Thanks for putting your time in thinking and responding unlike some other members.
No, the murderer of Taseer was a zealot. Mumtaz Qadri wasn't a "religious" person by any stretch of the imagination, he had a girlfriend & had love affairs before marriage with a girl in Karachi. He was a crazed fanatic. The most powerful & respected Barelvi scholars amongst all Muslims such as Dr Tahir ul-Qadri and Ghamidi have publicly condemned his murder.
That is an excellent point. So Qadri was a zealot, can we apply the same logic to other zealots and extremists that "claim" to be Deobandi? Espicially since the same Deoband school has condemened their actions wether it be Taliban or suicide bombings. Lets not have double standards.
Can you name me some groups of militant Shia & Barelvi groups in Pakistan? It's not good to hold out a whole community responsible for the actions of a zealot. Uneducated zealots will support murderers like Qadri, who kill innocent people in the name of "protecting the Prophet(S)'s honor." Extreme religious fervor is completely against the ideology of Islam, & most Barelvis still maintain this principle. Don't take an isolated incident & make it something it's not. You seem to be forgetting that since the inception of Pakistan; Shias, Ismailis, Parsis, Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, Ahmedis & other non-Muslims have lived very peacefully alongside the majority Barelvi Muslims since 1947. Some Barelvis are fanatics in their love of the Prophet(S), but they are not representative of the Barelvi ideology found in Pakistan. So most of your post is pure generalization based on one/a few incidents.
Sipah-e-Muhammad Pakistan and Tehrik-e-Jafria that have a shia base of support and Sunni Thereek that has a Barelvi base.
Personally, I have not balmed Barelvi school of thought or Shias for violence. I have time and again said that blaming a school of thought for terrorism and suicide bombings as such is actually wrong as these school of thoughts across the board do not supporting killing of innocent people muslim or non-muslim. Its only a militant polical religous ideology that radicalises a particular group espicially when the establishment supports the radicalising for its nefarious purposes.
There has been no involvement ever proven of the alleged hand of the Pakistani government or intelligence in Afghanistan. Don't go by speculation posted by western journalists in their articles, no official of any high stature from Pakistan or anywhere in the world has said the Pakistani government supports the Taliban in any way. Every official has said Pakistan has done a lot against the Taliban, & it needs to do more. There is absolutely no proof indicting Pakistan in supporting the Taliban, besides speculations in reports by some journalists.
I am talking about since the 80s and 90s, not just now. And I think the idea that most think about Afghan Taliban good and Pakistani Taliban bad is symptomatic of a problem that affects even policy establishment in Pakistan.
The Kashmir movement only became militant in the 1990's, because of all the violence perpetrated by the Indian forces. Kashmir does not belong to India, it is disputed territory.
The indigenous Kashmir movement was secular in character. There was no Jihad and Islam when the JKLF was fighting agains teh army. It was mainly Pakistani based groups like LeT, Hizb e.t.c that moved the secular sepratist agenda to an Islamic Jihad one and the calls for Ghazwa Hind
Let's leave assumptions out of this, if I can recall correctly, there has been no fatwa declared because Kashmiris are genuinely fighting for their freedom, while the Indian Army has been committing terrorism against them since 1947, & it was only in the past 20 years that the movement became militant. India should stop committing terrorism before asking others to stop fighting for survival, calling it "terrorism".
Not sure what you mean assumptions. Please check out these links.
Deoband fatwa ruffles feathers of Kashmiri separatists This includes Grand Mufti of Kashmir as well.
Here is Maududi's son saying that his father had opposed the declaration of Jihad in Kashmir
There Can be No Jihad in Kashmir
And also what former AJK PM said about the so called Jihad in Kashmir. Not an Islamic scholar ofcourse but a view of a pro-Pakistan Kashmiri on the Pakistani side of the LoC
Jihad in Kashmir is terrorism, says Sardar Qayyum
You find me one person from the Ahle-Hadees, Barelvi, Deobandi ulema that explicitly says the Kashmiris are committing terrorism against the Indian Army. Yes, they say terrorism is to be condemned, and that is what all Muslims believe. So the Indian Army should stop it.
You are confuding the groups like LeT, Hizb and other as local Kashmiris. Most of these are Punjabis or Kashmiris on the Pakistani side infiltrating into India. They avoid face to face combat with Army and instead attack informers, their families, policemen and their families, political party workers like NC workers and even pro-independant Kashmiris like Mirwariz Umar Farooq's father and Sajjad Lone's father.
No one is against the legitmate aspirations of the Kashmiri people and their fight against HR violations. Muslims and Deoband in particular and Indians in general highlight and keep in focus the HR violations in Kashmir valley much more than what is done even in Pakistan because they are more targeted and accurate.
