27 replies to this topic

[Freeurmind]

I didnt know where to put this, so I chose here.

This video makes me really sad, how badly our shia brothers were treated :/



Just to make it more relevant to south asia
This hazara akhoond is taling about shias in qeutta and how iranian governments helps palestine and doesnt even speak out for the shias in quetta

[Shiabro]

What would you expect of Taliban? And not only the Hazara suffered but all Shia in Afghanistan suffered during Taliban reign, and all women and children suffered. While almost all presidents in Afghanistan were biased towards Hazara and Zahir Shah, the king of Afghanistan, discriminated Shia people and especially Hazara people, the Taliban left the Shia no breath, their Shrines were destroyed and all Shia and Hindu had to wear signs to be recognized(like Jews during Hitler).
One strange thing is, that initially the Hazara political leader of Hizb "Wahdat"(which represents a part of Hazara people), called Mazari, initially went to the Taliban in order to be part of their government. He was trapped though and killed by them.
The same Akhoond you show below, who attacks Shia scholars for being political, speaks nicely of Mazari in his speeches.

Edited by Shiabro, 28 May 2012 - 04:31 AM.

[HabibKarimi]

Salam. I am a Hazara. Yes I know that hazaras did suffer from prosecution because of their religious and racial differences from the other Afghans. E.g. 62% of them got wiped out during the Abdur rahman khan. But today, Hazaras are about 25% of Afghanistan, while shias about 30%. So Hazaras are the majority of shias in Afghanistan.

As for that akhond, well he is a person who wants to put disputes between shias and sunnis (this can be seen from his other videos). As his comments for the shias of Quetta, I believe that the shias of Quetta (hazaras) are not determined enought to do something themselves. Because there is like half a million hazaras in Pakistan. Yes, they can do alote, without the help of Iran. So I would think that the Hazaras should stand up themselves first, then maybe Iran would try to help. Remember that Iran did help the Hazaras in Afghanistan a whole lote during the civil war. At that time it was easy to help you see now it is hard. Iran can help palestine easily because no one would raise against it except America and Isreal. However if Iran helps the Hazaras in Pakistan, Every one except the shia would raise against them. So the sitiuation would not be just bad for Iran however it would be even worse for the Hazaras/shias in Quetta.

[Wahdat]

Shiabro, on 28 May 2012 - 04:08 AM, said:

One strange thing is, that initially the Hazara political leader of Hizb "Wahdat"(which represents a part of Hazara people), called Mazari, initially went to the Taliban in order to be part of their government. He was trapped though and killed by them.
The same Akhoond you show below, who attacks Shia scholars for being political, speaks nicely of Mazari in his speeches.

Mazari was, is, and will be the Leader of ALL Hazaras just like Sayid Hassan is the leader of ALL Lebanese Shia. Thats why his people carried his body from South of Afghanistan to North on their shoulders.
Secondly, Mazari did not want to join the Taliban. Thats another lie spread by the enemies of Hazaras (mostly the sellout Sayeeds) who have developed a culture of selling out from the time of Abdul Rahman to now. If Mazari tried to join the Talibs then Imam Hussien tried to join Yazid. Thats ridiculous.

Thirdly , why not speak nicely of Baba Mazari? Because he was the ONLY shia leader who did not join the Salafis? Show me one more Shia leading figure to have fought Salafis from day one. Can you?

Having been the subordinate of Salafis and spying on  your own Shias you lot (saddat) are beginning to sound like them. If Mazari wanted to join the Taliban then why was he the ONLY one fighting the Salafis for 4 years and all alone? Same thing with Sayid Hassan Nasrullah. He is the ONLY Arab resistance leader thats fighting Israel directly and yet Salafis shamelessly claim that he is an Israeli pawn.

HabibKarimi, on 28 May 2012 - 05:48 AM, said:

Because there is like half a million hazaras in Pakistan. Yes, they can do alote, without the help of Iran.

half a million Hazaras surrounded by some 35 million hostile Pashtuns. Its hard to do much but I do agree that they can do alot if they really willed. But from their exile 100 years ago until now they havent had much of a chance.

HabibKarimi, on 28 May 2012 - 05:48 AM, said:

Remember that Iran did help the Hazaras in Afghanistan a whole lote during the civil war.

Can you elaborate please

Edited by Wahdat, 28 May 2012 - 08:03 AM.

[Shiabro]

Wahdat, on 28 May 2012 - 07:42 AM, said:

Mazari was, is, and will be the Leader of ALL Hazaras. Thats why his body was carried on the shoulders of Hazaras from South of Afghanistan to North on the shoulders of Hazaras.
Secondly, Mazari did not want to join the Taliban. Thats another lie spread by the enemy of Hazaras (mostly the sellout Sayeeds) who have developed a culture of selling out from the time of Abdul Rahman to now. If Mazari tried to join the Talibs then Imam Hussien tried to join Yazid. Thats ridiculous.

Thirdly , why not speak nicely of Baba Mazari? Because he was the ONLY shia leader who did not join the Salafis? He should have been like that murtad Mohsini? or the killer Anwari who were like brothers with the Salafis? People like you disgust me!

Having been the subordinate of Salafis and spying on  your own Shias you lot are beginning to sound like them. If Mazari wanted to join the Taliban then why was he the ONLY one fighting the Salafis for 4 years and all alone? Same thing with Sayid Hassan Nasrullah. He is the ONLY Arab resistance leader thats fighting Israel directly and yet Salafis shamelessly claim that he is an Israeli pawn.


half a million Hazaras surrounded by some 35 million hostile Pashtuns. Its hard to do much but I do agree that they can do alot if they really willed. But from their exile 100 years ago until now they havent had much of a chance.


