. This is, at worst, a desperate attempt to pawn off responsibility onto us. But, realistically speaking, there is ever possibility that the attacks originated from within Pakistan. State involvement, however, seems far fetched.
Meengla
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2009
- Messages
- 7,735
- Reaction score
- 22
- Country
- Location
A'jad says 'some security agents from Pakistan'. To me it sounds more like some border-level agents of Iran-Pakistan border who are milking off the Jundullah resistance. This does NOT at all mean the weakened State of Pakistan whose own sitting Army Chief cum President Musharraf was nearly killed twice by the unlimited supply of loose cannons inside Pakistan.
Come on, guys. Pakistan gains nothing by antagonizing Iran. Never was that the case and it is certainly not the case while Pakistan cleanse up FATA.
Come on, guys. Pakistan gains nothing by antagonizing Iran. Never was that the case and it is certainly not the case while Pakistan cleanse up FATA.
This is intriguing development indeed.
Did Pakistan acquiesce to some Yankee mischief - under duress?
I just don't think Najad is the player here. But what are those behind him thinking? We know these are thoughtful comments. These things are not said lightly.
To be frank, this "multipolarity" may be more trouble than it's worth.
Uncle is most dangerous on its way down a notch, the wounded tiger thing I suppose. Some horsetrading is going on at the back of the bazaar.
Pretty soon people will think a "strong" America is in the best of interest of everyone.
Did Pakistan acquiesce to some Yankee mischief - under duress?
I just don't think Najad is the player here. But what are those behind him thinking? We know these are thoughtful comments. These things are not said lightly.
To be frank, this "multipolarity" may be more trouble than it's worth.
Uncle is most dangerous on its way down a notch, the wounded tiger thing I suppose. Some horsetrading is going on at the back of the bazaar.
Pretty soon people will think a "strong" America is in the best of interest of everyone.
Kharian_Beast
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2008
- Messages
- 1,645
- Reaction score
- 0
I would advise Iran as a "Muslim brother" that she should follow up her barks with some bite. This is the same Iran that sends Hezbollah to make the lives of Palestinians even more difficult, the one that started a border war between Lebanon and Israel, the same Iran that sent extremist shiite death squads to Iraq to give their Sunni brothers payback for Iran-Iraq war and to instate their proxies in "their backyards".
Agno, I know you have a lot of background into this field but I can tell you now with a straight face mate that India never supported the Northern Alliance and neither did Russia. The only verifiable NA leader to have ties with KGB was Dostum but that scumbag was a known hustler and kingpin, his allegiances meant nothing in the operation theater. It also did not stop himself or his comrades from carrying out daring raids on Russian supply convoys in the north. Russians have killed a good number of his men in Afghanistan and I don't think if you were to tell NA before 2001 that they are Indian and Russian backed that they would even understand where you are coming from. Sure they might have recently received a lot of assistance from India but that is because Pakistan's decision making in the past has allowed for a natural alliance and now an Afghanistan that is hostile to Pakistan and friendly to India.
Afghanistan is not and was not confined to India-Pakistan bickering and differences, and the Soviet situation was a lot bigger than that. Their ethnic differences were made more visible when outsiders started grappling for influence. Countries like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan during the civil war were working for short-sighted goals. Countries like the U.S. and notable nations in Europe did not have the knowledge, expertise or realization that the country would break along ethnic lines (It still is broken along ethnic lines). NA is a political party/volunteer militia who started up as a movement to give minorities in Afghanistan a voice against Pashtun hegemony by a council of mostly ethnic Turkic people's and they had big backing from nations like Turkey, Uzbekistan and a few other central asian nations who provided money, arms and training. India never cared for the NA until 2001 and it is an excuse that was used by Pakistani intel to legitimize the support of Taliban and the eventual takeover of Afghanistan which was the worst decision in the history of the nation of Pakistan. Intel was putting hits and killing any Afghan leader who was not aligned or fond of the Taliban for a good 6 years, many of them having no connections with India as the environment was much too saturated with Pakistani-US-Irani-Turkish-Saudi elements, who were highly active for India to have any major sway in the nation's affairs especially within a large group like the NA. The ghosts of these decisions of backing civil war, extremism and ignorance are haunting us today where we can see a very similar if not exact situation on a microcosmic scale which has the potential of really screwing up Pakistan in the long run. I can also tell you that there were many elements within the army officer hierarchy that were against the support of Taliban who lost their careers, ranks and lives for such anti-state thinking. Pakistan has a lot of growing up to do because the leaders have all been pretty bad and ill-disciplined (notable exception is Sir Jinnah). Severe corruption, bribery, forgery, killings and suppression of good, kind hearted leadership material is a daily norm in Islamabad whether you want to believe it or not.
