:::: MENU ::::

The Brouhaha over Blackwater continues

Blackwater hereSunday’s Dawn has a report on the presence of Blackwater in Pakistan > there seems to be an apparent blanket of denial of their presence but tell tale signs continue to emerge that something is definitely afoot

Questions that must be asked of ourselves, (a) Can we trust our present leadership to tell us the whole truth, with honesty? (b) Can we trust America to NOT do such a thing and we believe the denial as per the US Ambassador, a representative of a country whose 233 year history is full of military operations, even if we were to, for a moment ignore this last decade of destruction and carnage?

Seriously, I’m not trumpeting an Anti-US paranoia, but answers to these questions are self explanatory to the rest of the world [non-Americans]. More importantly in this day and age of information war-fare, when a Minister comes on record to vehemently deny a story, following closely in the footsteps of Anne Patterson, when she tried to casually shrug aside this rumor mongering “I think this recent brouhaha over the embassy expansion has been difficult to beat back… just seems to be taken over by conspiracy theories” – Such idiotic statement emerging after reports that out of the proposed $1.8 billion US aid to Pakistan (2008-9), one billion dollars have been earmarked for the proposed extension of the US embassy. trusting this lethal duo, I’m more inclined to believe that there is something more than what meets the eye

On the flip side, America needs a dominant presence underneath China it also positions them to monitor Pakistan and be prepared god-forbid Indo-Pak nuclear tensions go out of control. We all know that Marines in military uniforms roaming the streets of Pakistan are a magnet for attacks [a grim reality in Iraq], but a rouge force ie. Blackwater-Xe, can potentially move far more freely and with greater impunity in the streets of Islamabad and its surrounding areas [also seen to Iraq] helping protect America’s interest from the ‘suicidal ghost’

All these American privileges come more-or-less because our esteemed President and his sidekick [Rehman Malik] are too sold out, literally everything in Pakistan is up for sale, lock, stock and barrel and the most valuable and probably the most frequently traded commodity in their portfolio is Pakistan’s soul and its self respect which I am sure in the hands of these corrupt leaders is up for sale to the highest bidder, be it America, India or even Israel, if the price is right — SOLD


  • Dear Jawwad Sahab,

    The above books are written and compiled by Ehsan Illahi Zaheer and these are taught in Medina University – Saudi Arabia for References. So Ehsan Illahi Zahir wasn't as worthless as you have declared him above.

  • dr jawwad khan

    i didn't say that he is worthless.i said the bomb made him a worthless BBQ. :)))

    suuni mindset is the deny anything which is presented by shia shia scholars.

    like saying that yazeed was a respectable man.

    the karbala massacre was a political war. not acknolodging the truths and facts of war of camels and the factors behind it….etc etc

  • as you have noticed that i hate shias more than any one else. i changed myself a liitle bit and came out from traditional sunni mindset.suuni mindset is the deny anything which is presented by shia shia scholars. like saying that yazeed was a respectable man. the karbala massacre was a political war. not acknolodging the truths and facts of war of camels and the factors behind it….etc etc [dr jawwad khan]

    ——————–

    Dear Jawwad Sahab,

    What about these thoughts of yours? Aren't these Typical Traditional Sunni Thoughts and Mindset??? Shall we say you were in the below metioned threads

    Public flogging of a woman in SWAT – is this the Islamic way of handing out justice? Posted by Teeth MaestroApril 3, 2009

    http://teeth.com.pk/blog/2009/04/03/women-being-p

    Swat Flogging and PTI’s Stand Posted by Dr Arif AlviApril 6, 2009

    http://teeth.com.pk/blog/2009/04/06/swat-flogging

    Shaheed or Halak ? – Ghazi Abdul Rashid | Teeth Maestro

    http://teeth.com.pk/blog/2007/07/12/shaheed-or-ha

  • the karbala massacre was a political war. not acknolodging the truths and facts of war of camels and the factors behind it….etc etc [dr jawwad khan]

    =========================

    Dear Jawwad Sahab,

    I also believe in History and incidents like Camel, Siffin, Neherwan and Karbala but with open eyes and carefully vetting the so-called Islamic History which as per Islamic Scholars:

    How Islamic History was compiled:

    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 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 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]

    Example is as under:

    “QUOTE”

    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.]