Can you elaborate please

Take a deep breath and reread my post. I've written that Hazaras were persecuted most amongst Shia but they haven't made it difficult, as it is no secret that Mazari went to Taliban in order to make a political deal with them(I know politics is dirty). How else was he caught? He was lured and then captured by the Taliban whereas all the others and even Sunni polticians knew how notorious the Taliban were and fled. He had the chance to flee as well. Instead he went straightly into their arms being welcomed by them.
And don't slander the Sadat. Allamah Sayed Balkhi remains the only one who rose against Zahir Shah and was killed for no other reason but for defending the impoverished and neglected Shia and Hazara people.
I don't see why a lot of Hazara always play the victim game in Afghanistan. This is a reason why they always lack behind in Afghanistan. They were not the only people suffering there. They sometimes even commited war crimes and at times even became communist betrayers.
In contrast to the Hizb Wahdat, Sayyed Hassan doesn't play the victim. He has a national unity approach, so don't compare Hizb Wahdat to Syed Hassan, because Sayed has majority of Lebanese behind him whereas Hizb Wahdat even fights his own Shia and even his own Hazara(who support a national unity movement with Ay. Kabuli and Ay. Mohsenni).

Edited by Shiabro, 28 May 2012 - 08:17 AM.

[Wahdat]

Shiabro, on 28 May 2012 - 08:10 AM, said:

Take a deep breath and reread my post. I've written that Hazaras were persecuted most amongst Shia but they haven't made it difficult, as it is no secret that Mazari went to Taliban in order to make a political deal with them(I know politics is dirty). How else was he caught? He was lured and then captured by the Taliban whereas all the others and even Sunni polticians knew how notorious the Taliban were and fled. He had the chance to flee as well. Instead he went straightly into their arms being welcomed by them.
And don't slander the Sadat. Allamah Sayed Balkhi remains the only one who rose against Zahir Shah and was killed for no other reason but for defending the impoverished and neglected Shia and Hazara people.

'Fleeing' or running away could only be a good action by the coward and in coward culture. Mazari, like all Sunni leaders and the sell out Sayid leaders, knew full well about the nature of the Taliban. Watch the following video where he talks about death and how much he desires to die among his own people and for his people because nothing else is dear to him. In the video he makes fun of those leaders who ran away and those that invited Mazari to run with them and people laugh. He was the first and only leader to have fought Wahabis since day 1

Quote

I don't see why a lot of Hazara always play the victim game in Afghanistan. This is a reason why they always lack behind in Afghanistan. They were not the only people suffering there. They sometimes even commited war crimes and at times even became communist betrayers.

When have you ever seen Hazaras playing the victim card? When? And in what area do they lag behind but economics? Thats because more than 60% were massacred or exiled, half of the South (their most fertile lands) were usurped and they were excluded from the state. Thats the reason for their economic poverty. And only for sell outs and cowards like you defending one's neighborhood equals to genocide. And only to liars and slanderers like you Sayids Hazaras, the only people in Afghanistan to have not signed a deal with Russians, become Communists. Lanat on the liars and slanderers.

Quote

In contrast to the Hizb Wahdat, Sayyed Hassan doesn't play the victim. He has a national unity approach, so don't compare Hizb Wahdat to Syed Hassan, because Sayed has majority of Lebanese behind him whereas Hizb Wahdat even fights his own Shia and even his own Hazara(who support a national unity movement with Ay. Kabuli and Ay. Mohsenni).

Those that play victim do not fight. Wahdat was the FIRST AND THE ONLY Afghan faction to have fought the Salafis since day one. His martyred body was carried on people's shoulders from South of Afghanistan to the North walking. And you say that people were not behind him? You compare him with that murtat Mohsini? You talk about national unity without realizing that Mazari was the ONLY leader working towards that end. Here is what he says on national unity.



Why do you lie and slander?

[HabibKarimi]

Shiabro, on 28 May 2012 - 08:10 AM, said:

I don't see why a lot of Hazara always play the victim game in Afghanistan. This is a reason why they always lack behind in Afghanistan. They were not the only people suffering there. They sometimes even commited war crimes and at times even became communist betrayers.

Are you alright bro? Have you heard of the Massacare of Abdur rahman khan? the massacare in Uruzgan? the Afshar massacre? The mout of 40 Girls? Did you know that before Ibrahim Gow Sawar, the hazaras were taxed not only on thier land, but also on their wheat, oil, members of their family etc. They were taxed almost on anything they had. Their lands were stolen. That was the reason, the let the Hazaras to poverty. It was Mazari who saved us. If he wasn't there, today the Hazaras would've been probably extinct.
Secondly today, that the situation of Afghanistan is better, go to the universities and observe. You will see that the top students in the colleges and universities are the Hazaras. You will see that in the Kankor exam, the Hazaras scoring the highest marks.

Wahdat, on 28 May 2012 - 07:42 AM, said:

Can you elaborate please

First of all Mazari's base was in Iran. That is where he started his mission from. During the civil war, there were arm helps from Iran to Hizb Wahdat. I tell you that if there was not the support of Iran to the Hazaras, then the situation of Hazaras would've been worse today.

[Shiabro]

HabibKarimi, on 29 May 2012 - 02:25 AM, said:

Are you alright bro? Have you heard of the Massacare of Abdur rahman khan? the massacare in Uruzgan? the Afshar massacre? The mout of 40 Girls? Did you know that before Ibrahim Gow Sawar, the hazaras were taxed not only on thier land, but also on their wheat, oil, members of their family etc. They were taxed almost on anything they had. Their lands were stolen. That was the reason, the let the Hazaras to poverty. It was Mazari who saved us. If he wasn't there, today the Hazaras would've been probably extinct.

You're right and I didn't deny it but today the Hazara have all the opportunities and they should make use of them instead of playing the victim card. Majority of Hazara do this anyways. The majority of Hawza of Mohseni consists of Hazara people(80% Hazara). But there are still Hazara people, mainly from Hizb Wahdat corner, slandering other Afghans, including Sadats, Pashtuns, Tajiks and whatever ethnicity exists in Afghanistan.

HabibKarimi, on 29 May 2012 - 02:25 AM, said:

It was Mazari who saved us. If he wasn't there, today the Hazaras would've been probably extinct.

I can't confirm or deny this. But I can tell you one thing. Mazari was far away from having no flaws like any politician in Afghanistan, including the other Shia ones, and one of his major mistakes was to go to the Wahabi Taliban in order to make a political deal. It was both a humane mistake as well as a political mistake. Political because he has underestimated the Wahabi Taliban and thought he could make some kind of a deal with them and humane mistake because he obviously wanted some governmental power.