Agno, I know you have a lot of background into this field but I can tell you now with a straight face mate that India never supported the Northern Alliance and neither did Russia. The only verifiable NA leader to have ties with KGB was Dostum but that scumbag was a known hustler and kingpin, his allegiances meant nothing in the operation theater. It also did not stop himself or his comrades from carrying out daring raids on Russian supply convoys in the north. Russians have killed a good number of his men in Afghanistan and I don't think if you were to tell NA before 2001 that they are Indian and Russian backed that they would even understand where you are coming from. Sure they might have recently received a lot of assistance from India but that is because Pakistan's decision making in the past has allowed for a natural alliance and now an Afghanistan that is hostile to Pakistan and friendly to India.
Afghanistan is not and was not confined to India-Pakistan bickering and differences, and the Soviet situation was a lot bigger than that. Their ethnic differences were made more visible when outsiders started grappling for influence. Countries like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan during the civil war were working for short-sighted goals. Countries like the U.S. and notable nations in Europe did not have the knowledge, expertise or realization that the country would break along ethnic lines (It still is broken along ethnic lines). NA is a political party/volunteer militia who started up as a movement to give minorities in Afghanistan a voice against Pashtun hegemony by a council of mostly ethnic Turkic people's and they had big backing from nations like Turkey, Uzbekistan and a few other central asian nations who provided money, arms and training. India never cared for the NA until 2001 and it is an excuse that was used by Pakistani intel to legitimize the support of Taliban and the eventual takeover of Afghanistan which was the worst decision in the history of the nation of Pakistan. Intel was putting hits and killing any Afghan leader who was not aligned or fond of the Taliban for a good 6 years, many of them having no connections with India as the environment was much too saturated with Pakistani-US-Irani-Turkish-Saudi elements, who were highly active for India to have any major sway in the nation's affairs especially within a large group like the NA. The ghosts of these decisions of backing civil war, extremism and ignorance are haunting us today where we can see a very similar if not exact situation on a microcosmic scale which has the potential of really screwing up Pakistan in the long run. I can also tell you that there were many elements within the army officer hierarchy that were against the support of Taliban who lost their careers, ranks and lives for such anti-state thinking. Pakistan has a lot of growing up to do because the leaders have all been pretty bad and ill-disciplined (notable exception is Sir Jinnah). Severe corruption, bribery, forgery, killings and suppression of good, kind hearted leadership material is a daily norm in Islamabad whether you want to believe it or not.
Last edited:
Omar1984
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2008
- Messages
- 12,296
- Reaction score
- 0
^^^ So now we have three unfriendly neighbours. Great!
Thank God we have China as a friendly neighbor.
Seriously though, Saudi Arabia is a better friend than Iran.
This whole game with Iran is all about the Indo-Iranian Chabahar Port and how it is a rival to Gwadar Port.
Even though India is a close friend of Israel and sided with Americans when it came to Iran's nuclear program and backed out of IPI, the Shia extremist regime of Iran will always take the side of Hindu majority India over Sunni Muslim majority Pakistan.
Bhushan
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 1,319
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
TEHRAN: Iran has received information that "some security agents" in Pakistan were cooperating with elements behind Sunday's attack on the Revolutionary Guards, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying.
Ahmadinejad called on Pakistan not to waste time in cooperating with Iran in apprehending the perpetrators, a local news agency reported.
"We were informed that some security agents in Pakistan are cooperating with the main elements of this terrorist incident... We regard it as our right to demand these criminals from them," Ahmadinejad said, without giving details.
"We ask the Pakistani government not to delay any longer in the apprehension of the main elements in this terrorist attack," he said.
State television said Iran's Foreign Ministry summoned a senior Pakistani diplomat in Tehran, saying there was evidence "the perpetrators of this attack came to Iran from Pakistan."
"The Pakistani official assured Tehran that his country would take all measures to secure its border with Iran," English-language Press TV added.
Iran urges Pakistan action after attack
Ahmadinejad called on Pakistan not to waste time in cooperating with Iran in apprehending the perpetrators, a local news agency reported.
"We were informed that some security agents in Pakistan are cooperating with the main elements of this terrorist incident... We regard it as our right to demand these criminals from them," Ahmadinejad said, without giving details.
"We ask the Pakistani government not to delay any longer in the apprehension of the main elements in this terrorist attack," he said.
State television said Iran's Foreign Ministry summoned a senior Pakistani diplomat in Tehran, saying there was evidence "the perpetrators of this attack came to Iran from Pakistan."