  • dr jawwad khan

    and irony is that moulana modudi form those opinions on which you call him a pervert(astaghfirullah) are taken mostly from tareekh e tabari and bidaya wa alnihaya along with other distinguished historians.

    especially any one who read the "bidaya wa alnihaya" and give some value to the opinion of hafiz ibn e kathir(reh aleh) shall never criticise molana syed abul ala modudi(reh ale) on these issues(taking side of shia or blasphemy)

  • especially any one who read the “bidaya wa alnihaya” and give some value to the opinion of hafiz ibn e kathir(reh aleh) shall never criticise molana syed abul ala modudi(reh ale) on these issues(taking side of shia or blasphemy) [Dr Jawwad Khan]

    the karbala massacre was a political war. not acknolodging the truths and facts of war of camels and the factors behind it….etc etc [dr jawwad khan]

    ===================

    Dear Jawwad Sahab,

    If you believe in Islamic History as it is written then read the whole Chapter of Al Bidaya Wal Nihaya [Allama Ibn Kathir, read the original Arabic Edition not the Translations] on Yazeed Bin Muawiya [May Allh have mercy on his soul].

    Ibn Kathir praised him for being head of Army which had fought Christians at Constantinople. It was Yazeed under whom following Companions of Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] took part in that battle.

    1 – Abu Ayub Ansari [May Allah be pleased with him], he passed away their and his funeral prayers [Namaz-e-Janaz] were lead by Yazeed.

    2 – Abdullah Ibn Umar [May Allah be pleased with him].

    3 – Abdullah Ibn Zubair [May Allah be pleased with him]

    4 – Hazrat Hussein Ibn Ali [May Allah be pleased with him]

    For Further Details read Sairul A'Iam an-Nubala [30 Volumes by Hafiz Zahbi pupil of Ibn Taimiya] and Al-'Awasim min al-Qawasim by Abu Bakr Ibn al-Arabi[not the Sufi but a Maliki Jurist and pupil of Imam Ghazali]

    DEFENCE AGAINST DISASTER AL-`AWASIM MIN AL-QAWASIM

    Determining The Position Of The. Companions After The Death Of The Prophet,. May Allah Bless Him And Grant Him Peace. AL-`AWASIM MIN AL-QAWASIM

    talk.islamicnetwork.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=403&d

  • especially any one who read the “bidaya wa alnihaya” and give some value to the opinion of hafiz ibn e kathir(reh aleh) shall never criticise molana syed abul ala modudi(reh ale) on these issues(taking side of shia or blasphemy) [Dr Jawwad Khan]

    ====================

    Dear Jawwad Sahab,

    There is book written “Khilafat wa Malookiyat Ki Tareekhi Aur Shariee Haisiyat [Authenticity and Relity of Caliphat and Kingdom by Mawdudui] by Hafiz Salahuddin Yousuf [Editor of Weekly Eitisaam, Lahore Pakistan , he is a Salafi Scholar and if you get that book then please note that in preface following Deobandi and even Barelvi Scholar praised the above book on the refutation ofr Mawdudi's Deviant and Blasphemic Beliefs regarding the Companions of Prophet Mohammad. You have already praised Deobandi Mullahs in one of your mail and following Mullahs [not ordinary Jahil Taliban] praised the book:

    1 – Mufti Muhammad Shafi Usmani [Deobandi]

    2 – Justice Taqi Usmani [Deobandi]

    3 – Maulana Ziauddin Islahi [Daar ul Musanifeen Azam Garh India]

    4 – Maulana Yousuf Ludhiyanvi [Binnori Town – Deobandi]

    5 – Maulana Ghulamullah Khan [Rawalpindi – Deobandi]

    6 – Dr Israr Ahmed [Former Deputy of Mawdudi]

    7 – Maulana Amee Ahsan Islahi [Former number 2 of Mawdudi]

    8 – Agha Shoorish Kashmiri [Noted Scholar and Journalist]

    9 – Maulana Manzoor Naimani [One of the founder of Jamat-e-Islami and Deobandi scholar and also refuted Mawdudi in his book on Islamic Revolution of Iran]

    10 – Safi ur Rahman Mubarakpuri [Author of Prophet Mohammad – PBUH's biography Ar Raheeq Al Makhtoom and he is an Indian Scholar and a Salafi]

    11 – Yousuf Saleem Chishti [Deobandi Sufi Scholar]

    12 – Maulana Abul Hasan Nadvi [Former Head of Darul Ulomm Deoband and Member Board of Medina University Saudi Arabia]

    Dear Jawwad Sahab,

    These are not some Deobandi Ulema:

    1 – Maulana Yousuf Ludhiyanvi – Binnori Town refuted Mawdudi.

    2 – Mawlana Yousuf Binnori – Founder of Binnori Town refuted Mawdudi

    3 – Mawlana Abdul Majid Daryabadi pupil of Ashraf Ali Thanwi refuted Mawdudi.

  • dr jawwad khan

    i have discussed these issues in detail. and i have already answered the objection numberwise.and i am not going to repeat myself again.take care

  • Pingback: Blackwater β€˜IN’ Pakistan – Rehman Malik, Patterson & Clinton all LIED to the People of Pakistan « Talkhaba()

  • Private US spy network still in Pakistan, Afghanistan: report

    Sunday, 16 May, 2010 http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-