HabibKarimi, on 29 May 2012 - 02:25 AM, said:

First of all Mazari's base was in Iran. That is where he started his mission from. During the civil war, there were arm helps from Iran to Hizb Wahdat. I tell you that if there was not the support of Iran to the Hazaras, then the situation of Hazaras would've been worse today.

And that's what Iran gets back in return:
http://www.hazarapeo...ahdat-e-islami/

Edited by Shiabro, 29 May 2012 - 04:13 AM.

[Wahdat]

HabibKarimi, on 29 May 2012 - 02:25 AM, said:

First of all Mazari's base was in Iran. That is where he started his mission from. During the civil war, there were arm helps from Iran to Hizb Wahdat. I tell you that if there was not the support of Iran to the Hazaras, then the situation of Hazaras would've been worse today.

Yes, you are right that Baba Mazari's party (Nasr) was based in Iran. And you also know that his was one of the 8 factions that constituted the Shia resistance front against the Soviets. With Sunnis making up some 70-75% of the population and different ethnicities were represented by 7 factions while Shias with their small population and homogeneous ethno-religious background made for 8 factions? Would Hezbollah today be as strong as it is had it been divided into 8 factions? Would Iran be as strong as it is today had there been 8 different chains of commands as opposed to one (Rahbar's)? This is not to mention that Hazara-hating snakes whose entire lives were paid off by Hazara khoms and zakat controlled the commanding ranks of those doomed 8 parties. As a result, more young Hazara men were killed in the inter-8 party civil war than fighting the Soviets and latter the civil war combined. This is very important fact. I by no means deny Iran's contribution to Lebanese shia and actually cant help but feel proud about it. But when it comes the same for Hazaras, I dont find pride but reservation....given the state of Hazaras as a people in Iran only adds up.

That said, the only weapons that Hazaras were fighting the Wahabis with were those left in Soviet depots taken over by Hazara guys in West Kabul. There was no route to supply Hazaras with weapons even if Iran was genuine enough to supply them. On the other hand Iran was helping Masood handsomely. I even saw video of Iranian (guards) hostages captured by Shafee's guys that were fighting alongside Masood. Lastly, I do not deny the mutual positive effects of a very historical relationship between Hazaras and Iran, but lets remind ourselves that  Iran did go on to serve as an excuse to discriminate against Hazaras. That Hazaras were further caught in Iran's geopolitical games with Saudi and the US.
Hazaras are doing better today not necessarily because of Iran but because of the blood of thousands of brave martyrs who laid their lives for a better and equal future for their people IMHO.

Shiabro, on 29 May 2012 - 03:38 AM, said:

You're right and I didn't deny it but today the Hazara have all the opportunities and they should make use of them instead of playing the victim card. Majority of Hazara do this anyways. The majority of Hawza of Mohseni consists of Hazara people(80% Hazara). But there are still Hazara people, mainly from Hizb Wahdat corner, slandering other Afghans, including Sadats, Pashtuns, Tajiks and whatever ethnicity exists in Afghanistan.

When have or has a Hazara ever played victim? You claim majority of Hazaras are doing this just show me some- a minority. That said, recounting the various massacres and genocides against them hardly makes them playing victims. Maybe you dont really know what playing victims really means. do you?
In 1979 Hazaras were given equal rights and in 1992 it was taken away from them and hence the cause for civil war and in 2002 things got better right-wise by entrance of US. So in 120 years of state of Afghanistan Hazaras have only enjoyed equal status for less than 20 years. And despite all that they have held strong by the might of their arms and Islamic work ethics where they worked hard instead of becoming thieves, terrorists, murtads, beggars etc. And today they have the HIGHEST entrance to University and other literacy related fields. Then what the hell are you talking about trying to take advantage?
Mohsini the Murtad sells Hazaras, Pashtuns organize massacres for Hazaras, Tajiks facilitate everything and yet you complain about Hazaras complaining about such inhuman events? Like I said, you Sayids, while growing fat from the blood and sweat of ordinary Hazaras, have grown a culture of bad-mouthing Hazaras infront of their Pashtun masters so as just to fit in. This coward bunch sold Hazaras during Abdul Rahman to Sunnis, They sold Hazaras again during civil war and joined the Sunnis who did not want shias in the govt. But dont worry, people have woken up and have come to know this free-loading lot for the bloodsucking creatures that they are thanks to foresight of Baba.

Edited by Wahdat, 29 May 2012 - 01:07 PM.

[Wahdat]

Shiabro, on 29 May 2012 - 03:38 AM, said:

I can't confirm or deny this. But I can tell you one thing. Mazari was far away from having no flaws like any politician in Afghanistan, including the other Shia ones, and one of his major mistakes was to go to the Wahabi Taliban in order to make a political deal. It was both a humane mistake as well as a political mistake. Political because he has underestimated the Wahabi Taliban and thought he could make some kind of a deal with them and humane mistake because he obviously wanted some governmental power.

If you are Shia of Ali and not a Sunni in disguise, then you could show me or prove where Mazari wanted governmental power?
In 1992 Sunnis decided that Shias did not have the right to participate in the govt. Mazari, the ONLY SHIA LEADER, was the one to rise against this. Other coward shia figures- from Mohsini to Anwari to Akbari- all joined the same Sunnis & Wahabis who had excluded them from taking part in the govt at the first place.
So Mazari was the FIRST AND ONLY shia leader to fight the Wahabis and thus he had a pretty good knowledge of his enemy. In the last part of the first video I posted which was couple of days before his martyrdom he says that he will do anything to safegaurd his people's rights and even if it involves talking to the enemy or loosing his life. Why is Mazaris decision to talk to Taliban is bad but Ayatollah Khameni's talk with USrael good?

Lastly, Mazari never sought governmental position in Afghan govt the same way Sayid Hassan doesnt want any position in Lebanese govt. These are just lies perpetuated by Sayids because Mazari cut their hands from Hazara pockets...albeit some.

La'ant upon Liars and Slanderers.