"The Pakistani official assured Tehran that his country would take all measures to secure its border with Iran," English-language Press TV added.
Iran urges Pakistan action after attack
Bhushan
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 1,319
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Bombings in Iran
Dawn Editorial
Monday, 19 Oct, 2009
Two attacks, including a suicide bombing, in Irans volatile Sistan-Baluchistan province on Sunday have killed over 30 people, including senior officials of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. Suspicion has immediately fallen on Jundullah, though Iranian officials have also accused the US of instigating the bombings, a claim denied by the Americans.
In the murky world of militancy in the Baloch-dominated areas along the Pak-Afghan-Iran border very little is known for certain. Jundullah argues that it is fighting for the rights of the Baloch people; however, in Shia-dominated Iran, an armed Sunni group automatically raises suspicions of sectarian motivations. Jundullah has been linked to, variously, Lashkar-i-Jhangvi, South Waziristan and even Al Qaeda claims which have been buttressed since the introduction of suicide bombings in Iran by Jundullah last December. Add to this the decades-old animosity between the US and Iran and the American presence in Afghanistan, and an even murkier picture emerges in which Jundullah may be using a series of shifting, tactical alliances with regional players to further its own agenda.
On the Pakistani side, the government is keen to reduce the strains on Pak-Iran relations caused by Jundullah violence and it is not very difficult to understand why. A local, low-level insurgency is still continuing in Balochistan here, Pakistan is keen to get the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline started and Afghanistan remains volatile meaning that major security and economic interests of Pakistan may be at risk if the concerns of the Iranian establishment are not addressed. Eager to placate the Iranians, the Pakistani government even handed over a brother of the Jundullah leader Abdulmalek Rigi and denies any support for the group. But perhaps the most combustible element in this shadowy war of sorts is the US connection.
Earlier this month, the first high-level meeting in three decades took place between Iranian and American officials to discuss US concerns about Irans nuclear programme. Meanwhile, the US is aware that Iran is influential in the non-Pashtun camp in Afghanistan and that Iran could even ramp up tactical support for the anti-American militants there to keep the US off balance. The bottom line: supporting Jundullah in any way is to play with fire, and all the players in the region must understand that such support can have dangerous, unpredictable consequences for regional stability.
Dawn Editorial
Monday, 19 Oct, 2009
Two attacks, including a suicide bombing, in Irans volatile Sistan-Baluchistan province on Sunday have killed over 30 people, including senior officials of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. Suspicion has immediately fallen on Jundullah, though Iranian officials have also accused the US of instigating the bombings, a claim denied by the Americans.
In the murky world of militancy in the Baloch-dominated areas along the Pak-Afghan-Iran border very little is known for certain. Jundullah argues that it is fighting for the rights of the Baloch people; however, in Shia-dominated Iran, an armed Sunni group automatically raises suspicions of sectarian motivations. Jundullah has been linked to, variously, Lashkar-i-Jhangvi, South Waziristan and even Al Qaeda claims which have been buttressed since the introduction of suicide bombings in Iran by Jundullah last December. Add to this the decades-old animosity between the US and Iran and the American presence in Afghanistan, and an even murkier picture emerges in which Jundullah may be using a series of shifting, tactical alliances with regional players to further its own agenda.
On the Pakistani side, the government is keen to reduce the strains on Pak-Iran relations caused by Jundullah violence and it is not very difficult to understand why. A local, low-level insurgency is still continuing in Balochistan here, Pakistan is keen to get the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline started and Afghanistan remains volatile meaning that major security and economic interests of Pakistan may be at risk if the concerns of the Iranian establishment are not addressed. Eager to placate the Iranians, the Pakistani government even handed over a brother of the Jundullah leader Abdulmalek Rigi and denies any support for the group. But perhaps the most combustible element in this shadowy war of sorts is the US connection.
Earlier this month, the first high-level meeting in three decades took place between Iranian and American officials to discuss US concerns about Irans nuclear programme. Meanwhile, the US is aware that Iran is influential in the non-Pashtun camp in Afghanistan and that Iran could even ramp up tactical support for the anti-American militants there to keep the US off balance. The bottom line: supporting Jundullah in any way is to play with fire, and all the players in the region must understand that such support can have dangerous, unpredictable consequences for regional stability.
FireFighter
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2009
- Messages
- 961
- Reaction score
- 0
That's another lie. there was no such thing as "shia'' during the times of the khulafa rashideen. This Athna-Ashari shia idiology developed 7-8 hundred years ago and is a by product of the ruthlessly barbaric Safavid dynasty that forced the majority of sunni muslims of Persia to ithna Ashari version of Shiaism.