Pakistan used to be involved in Kashmir, it is not involved in Kashmir anymore. Kashmir is not India's land, it it disputed land that Pakistan considers it's own, and Pakistan will do everything to help Kashmiris fight terrorism from the Indian occupied forces. Zakir Naik said Pakistan should never have been created because the 2-nation theory was unjustified, & people like him are Indian sellouts. It was these people that spoke against the very existence of Pakistan. Anyways, these guys are no experts in politics, they have no right to talk about things they have no clue about. They are not taking any religious stand, they have no knowledge on these issues, so it's better they keep quiet on issues that are not their expertise, & things they have no clue about. It is their personal opinion without any religious context in it, deprived of any sense of reality from the situation. Btw, Kashmir is not a covert war, it has been pretty obvious since 1947 what the Indian Army has done in Kashmir, & what it continues to do today with its 800,000 Army personnel there. That case is specific about a covert war, & there was Pakistani involvement in Kashmir in the past, it isn't involved there anymore.
The large number of Kashmir "Jihad" gatherings that have started in the past two years actually indicate the opposite. The Establishment is trying its best to funnel the extremists into Kashmir. They still think they can control TTP and the likes by potraying India as the evil one and hoodwink them to fight the Indian army rather than implement their Taliban agenda in Pakistan.
A covert war is one that is fought without declaring a full scale war. And this is what Pakistan is doing. Remember the Kargil War, there was no declaration of war then either. In any case, if Pakistan wants to get Kashmir through war, please do so, but dont' call it Jihad. That is my main point.
These people clearly have no expertise in politics, yet want to speak about these things. People like Zakir Naik are in no position to comment on these issues. They are clearly sell-outs that do not explicitly condemn Hindutva terrorism, or the terrorism of the Indian state against their own people. They do not wish well for Muslims, especially since most of the "ideological funding" for the Indian Mujahideen & groups like SIMI in the past came from these Ulemas, & it was only recently that they started condemning these attacks, for their own survival in India, not because of any good for Indian Muslims.
There you go on a tangent again. The Jamiat Ulema -i- Hind explicitly said that religion has nothing to do with terrorism and that they will not use the term Hindu terrorism when describing terrorism committed by Hindu extremists. But that doesn't mean they have taken it up and condemened it.
And "ideological funding" to SIMI? Do you know what was SIMI core goal. Do you know the differnece between a school of thought like Deobanid/Barelvi/Salafi and a political religious ideology like political Islam or Zionism or Hindutva?
Political religious ideology groups include mainly the Jamaat Islami in the subcontinent. And under Qazi Hussain Ahmed it has become a militant political religious organisation used as a tool by intelligence establishment in Pakistan.
SIMI has a political religious ideology that is roundly rejected by almost every school of thought including Deoband. SIMI used to denounce religious leaders in India and would link up with Jamaat ISlami Pakistan and play speeches of Qazi Hussain Ahmed and other so called Jihadi group leaders in their meetings. The Babri Masjid demolition and its aftermath helped in radicalising young muslims and it recevied support from radicalised young muslims from Bombay and later Gujarat after the riots and not because of some theological basis. Most of these memebrs were just hardly practicing muslims but joined this group because of the circumstances of that point in time.
And the ISI ever ready to take advantage to whip up instability in India even at the cost of muslims there readily provided support to the breakaway factions who wanted to indulge in bomb attacks and violence hoping to create cycles of violence between the two communities. There are unfortunately some Pakistanis on this very forum that look forward to such an eventuality with glee and are probably disappointed it has not happened yet.
But thanks to the Indian Muslim scholars, SIMI has been unable to garner support and its activities has resulted in dwindiling support later on. So much so that Safdar Nagori has contemplated of leaving SIMI himself. Read the whole article
Jihad does not sell anymore: SIMI chief - Mumbai - DNA
MUMBAI: Jihadis are making little headway in garnering support for their cause among Muslims in the Indian mainstream. And the chief of the rump Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI), Safdar Nagouri, is so disheartened by the lack of response that he recently startled police interrogators by telling them he had become disillusioned with the concept of jihad. He added that since the latter part of 2007 he had even been thinking of deserting SIMI.
So bottom line, stop blaming school of thoughts for terrorism in Pakistan and focus on the root cause of militant political religious ideology particularly by groups like LeT, Hizb, Taliban of all varieties. Even Jamaat Islami was not as militant during Maududi's time as it was under Qazi Hussain Ahmed where it acted as another channel for personnel and funds for Afghan and later Kashmir war for the intelligence establishment.