[Noah-]

Freeurmind, on 28 May 2012 - 03:56 AM, said:

Shaikh Hassan Allah Yari is not the 'Hazara Akhoond' he is a Turkmen. He never had anything against Iranian government until Iran asked him to stop insulting Sunni Khulafa and their beliefs or else the donations will be banned to his Tv channel in Iran (which was a huge % of money going to his channel). He rejected Iran's request and then Iran imposed a ban on giving any donation to his channel. He then like other political aakhonds began to question Iran and the even began to insult the Shia scholars living in Iran. On the other hand, he is just a reaction to Sunni private channels who invited Sunni guests just to insult Shia beliefs in their channels.

Anyhow, I agree with some of his points, like the one he made on Hazaras or Shias going to protest during Quds while Palestinians or Sunnis never take part themselves, never appreciate.. and I said that on this forum many times before.

And when it comes to Iranian aids to Palestine vs Shias of Afghanistan.. it is not just the Shias in Afg,  Iran is the same towards other Shias as well... Just read a little bit about the status of Shia Zaidis of Yemen, they even live worse than Somalians, the limit of poverty and the abuse they faced for last 3 decades... the wars that were imposed on them, not only by their government but also by Saudis.. Look at the Azerbaijan, the Shia religious ppl are the poorest, face discrimination from fellow Shia (atheist) government... look at Iraq... Palestine and Lebanon were set as an example during Imam Khomeini and that time was WAY different than today, after his death they all followed the same thing, no one bothered to reconsider things according to time... The Iranian governments and even some scholars never changed anything even that Arafat and Palestinians sided with Saddam during Iran-Iraq war, just the Palestinians fooled them by accusing the Arafat gangs and the Salafis were able to build new connections... just to repeat the same thing and in 2011 again to join the Saudi gangs and stab Iran and Syria in the back.

BTW: in Pakistan it is not only Hazaras, the Pashtun Shias face worse than everyone else. In Parachinar the entire city is besiged for 6 years now.. even food and medicine is denied to reach and the government doesn't do anything about it. At least in Hazara areas they have police, government officials from their own communities in charge and live in big cities.

The same in Afghanistan... Hazaras might have faced the worst but no Shias or even non Pashtun Tajiks were safe... Aside from massacre of Abdur Rahman, nothing worse happened than what Sunni Tajiks of Shamali faced at the hands of Nadir Khan... massacre of people, mass rape of women, and looting of their cities, lands, and other properties, where the 'loot of Shamali' the incident is known is something that everyone knows about it..

[Wahdat]

Noah-, on 29 May 2012 - 01:20 PM, said:

The same in Afghanistan... Hazaras might have faced the worst but no Shias or even non Pashtun Tajiks were safe... Aside from massacre of Abdur Rahman, nothing worse happened than what Sunni Tajiks of Shamali faced at the hands of Nadir Khan... massacre of people, mass rape of women, and looting of their cities, lands, and other properties, where the 'loot of Shamali' the incident is known is something that everyone knows about it..

Do you know that prior to Commys getting something as simple a Passport for a Hazara was almost impossible? I know someone who got a scholarship to University of Chicago in mid 70s and it took the then American ambassador to intervene and help him get to the US. He was denied a passport. What about taxation? Were Hazaras being taxed the same as Tajiks? What about education? infrastructure etc?
That said, I believe Pashtuns themselves are the BIGGEST victims of Pashtun rule seeing how every super power comes and bombs and destroys them. Not to mention taht their entire young generation have gone to waste. Last one become commy, this one terrorists and radical and God knows what will happen to the next one.

Edited by Wahdat, 29 May 2012 - 01:57 PM.

[Noah-]

Wahdat, on 29 May 2012 - 01:38 PM, said:

Do you know that prior to Commys getting something as simple a Passport for a Hazara was almost impossible? I know someone who got a scholarship to University of Chicago in mid 70s and it took the then American ambassador to intervene and help him get to the US. He was denied a passport. What about taxation? Were Hazaras being taxed the same as Tajiks? What about education? infrastructure etc?
That said, I believe Pashtuns themselves are the BIGGEST victims of Pashtun rule seeing how every super power comes and bombs and destroys them. Not to mention taht their entire young generation have gone to waste. Last one become commy, this one terrorists and radical and God knows what will happen to the next one.

Yes, I know all that.. that is why I said Hazaras faced the worst... And yes all other ethnics faced discrimination in education, government or anything you name it to some extends.. Hazaras were hated for being Hazara and Shia, but Tajiks if were not hated for being Sunni, they were hated for being Tajik.. And yes, Pashtuns themselves faced the worst.. even in old days. The same hatred that existed against non Pashtuns, it also did amongst Pashtuns for tribal reasons. Shinwar, an entire Pashtun tribe faced massacre from the hands of the same guy who massacred Hazaras and declared Shias kafir, from the hands of Abdur Rahman.. the same guy who sold half of Pashtuns and their lands to British India at the time, that is why today they (NWFP)  are included in Pakistan. Even today it is Ghelzai vs Popalzai.. and as you said, they even invite super powers in order to beat each other.. kings come from Popalzais.. then Ghelzais raise to power through commies, then after the Mujahiden Ghelzais mainly came from the Taliban, then Popalzais came to revenge by aiding Masood and then found the chance to gain Americans support to keep bombing their rivals day/night and occupy the high ranking government posts.

But anyhow, to say it was always Shia vs Sunni in Afghanistan, that is kind of unrealistic to some point... the loot of Shamali was one of the worst.. to the same extend the Sunni Tajiks lands are taken in Badakhshan, the entire Kunduz, Baghlan, Parwan, Balkh, Herat and many more provinces and were given to Pashtuns. I don't know much about Sunni Uzbek or Baluch, but I am sure they never enjoyed equality or peace either. They even told Pakistani Taliban and Arabs that all the Northern Alliance were Shia, and they consider any 'Farsi speaking' person as a Shia, while in reality Shias made a small minority amongst them...