It's rather appalling that you're so openly justifying the actions of the Iranian regime that interfered and conspired against her neighboring countries, created upheval by supporting political militancies to coerce the naive folks into shiasm, and launched propaganda warfare to derail govn'ts. Is that how Islam is supposed to be spread?
Islam was spread through peaceful methods and sacrifices of the Sufiya in sub continent.
Not through violent revolutions.
Now this guy was an American? roflShias tried taking over the KabahThe guy was an american agent professing he was a shia. We've had so many guys thinking they were Mahdi; we wouldn't call them shias would we
care to explain the roits of the 80s then? were they americans as well? rofl
Iraq doesn't have majority Shia, but Bahrain does. Those countries are not democracies, never been such for hundreds of years, and the people dont aspire to follow the western democracy either.Bahrain has a majority Shia population; so does Iraq. If Pakistan as a sunni majority population can explain Zia's bigot tendencies to protect itself from Shia ideology; why cant the above mentioned states with majority Shia population protect itself from sunni ideology
Shia and Sunni communities lived there peacefully for centuries before the rise of violent shia revolution creating tensions and sectarianism.
Islam says that you don't go around creating revolutions in other countries whether they're governed by shia or sunni leadership so long as they're just and peaceful. Pakistan had many times appointed Shia leadership, in fact our current president is a shia (albeit with the lowest rating).
Last edited:
rajeev
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2009
- Messages
- 503
- Reaction score
- 0
For the same reason that Indian RAW is setting up blasts in Pakistan.
AZADPAKISTAN2009
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2009
- Messages
- 37,669
- Reaction score
- 68
- Country
- Location
This is clearly work of CIA
Iran closed in , ties with Pakistan with Gas pipleline
The region where the alleged culprits went in Iran lies close to borders where theer are also US CIA operatives.
The mission would have probbly channeled $ to some local groups
in Iran so that they can do something like this to disrupt the cooperation between Pakistan and Iran
Becasue CIA does not wants Iran to have money. Becasue they want to proof that Iran is a failed state but reality is if it was not for the sanctions Iran would be one of top nations in world.
Hopefully this issue can resolve itself - as Iran + Pakistan is future
Iran closed in , ties with Pakistan with Gas pipleline
The region where the alleged culprits went in Iran lies close to borders where theer are also US CIA operatives.
The mission would have probbly channeled $ to some local groups
in Iran so that they can do something like this to disrupt the cooperation between Pakistan and Iran
Becasue CIA does not wants Iran to have money. Becasue they want to proof that Iran is a failed state but reality is if it was not for the sanctions Iran would be one of top nations in world.
Hopefully this issue can resolve itself - as Iran + Pakistan is future
Cheeta
FULL MEMBER
New Recruit
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2008
- Messages
- 78
- Reaction score
- 0
What th hell is this!!! .After india,afghansitan now Iran starts blame game without any concrete evidence.Thanks God there is Arabian sea in south of Pakistan....
How is it possible that The United States sets its pot in the hills and there be not flames on all sides to maintain it hot.
It is the characteristic of irregular war machinery that there often disturbances occur in the areas where that exists. Their presence is revealed by their actions just like a child that can not sit quiet and touches and drags objects around. Only peace prevails in the north where though a sleeping volcano exists in Sinkiang but seems delayed being the current disturbance more severe. The United States has announced its force in Afghanistan to be two fold so how will not also the resistance movement increase there. These guerrillas are getting more severe and powerful day by day as The United States is giving them opportunity to spread out and increase their number making them win more fame opposing three super powers U.S, Britain and France at a time.
There is calmness in North and North - East because Russia does not have for the time as ambitious leaders as before otherwise, to avenge the enmity of the days of Communism God has brought its enemies to doorstep.
Bhushan
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 1,319
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Interesting To Read...
Who's behind Pak-Iran Tension?
Dr Shahid Qureshi, UK
Saturday February 21 2009
There was no justification of attack on Pakistan embassy in Tehran and burning of Pakistani flag by some Iranian thugs and enemies of friendship between the two countries in front of police. There is no doubt that Shia-Sunni clashes in tribal areas of Pakistan are work of enemies of Pakistan . It is an internal matter no one should take sides and get into the trap of Iranian Shia Left and Pakistani stooges. Unfortunately if Iran has foreign agents in hundreds current numbers in Pakistan might be in thousands. Pakistan has its own problems and so is Iran. Pakistanis have always been tolerant and had inclusive approach never put religious beliefs in choosing its politicians.