[Wahdat]

Noah-, on 29 May 2012 - 06:00 PM, said:

Yes, I know all that.. that is why I said Hazaras faced the worst... And yes all other ethnics faced discrimination in education, government or anything you name it to some extends.. Hazaras were hated for being Hazara and Shia, but Tajiks if were not hated for being Sunni, they were hated for being Tajik.. And yes, Pashtuns themselves faced the worst.. even in old days. The same hatred that existed against non Pashtuns, it also did amongst Pashtuns for tribal reasons. Shinwar, an entire Pashtun tribe faced massacre from the hands of the same guy who massacred Hazaras and declared Shias kafir, from the hands of Abdur Rahman.. the same guy who sold half of Pashtuns and their lands to British India at the time, that is why today they (NWFP)  are included in Pakistan. Even today it is Ghelzai vs Popalzai.. and as you said, they even invite super powers in order to beat each other.. kings come from Popalzais.. then Ghelzais raise to power through commies, then after the Mujahiden Ghelzais mainly came from the Taliban, then Popalzais came to revenge by aiding Masood and then found the chance to gain Americans support to keep bombing their rivals day/night and occupy the high ranking government posts.

But anyhow, to say it was always Shia vs Sunni in Afghanistan, that is kind of unrealistic to some point... the loot of Shamali was one of the worst.. to the same extend the Sunni Tajiks lands are taken in Badakhshan, the entire Kunduz, Baghlan, Parwan, Balkh, Herat and many more provinces and were given to Pashtuns. I don't know much about Sunni Uzbek or Baluch, but I am sure they never enjoyed equality or peace either. They even told Pakistani Taliban and Arabs that all the Northern Alliance were Shia, and they consider any 'Farsi speaking' person as a Shia, while in reality Shias made a small minority amongst them...

Mazari said it way back in the 1980s that in Afghanistan slogans are religious and wars racial. The worst enemies of recent Afghan politics were Masood and Gulbodeen .... faithful members of the same party- Ikhwan Ul Muslimeen.
But coming back to Pashtuns I must say that their only problem is Tribalism. Modern human societies have long evolved from Tribalism (Cavemanism) and its message has gotten more and more universal. All religions have universal message. Tribalism in today's world is like playing Attari with iPhone. For example, based on Tribal code a non-Pashtun is a potential enemy. Hence, all non-Pashtun Afghans are enemies. How can you make a country when you declare or presume 65% of its inhabitant as enemies?Then based on the same doomed code the guy from other tribe is a competition...hence dividing and isolating themselves further and further till they get to their brothers. Thats why their whole history is one of fighting internally and recently in the last 250 years externally. And its a Pashtun (Golbodeen) who holds the Guinness book's world record for being the only PM in history to have shelled his capital while being in the office of PM lol

But as far as loosing to the state or history i believe that Hazaras lost the most physically and Pashtuns the worst spiritually and morally. They have joined foreigners in the last 250 years to kill their own brothers and pashtuns time and again. May God guide the to the right path and and may He liberate all Afghans from Afghanistan.

[Noah-]

HabibKarimi, on 28 May 2012 - 05:48 AM, said:

But today, Hazaras are about 25% of Afghanistan, while shias about 30%. So Hazaras are the majority of shias in Afghanistan.

I don't think Hazaras are 25% or Shias 30% in Afghanistan... from many sources that I read, the Hazaras (including the Sunni Hazaras) make up to 15% of Afghanistan and Shias make about 22% of the population including the Shia Ismailias.

[HabibKarimi]

Well no source is accurate because even encyclopedia, it says hazaras are 9% how's that? and then another column saying 15-10%. According to Mohaqiq Kabuli, Hazaras are 8 million living in Afghanistan from the 32 which is 25%. Then obviously there would be another 5% shias from, Qizilbash, Tajik,  Pushton, Sayiid which would make 30%shia.

You know what? I think the Afghan government should get a very good statistics about its country's people and population.

Wahdat: Well as for the 8 divisions, I don't think the intention for that was bad. I remember my uncle who used to live in Iran, told me that when the Iranin government created the 8 divisions, and when they were sent back to Afghanistan to fight the Soviets, they were all told to go under the Quran and swear to Allah that they would not be divided amongst themselves. So we can see here that there were other intentions behind the division, which I don't know.
Secondly, what would Iran benifit from if they wanted to create divisions between the Hazaras?

[Shiabro]

Wahdat, on 29 May 2012 - 12:50 PM, said:

Yes, you are right that Baba Mazari's party (Nasr) was based in Iran. And you also know that his was one of the 8 factions that constituted the Shia resistance front against the Soviets. With Sunnis making up some 70-75% of the population and different ethnicities were represented by 7 factions while Shias with their small population and homogeneous ethno-religious background made for 8 factions? Would Hezbollah today be as strong as it is had it been divided into 8 factions? Would Iran be as strong as it is today had there been 8 different chains of commands as opposed to one (Rahbar's)? This is not to mention that Hazara-hating snakes whose entire lives were paid off by Hazara khoms and zakat controlled the commanding ranks of those doomed 8 parties. As a result, more young Hazara men were killed in the inter-8 party civil war than fighting the Soviets and latter the civil war combined. This is very important fact. I by no means deny Iran's contribution to Lebanese shia and actually cant help but feel proud about it. But when it comes the same for Hazaras, I dont find pride but reservation....given the state of Hazaras as a people in Iran only adds up.

That said, the only weapons that Hazaras were fighting the Wahabis with were those left in Soviet depots taken over by Hazara guys in West Kabul. There was no route to supply Hazaras with weapons even if Iran was genuine enough to supply them. On the other hand Iran was helping Masood handsomely. I even saw video of Iranian (guards) hostages captured by Shafee's guys that were fighting alongside Masood. Lastly, I do not deny the mutual positive effects of a very historical relationship between Hazaras and Iran, but lets remind ourselves that  Iran did go on to serve as an excuse to discriminate against Hazaras. That Hazaras were further caught in Iran's geopolitical games with Saudi and the US.
Hazaras are doing better today not necessarily because of Iran but because of the blood of thousands of brave martyrs who laid their lives for a better and equal future for their people IMHO.


When have or has a Hazara ever played victim? You claim majority of Hazaras are doing this just show me some- a minority. That said, recounting the various massacres and genocides against them hardly makes them playing victims. Maybe you dont really know what playing victims really means. do you?
In 1979 Hazaras were given equal rights and in 1992 it was taken away from them and hence the cause for civil war and in 2002 things got better right-wise by entrance of US. So in 120 years of state of Afghanistan Hazaras have only enjoyed equal status for less than 20 years. And despite all that they have held strong by the might of their arms and Islamic work ethics where they worked hard instead of becoming thieves, terrorists, murtads, beggars etc. And today they have the HIGHEST entrance to University and other literacy related fields. Then what the hell are you talking about trying to take advantage?
Mohsini the Murtad sells Hazaras, Pashtuns organize massacres for Hazaras, Tajiks facilitate everything and yet you complain about Hazaras complaining about such inhuman events? Like I said, you Sayids, while growing fat from the blood and sweat of ordinary Hazaras, have grown a culture of bad-mouthing Hazaras infront of their Pashtun masters so as just to fit in. This coward bunch sold Hazaras during Abdul Rahman to Sunnis, They sold Hazaras again during civil war and joined the Sunnis who did not want shias in the govt. But dont worry, people have woken up and have come to know this free-loading lot for the bloodsucking creatures that they are thanks to foresight of Baba.

You accuse me of racism, yet reread your post who insults and badmouths other races(Tajik, Uzbak, Sadat, Pashtun...), you and your likes or me. Although I am no fan of Mohseni, you and your likes, slander(not criticize) him and others with the worst of insults without any proof.
I criticize Mazari for his mistakes but I don't slander him and even have respect for him. Nevertheless, he does not represent all Hazara. Many Hazara reject him and don't see him as their leader. About half of the Hazara people support Mohseni as you might know.
I am no Sayyid, so no need to say You Sayyids. But I can tell you that the Sayyids were the most sincere people towards the Hazara, and every Hazara I have met admits that. They taught the Hazara the basics, as the Hazara people were illiterate then. They even gave their daughters to poor Hazara men. Next to the Hazara the Sadat may have been the most impoverished and neglected people in Afghanistan because the government didn't trust them both.
Although I don't agree with Hizb Wahdat and what Mazari did in his last days, I say, that may his soul rest in peace.  And I wish the Hazara people all the best for their future.
End of discussion for me, as I have said everything that has to be said.
And a final note to Wahdat: Dude, end of discussion with you as well. Not only in this thread you insult and slander people. Such a foul language deserves only an equal reply and I am not willing to give you such a reply.

Edited by Shiabro, 30 May 2012 - 03:07 AM.

[Wahdat]

Oh so now you are pouting? Oh my!
You claim that you did not lie or slander- yet if you go back and read your lie-filled posts you see there nothing but anti-Hazara propaganda from beginging to the end. You claim that Mazari was sectarian, you claim that he was divisive, you claim that he was after power or governmental positin, you claim that he wanted to join the Taliban, you claim that he caused genocide etc etc........ if these are not lies and slanders then what are they specially in the light of your inability to back your proof.
I noticed it in another thread where you suffer from the same racism that has been prevalent against Hazaras. I know your kind from a mile and thats despite me not having a 20/20 vision.
FYI- ALL HAZARAS (99%) are supporters of Mazari because Mazari proved himself infront of the people. Unlike Akhbari or Mohseni he did not hide or ran away or joined the salafis but stood by his people. If you lie again and claim that only half of Hazaras back him, then statistically half of the Hazaras here should not like him. If you can find me 2 Hazaras on this site who do not approve of Mazari then I will believe you. But thats impossible.
Sayids have been the snake in Hazara sleeves. They caused the massacre of more than 60% of Hazaras, usurpation of their land and slavery of their women and children 120 years ago, and they then were so shameless to try to do the same 100 years latter 20 years ago. When Salafis were shelling Shia areas the very Murtad Mohseni ordered his Hazara troops from Qoregh mountains to not get involved as it was a Hazara war. Do you think those guys listened? NO. This is a well known fact. Then why any Hazara in their right mind would support that disgusting old man who did nikkah with his friends 12 year old sister while being well into his late 70s.
Sayids are insignificant numerically speaking, they only become sorta important when they appoint themselves as representatives of Shias or Hazaras. But those days are over.

HabibKarimi, on 30 May 2012 - 02:07 AM, said:

You know what? I think the Afghan government should get a very good statistics about its country's people and population.

US has done a very accurate census but they do not want to make it public for the fear of public security. Hazaras, as it will be shown in future, are easily well over 20% IMO.

Quote

Wahdat: Well as for the 8 divisions, I don't think the intention for that was bad. I remember my uncle who used to live in Iran, told me that when the Iranin government created the 8 divisions, and when they were sent back to Afghanistan to fight the Soviets, they were all told to go under the Quran and swear to Allah that they would not be divided amongst themselves. So we can see here that there were other intentions behind the division, which I don't know.
Secondly, what would Iran benifit from if they wanted to create divisions between the Hazaras?

Why create 8 divisions and then pass them under the Qur'an and ask them to act as 1? Why not create 1?
Iran, with more than 2 Million refugees inside , did not find it in its self interest to create 1 party which would have become more strong outside of Iran (Afg) and way more powerful inside of Iran (like in Paksitan and Gulbodeen). The good old Divide and Conquer trick. A bunch of divided and weak parties would have been easily controllable.

Edited by Wahdat, 30 May 2012 - 12:20 PM.

[Al-Englisi]

Wahdat, on 30 May 2012 - 11:38 AM, said:

When Salafis were shelling Shia areas the very Murtad Mohseni ordered his Hazara troops from Qoregh mountains to not get involved as it was a Hazara war. Do you think those guys listened? NO. This is a well known fact. Then why any Hazara in their right mind would support that disgusting old man who did nikkah with his friends 12 year old sister while being well into his late 70s.

Bismillah,

Salams,

I didn't want to get directly involved with this thread, even though i share some controversial views with some of the posters or readers. However, i will comment on two things, simply because they are purely Islam related and do not have the messiness of politics alongside them.

1) On what basis are you throwing around fatwas of takfir? Mohseni (though i may not completely agree with him) is one of the respected shia scholars of Afghanistan, revered by many. He runs a Shia hawza and has even earned the respect of a good number of sunnis (esp religious students). You have failed to provide any evidence on this thread that would make your allegations against Mohesini true, esp takfir.