According to news reports on 18th February 2009, "protesting against Shia-Sunni clashes of Parachinar, hundred or so Iranians attacked Pakistan Embassy in front of the security services and police. They held placards saying "Death to Wahabies", "Death to Taliban", "Death to Yazidyaat", "Death to America " "Death to American allies", etc.
This development is rattling some Sunni Arab governments, but for Washington , it could be a chance to build bridges with the region's Shiites, especially in Iran ".
Those who have been shouting anti-Taliban slogans in Iran and burning Pakistan flag must know that it was half Iranian Shia, Benzair Bhutto who supported, nurtured and created Taliban with the support of her foreign masters. Benazir’s minister Nasser Ullah Babur use to call Taliban 'my boys’. She apologized for creating and supporting Taliban at London School of Economics in front of large a gathering in May 2007. Religion in politics does not matter in Pakistan. Iran should be careful with its Shia Left and Right!
Pakistan's Shias are very well integrated with full liberty to practice their faith in harmony with the majority Sunni population. There are approximately 14000 registered Sunni and 380 Shia madrassas in Pakistan , which are functioning peacefully according to the Ministry of Religious Affairs.
ZA Bhutto was Shia introduced in politics by Skandar Mirz (who was from the line of traitor Mir Jafar) a staunch Shia currently buried in Mashhad – Iran. His Iranian wife Naheed Skindar Mirza was wife of Iranian Military Attaché in Islamabad whom SM started an affair before her divorce. She was instrumental in 2nd Marriage of Zulifqar Ali Bhutto with Nusrat Isphani mother of Benazir.
Benazir Bhutto was married by a Shia Imam to Asif Zardari but people of Pakistan elected Ms Bhutto and her father prime minister of Pakistan twice and her husband President. Third re-launching of Benazir Bhutto (and now Zardari) had a Shia dimension too? The Americanized Shia President Zardari is behaving and dressing like Iranian leaders? Benazir and Zardari’s links with Zionist lobby and complete reliance on foreign actors, Benazir Bhutto’s murder investigation by UN is a clear sign of mistrust on Pakistani institutions?
PPP was formed in the house of a Shia, Dr Mubshar Hassan, Bhutto’s finance minister according to reports. MQM also formed and overly represented in leadership by the mostly leftist Shias like John Elia, Raees Emrovhee, Shanshaha Hussain, Abbas Kumeli, Haider Abbas Rizivi and many others. Both the above parties are in complete patronage of India and US! Senator Mushahid Husain the brain of former ruling party PMLQ, Faisal Salah Hayat former interior minister, SM Zafar former law minister, lawyer Naeem Bukhari (reportedly used by Gen Mushraf to sack CJP Iftikhar Chaudhry), Dr Shireen Mazari, spokesperson of Imran Khan’s PTI, Prof Mehdi Hassan, Naseem Zahra, Hasan Askri Rizvi also come from Shia background.
Does Sunnis in Iran have same high positions, liberties, and freedoms as Shias in Pakistan ? For example many known and reported Shias of Pakistan are in high political and government positions doing their jobs without any problems. President Asif Zardari, Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gillani, Information Minster Sherry Rehman, Governor State Bank Saleem Raza, Secretary Defence Athar Ali, DG ISPR Maj Gen Athar Abbas brother of renowned journalists Azhar Abbas (Former GEO TV- DAWN TV), Mazhar Abbas (AFP), and Zafar Abbas (BBC). Former Pakistan ’s ambassador to US Abida Hussain her daughter newly elected Senator Kalsum Imam, Senator Faisal Raza Abidi, Faisal Sabzwari, Sind Chief Minister, deputy speaker Sind Assembly Shela Raza PPP and many others. So when, 'Khurshid Kasuri former Foreign Minister said to the Iranian Foreign Minister, "Pakistani Shias are not like Sunnis in Iran". He meant the above?
Since 2001, US policy is quite focused on Shias and Sunnis. On the one hand US siding with Shias in Iraq and Afghanistan against Sunnis but on the other hand supporting Sunnis in Middle East against Shia Hezbollah and Syria. Interestingly the wizard of the US policy on Shias and Sunnis is Vali Nasar son of Husain Nasr who was close to Shah of Iran. He is Professor at the US Naval Postgraduate School, an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. He tells people what they want to hear not what they should know!
Vali Nasr wrote in Foreign Affairs, July/August 2006, 'When the Shiites Rise’, "By toppling Saddam Hussein, the Bush administration has liberated and empowered Iraq's Shiite majority and has helped launch a broad Shiite revival that will upset the sectarian balance in Iraq and the Middle East for years to come. This development is rattling some Sunni Arab governments, but for Washington , it could be a chance to build bridges with the region's Shiites, especially in Iran ".
The great game of weakening Pakistan was going on for few years but now it has taken pace and no one seems to be bothered? Main features of the game are (1) Humiliation of Pakistan armed forces, (2) Taking over nuclear assets (3) Installing minority group people in powerful positions, which Zardari is already doing. (4) Use minority groups as collaborators. It did not fully work in Iraq but did bring chaos and destruction.
Zafar Hashmi in an article published on 11th January 2005 titled, 'The Shia Strategy in Iraq and Pakistan ’ wrote, "The two most repressive governments from the Shia point of view i.e. the government of Taleban and the regime of Saddam Hussein have disappeared. He wrote, 'The only way to prevent suicide bombings is through intelligence gathering of the enemy or in other words we have to infiltrate SSP and keep an eye on their activities. If some of our brothers join and infiltrated SSP or LJ then we can keep track of their activities and plans. Any intelligence that we gather on SSP or LJ can be simply passed to the Pakistani security agencies who are closely working with the Americans. In this way we neither have to kill, attack, injure, or hurt anybody. All we are doing is passing the information and the rest is done by the agencies themselves.
Its about time we drop the slogan of 'Death to America ' once and for all. We haven't achieved anything through such hollow slogans. We should stop living in this Utopia and face the reality. Its time we close the foreign front against America and concentrate on the local enemy whose sole aim is the destruction of the Shias in Pakistan . MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "www.iranian.com" claiming to be "http://www.iranian.com/Opinion/2005/January/Shia/index.html"
Professor Vali Nasr, while addressing at a program on 'America and Islam after Bush’, organised by The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life on December 8, 2008 said, ' Post-Saddam Iraq is the first Shia Arab state in history. That represents a major turning of the tide. What the U.S. did in Iraq was to showed a path to empowerment for the Shia, first through regime change and secondly through elections".
The News reported on 28th July 2008, that (mostly Shia), "The Hazaras in Quetta have been targeted repeatedly in the past. They suffered casualties which have been sectarian and ethnic biased". It is reported that the Americans are using Shia Hazars as interpreters in Afghanistan against Taliban and that could have led to attacks on them.
The use of Shias as collaborators is nothing new in the history. Both Mir Sadaiq who betrayed Tipu Sultan and Mir Jafar, who betrayed Sirajudullah in the Battle of Plassy in Bengal , supported and collaborated with British invaders were Shias. Fall of Bengal was the key to the 200 years British rule in India ? Historically, "Vengeful Shiites volunteered help to the Mongols in Mosul and other places along their march. The caliph’s vizier, or chief minister, was himself a Shiite of uncertain loyalty. Islamic opinion afterward held that the vizier, al-Alkamzi, vilely betrayed the caliph and conspired with the Mongols; an exhortation in Muslim school books used to say, "Let him be cursed of God who curses not al-Alkamzi." As fighting began, Hulagu, acknowledging the importance of Shiite support, prudently posted guard detachments of a hundred Mongol horsemen at the most sacred Shiite shrines in Najef and Karbala wrote Ian Frazier April 25, 2005 in The New Yorker.
" Iran may be bombastic but Pakistan has the Bomb", wrote Douglas Bloomfield in The Jerusalem Post on 3rd September 2008, " Iran may boast of great strides in its pursuit of nuclear, missile and satellite technology, but analysts say its progress is no match for its overblown rhetoric. But Pakistan doesn't need to boast. It already has a stockpile estimated at 60 or more nuclear warheads and North Korean ballistic missiles and US-made F-16s to deliver them."
No country should take sides on the basis of religious beliefs because Shias and Sunnis co-existed for hundred of years all required is to save themselves from abuse and keep their house in order. No doubt there would be minor religious tensions but internationalising them is like asking for trouble. What is happening in Kuram Agency now or in the past, Iranians have no control over it and they have their own big problems too. When tensions between Catholics and Protestants were at the height in Northern Ireland , Britain did not ask Italian Catholic Pope to intervene or sign an international Catholic - Protestant peace deal. We never saw any protest outside British Embassy in Vatican ( Rome ) when Catholics and Protestant riots broke out in Northern Ireland.
Who's behind Pak-Iran Tension?