2) Bro, dont ridicule something that is Islamically allowed, though i may share your thoughts about the act being sick or unpleasant (because of how brainwashed i am, and how deep the western mentality has set in my brain) i would never  try and damn a thing which is Halal in the sharia of Mohammad (saw). There is nothing wrong with what he did, if the girl agreed and the proper Islamic guidelines were followed.

---

Anyways, this is interesting, please carry on (without the takfir).

[Wahdat]

Lychee, on 30 May 2012 - 03:40 PM, said:

1) On what basis are you throwing around fatwas of takfir? Mohseni (though i may not completely agree with him) is one of the respected shia scholars of Afghanistan, revered by many. He runs a Shia hawza and has even earned the respect of a good number of sunnis (esp religious students). You have failed to provide any evidence on this thread that would make your allegations against Mohesini true, esp takfir.

You are right about hte position of the mentioned figure. He has his TV station, hawza, young wives and everything else that millions of dollars could buy. Technically speaking, takfeer was wrong but you have to know this opportunist for who he really is. People like him should be despised and even expelled from community. For example, Mawlawi Younis Khalis (late), whom Mohsini shamelessly often refers to as his esteemed brother, provided a simpl formula for the makeup of the govt that won the support of most sunnis, it was- 'In the Islamic Afghan govt, we do not want cats, dogs, and the shia.' But when it came to Mohsini he was quoted as saying that he did not mean Shias like him (one with a nose like his), The kind of shia that Khalis meant were Hazaras. This pimple of a scholar instead of working with his so called brother to find a solution for his dark vision, accepted his formula so long as his interests were taken into account. Thus he joined a coalition of Ikhwanis and salafis who committed heinous crimes against the shias. One such event was the Afshar Massacre where women's breasts were cut off, their feutus were stabbed out of their bellies, mosques burnt, sons got their throats cut off infront of their mothers, the entire neighborhood was razed etc. How can he still call himself Shia is beyond me. Throughout the Shia history in Afghanistan, its snakes like him from within that have proved to be more dangerous than the most vicious of the enemies from without.

Lychee, on 30 May 2012 - 03:40 PM, said:

2) Bro, dont ridicule something that is Islamically allowed, though i may share your thoughts about the act being sick or unpleasant (because of how brainwashed i am, and how deep the western mentality has set in my brain) i would never  try and damn a thing which is Halal in the sharia of Mohammad (saw). There is nothing wrong with what he did, if the girl agreed and the proper Islamic guidelines were followed.

I do not know much about Islamic rulings but know this much that if it contradicts basic human decency then it can not be Islam. The girl that I mentioned was the little sister of one of Mohsini's confidants. The guy was sent by Mohsini on some assignment; having had his parents pass away recently, the guy had no one to leave his little baby sister with. Mohsini offered that she could stay in his compound. Anyways, long story short, when the guy returns he finds Mohsini the old man as his young brother-in-law. Mohsini's excuse was because she was non-mahram and he had to do a nikkah to make it all halal. When the guy protested, few days latter he was found dead. You be the judge of whether he acted in accordance to Islam or his own sexual desires. But I know this much that man would have been sent to jail and convicted of pedophilia had he been in the West.

[Al-Mufeed]

Quote

Shaikh Hassan Allah Yari is not the 'Hazara Akhoond' he is a Turkmen. He never had anything against Iranian government until Iran asked him to stop insulting Sunni Khulafa and their beliefs or else the donations will be banned to his Tv channel in Iran (which was a huge % of money going to his channel). He rejected Iran's request and then Iran imposed a ban on giving any donation to his channel. He then like other political aakhonds began to question Iran and the even began to insult the Shia scholars living in Iran. On the other hand, he is just a reaction to Sunni private channels who invited Sunni guests just to insult Shia beliefs in their channels.

Im not here to comment on Afghan shia-interrelations - but what you just said is 100% not true and is a result of rumors.

Allahyari is hazara i know the man personally. Not only that he has always been Anti - Iran. He was already extremely anti Iran before he even opened his channel.

[Noah-]

Al-Mufeed, on 31 May 2012 - 01:05 PM, said:

Im not here to comment on Afghan shia-interrelations - but what you just said is 100% not true and is a result of rumors.

Allahyari is hazara i know the man personally. Not only that he has always been Anti - Iran. He was already extremely anti Iran before he even opened his channel.

You could be right. I don't know much. But, him being a Hazara... not sure.. in Afghanistan, the Shia Turkman are usually called as "Hazarai Turkman" too.. and considered as one of their tribes because of their Shiism and closeness to Hazaras... but they are not actually Hazara even if they call themselves Hazara... so from what I heard he was one of them.

Anyhow, Mohaqiq Kabuli, a Shia scholar declared a 'fatwa' against him... from his YouTube clip it seems he was really disturbed about that because he considers Mohaqiq Kabuli a learned scholar...He has some good points, and should make his points without attacking other Shia communities and clergies.


Wahdat,

I don't want to start here between you and the other users.. or else I must type pages and then sometimes it ends up with some kind of uneasy posts..

But, just want to make a few points:
Hizbe Wahdat's leader, Ustad Abdul Ali Mazari made alliances with Gulbudin Hekmatyar and Rashid Doustom against Masood for a long period. Gulbudin, the extremist Ikhwani was also one of those 7 Sunni leaders, actually one of the top one at the time who all deneid 'Shias' participation in Afghan government in Pakistan's meeting after the fall of the Communists.

Alliances like this were not something that bad that you make out of it... groups did alliances every 5 months... Wahdat did several times, including allying with the same guy, Ahmad Shah Masood who ruined the entire 'AFSHAR' and 'Chendawol' and other Shia areas of Kabul. Other Wahdat factions did it too, as you mentioned Akbari, even with the Taliban to safe Bamyan as he claimed.. and he was right from my point of view. Also, today, majority of Hazaras might love Ustad Mazari or supported some of his actions at the time, but that doesn't mean majority of them supported Mazari's in political processes. Nowadays, in every Pm election, Akbari is the top winner in Bamyan province with tens of thousands of followers, loyalists of Mohseni win big in Ghazni, Wardak and other Hazara areas.. and some other Hazaras who have nothing to do with loyalists of former Wahdat leader. People do not hate each other as you make them out here... the online sources outside Afgahnistan is way different than what majority of Hazaras, Sayeds, and other Shias are actually dealing with each other in Afg at the moment... or for example in Mohseni's Hawza, in their Tv channels and other social interactions.