Dr Shahid Qureshi, UK
Saturday February 21 2009
There was no justification of attack on Pakistan embassy in Tehran and burning of Pakistani flag by some Iranian thugs and enemies of friendship between the two countries in front of police. There is no doubt that Shia-Sunni clashes in tribal areas of Pakistan are work of enemies of Pakistan . It is an internal matter no one should take sides and get into the trap of Iranian Shia Left and Pakistani stooges. Unfortunately if Iran has foreign agents in hundreds current numbers in Pakistan might be in thousands. Pakistan has its own problems and so is Iran. Pakistanis have always been tolerant and had inclusive approach never put religious beliefs in choosing its politicians.
According to news reports on 18th February 2009, "protesting against Shia-Sunni clashes of Parachinar, hundred or so Iranians attacked Pakistan Embassy in front of the security services and police. They held placards saying "Death to Wahabies", "Death to Taliban", "Death to Yazidyaat", "Death to America " "Death to American allies", etc.
This development is rattling some Sunni Arab governments, but for Washington , it could be a chance to build bridges with the region's Shiites, especially in Iran ".
Those who have been shouting anti-Taliban slogans in Iran and burning Pakistan flag must know that it was half Iranian Shia, Benzair Bhutto who supported, nurtured and created Taliban with the support of her foreign masters. Benazir’s minister Nasser Ullah Babur use to call Taliban 'my boys’. She apologized for creating and supporting Taliban at London School of Economics in front of large a gathering in May 2007. Religion in politics does not matter in Pakistan. Iran should be careful with its Shia Left and Right!
Pakistan's Shias are very well integrated with full liberty to practice their faith in harmony with the majority Sunni population. There are approximately 14000 registered Sunni and 380 Shia madrassas in Pakistan , which are functioning peacefully according to the Ministry of Religious Affairs.
ZA Bhutto was Shia introduced in politics by Skandar Mirz (who was from the line of traitor Mir Jafar) a staunch Shia currently buried in Mashhad – Iran. His Iranian wife Naheed Skindar Mirza was wife of Iranian Military Attaché in Islamabad whom SM started an affair before her divorce. She was instrumental in 2nd Marriage of Zulifqar Ali Bhutto with Nusrat Isphani mother of Benazir.
Benazir Bhutto was married by a Shia Imam to Asif Zardari but people of Pakistan elected Ms Bhutto and her father prime minister of Pakistan twice and her husband President. Third re-launching of Benazir Bhutto (and now Zardari) had a Shia dimension too? The Americanized Shia President Zardari is behaving and dressing like Iranian leaders? Benazir and Zardari’s links with Zionist lobby and complete reliance on foreign actors, Benazir Bhutto’s murder investigation by UN is a clear sign of mistrust on Pakistani institutions?
PPP was formed in the house of a Shia, Dr Mubshar Hassan, Bhutto’s finance minister according to reports. MQM also formed and overly represented in leadership by the mostly leftist Shias like John Elia, Raees Emrovhee, Shanshaha Hussain, Abbas Kumeli, Haider Abbas Rizivi and many others. Both the above parties are in complete patronage of India and US! Senator Mushahid Husain the brain of former ruling party PMLQ, Faisal Salah Hayat former interior minister, SM Zafar former law minister, lawyer Naeem Bukhari (reportedly used by Gen Mushraf to sack CJP Iftikhar Chaudhry), Dr Shireen Mazari, spokesperson of Imran Khan’s PTI, Prof Mehdi Hassan, Naseem Zahra, Hasan Askri Rizvi also come from Shia background.
Does Sunnis in Iran have same high positions, liberties, and freedoms as Shias in Pakistan ? For example many known and reported Shias of Pakistan are in high political and government positions doing their jobs without any problems. President Asif Zardari, Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gillani, Information Minster Sherry Rehman, Governor State Bank Saleem Raza, Secretary Defence Athar Ali, DG ISPR Maj Gen Athar Abbas brother of renowned journalists Azhar Abbas (Former GEO TV- DAWN TV), Mazhar Abbas (AFP), and Zafar Abbas (BBC). Former Pakistan ’s ambassador to US Abida Hussain her daughter newly elected Senator Kalsum Imam, Senator Faisal Raza Abidi, Faisal Sabzwari, Sind Chief Minister, deputy speaker Sind Assembly Shela Raza PPP and many others. So when, 'Khurshid Kasuri former Foreign Minister said to the Iranian Foreign Minister, "Pakistani Shias are not like Sunnis in Iran". He meant the above?
Since 2001, US policy is quite focused on Shias and Sunnis. On the one hand US siding with Shias in Iraq and Afghanistan against Sunnis but on the other hand supporting Sunnis in Middle East against Shia Hezbollah and Syria. Interestingly the wizard of the US policy on Shias and Sunnis is Vali Nasar son of Husain Nasr who was close to Shah of Iran. He is Professor at the US Naval Postgraduate School, an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. He tells people what they want to hear not what they should know!
Vali Nasr wrote in Foreign Affairs, July/August 2006, 'When the Shiites Rise’, "By toppling Saddam Hussein, the Bush administration has liberated and empowered Iraq's Shiite majority and has helped launch a broad Shiite revival that will upset the sectarian balance in Iraq and the Middle East for years to come. This development is rattling some Sunni Arab governments, but for Washington , it could be a chance to build bridges with the region's Shiites, especially in Iran ".
The great game of weakening Pakistan was going on for few years but now it has taken pace and no one seems to be bothered? Main features of the game are (1) Humiliation of Pakistan armed forces, (2) Taking over nuclear assets (3) Installing minority group people in powerful positions, which Zardari is already doing. (4) Use minority groups as collaborators. It did not fully work in Iraq but did bring chaos and destruction.
Zafar Hashmi in an article published on 11th January 2005 titled, 'The Shia Strategy in Iraq and Pakistan ’ wrote, "The two most repressive governments from the Shia point of view i.e. the government of Taleban and the regime of Saddam Hussein have disappeared. He wrote, 'The only way to prevent suicide bombings is through intelligence gathering of the enemy or in other words we have to infiltrate SSP and keep an eye on their activities. If some of our brothers join and infiltrated SSP or LJ then we can keep track of their activities and plans. Any intelligence that we gather on SSP or LJ can be simply passed to the Pakistani security agencies who are closely working with the Americans. In this way we neither have to kill, attack, injure, or hurt anybody. All we are doing is passing the information and the rest is done by the agencies themselves.
Its about time we drop the slogan of 'Death to America ' once and for all. We haven't achieved anything through such hollow slogans. We should stop living in this Utopia and face the reality. Its time we close the foreign front against America and concentrate on the local enemy whose sole aim is the destruction of the Shias in Pakistan . MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "www.iranian.com" claiming to be "http://www.iranian.com/Opinion/2005/January/Shia/index.html"
Professor Vali Nasr, while addressing at a program on 'America and Islam after Bush’, organised by The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life on December 8, 2008 said, ' Post-Saddam Iraq is the first Shia Arab state in history. That represents a major turning of the tide. What the U.S. did in Iraq was to showed a path to empowerment for the Shia, first through regime change and secondly through elections".
The News reported on 28th July 2008, that (mostly Shia), "The Hazaras in Quetta have been targeted repeatedly in the past. They suffered casualties which have been sectarian and ethnic biased". It is reported that the Americans are using Shia Hazars as interpreters in Afghanistan against Taliban and that could have led to attacks on them.
The use of Shias as collaborators is nothing new in the history. Both Mir Sadaiq who betrayed Tipu Sultan and Mir Jafar, who betrayed Sirajudullah in the Battle of Plassy in Bengal , supported and collaborated with British invaders were Shias. Fall of Bengal was the key to the 200 years British rule in India ? Historically, "Vengeful Shiites volunteered help to the Mongols in Mosul and other places along their march. The caliph’s vizier, or chief minister, was himself a Shiite of uncertain loyalty. Islamic opinion afterward held that the vizier, al-Alkamzi, vilely betrayed the caliph and conspired with the Mongols; an exhortation in Muslim school books used to say, "Let him be cursed of God who curses not al-Alkamzi." As fighting began, Hulagu, acknowledging the importance of Shiite support, prudently posted guard detachments of a hundred Mongol horsemen at the most sacred Shiite shrines in Najef and Karbala wrote Ian Frazier April 25, 2005 in The New Yorker.
" Iran may be bombastic but Pakistan has the Bomb", wrote Douglas Bloomfield in The Jerusalem Post on 3rd September 2008, " Iran may boast of great strides in its pursuit of nuclear, missile and satellite technology, but analysts say its progress is no match for its overblown rhetoric. But Pakistan doesn't need to boast. It already has a stockpile estimated at 60 or more nuclear warheads and North Korean ballistic missiles and US-made F-16s to deliver them."
No country should take sides on the basis of religious beliefs because Shias and Sunnis co-existed for hundred of years all required is to save themselves from abuse and keep their house in order. No doubt there would be minor religious tensions but internationalising them is like asking for trouble. What is happening in Kuram Agency now or in the past, Iranians have no control over it and they have their own big problems too. When tensions between Catholics and Protestants were at the height in Northern Ireland , Britain did not ask Italian Catholic Pope to intervene or sign an international Catholic - Protestant peace deal. We never saw any protest outside British Embassy in Vatican ( Rome ) when Catholics and Protestant riots broke out in Northern Ireland.