Iran had no interest in making 8 factions… Iran or Pakistan had no role in making different factions for Afghans… they themselves were divided and couldn’t work together… to make things easy, they went on separate ways to fight the communists and these two countries helped them individually. It is not as some people always claim. Ustad Mazari, Akbari or Gulbudin or Masood they were no absolute slaves of any country to take orders and then make groups to fulfill Pakistan or Iran’s wishes… because somehow they wanted to divide and rule. For example, Masood and Gulbudeen the two main Ikhwani groups were attacking each other’s sides even before going to Pakistan and even before the Russian invasion.
Akbari says the opposite of what you believe, in one of his interviews that Iran wanted the Shia groups to be together and strong, but they couldn’t because of the differences and difficulites… Link: http://www.kabulcent...rrent-articles-

And the last point, you use the same propagand and language against Mohseni as was spread around by KHAD of former communist government during Mujahideen fightings... as they were doing against every single Jihadi leader...
For example, they made 10s against Ustad Mazari... 1. that he was a special agent of Iran. 2. that he personally ordered and liked 'raqse Morda' the dance of beheaded bodies, 3. he had a special unit who was rounding up pregnant women and killed their unborn babies. I don't claim Shaikh Mohseni, Ustad Mazari or Masoud did not make any mistake or their men did not commit crimes against humanity... but many propagandas were spread against them just for political purposes by a main enemy.

[Wahdat]

Noah-, on 31 May 2012 - 02:07 PM, said:

But, just want to make a few points:
Hizbe Wahdat's leader, Ustad Abdul Ali Mazari made alliances with Gulbudin Hekmatyar and Rashid Doustom against Masood for a long period. Gulbudin, the extremist Ikhwani was also one of those 7 Sunni leaders, actually one of the top one at the time who all deneid 'Shias' participation in Afghan government in Pakistan's meeting after the fall of the Communists.

Accusing Mazari in this case is as bad, baseless and dishonest as accusing Islamic regime in Iran of alliance with the secular Syrian regime. Or Hezbollah's alliance with Christians. I believe that it matters less who your ally is and more what you are allied for. When Golbodeen was for exclusion Mazari was against him. When he changed, so did Mazari.

The war started when there were efforts to exclude Hazaras from decision making process based on the same age old excuse that Hazaras are Iranian spies. This time only it was Masood who was saying that. Now compare the two side- one wants equality and brotherhood while the other wants to prohibit Iran from turning Kabul into Southern Beirut. Who do you believe?




'We think with your strength and the right that we demand we demand it for you. Demanding this right does/should not mean animosity with Hezbi Islami or Jamiat (Golbodeen-Masood). We firmly believe that the problem of Afghanistan can only be solved when people and parties tolerate one another. That they are not after excluding one another. We are very proud and are justified to be proud because we created National Unity. We did not behave intolerantly when our brothers in Pakistan excluded us*. We want rights for our people and want to be part of the decision making mechanism. Exclusion has finished. And no one can exclude a person, community, people, religion or sect. Let us declare that he who speaks of exclusion be known as national traitor. We have proven time and again that we do not want war to be part of a solution. We have this national pride **, this does not mean that today Uzbek, Pashtuns, and Hazara are allying against Tajiks. Tajiks are our brothers, they are of our people, and a big part of this country. It does not mean animosity. In this way we work hard to one day solve these animosities with understanding between these four nations.'

Now- the Pride that Ustad was talking about
*,**- he mentioned it in one of his negotiations with Haqqani that he did not mind being excluded in Pakistan because his concern was Afghanistan. He did not mind being excluded from affairs of Kandahar because his concern was Afghanistan. Hazaras controlled all strategic points in Kabul and could have easily not let the Jihadi leaders enter Kabul. He let them in because he wanted to solve things without violence.

Now compare his take of the situation with his opponent's


allwhile Masood and his Shia allies received Iranian aids. Anyhew, One man's mission was to establish an Afghanistan based on equality and brotherhood of nations and the other's was to defend Afghanistan from Un-Islamic Iran. Who do you believe?

Oh and thanks to Mazari that he converted one of the biggest enemy of Iran/Shia in Afghanistan into a friend of Iran.

Edited by Wahdat, 31 May 2012 - 04:10 PM.

[Noah-]

Wahdat, on 31 May 2012 - 03:46 PM, said:

The whole point of the alliance was to form an inclusive government. What happened next? Both Dostum and Mazari pulled out of the alliance and the beginning of the civil war. Dostum was up north, Massod and the Salafis had blocked supply routes from West, North, and the East. South was the only one left open through which millions of people in West Kabul got their breads and clothes. No Golbodeeni rocket were dropped on West Kabul. No Shia women were raped by Golbodeen. No Golbodeeni boots were present in West Kabul. On the other hand, the other side ran to the arms of the very same people who literally razed two very ancient Shia neighborhood, raped Shia women, burnt Shia mosques, etc etc etc.  Last but not least, Gulbodeen was not a foreign mercenary but an Afghan citizen.

Well, I did not say Mazari did something bad or accused him going against Shias or against his Hazara ppl. I did not claim he made alliances with the citizens of Brazil or Nigeria. I know Gulbudeen is a citizen of Afghanistan. The same way you give 10s of reason, the same way the loyalists of Akbari, Mohseni or others give 100s of reason why it was good to ally themselves with Masood at the time and first beat the extremist-Ikhwanis such as Hekmatyar or Khalis. It is just insane to believe any Shia leader or scholar enjoyed being sidelined or was happy that one of the Shia communities ever faced massacre. Gulbudeen may never raped people in west Kabul, maybe because he never got there. But, Gulbudeen is known according to independent sources that did hit the other parts of Kabul with 6000 rockets per day... His known men such as Zardad butchered civilians in Surobi and Maheipar.

Today, Masood is considered a 'Shaheed' and a 'hero' in every speech by Karim Khalili and Mohammad Mohaqiq...

But somehow you think it is still the civil war times between Hazara factions and between Shia factions and Masood-Sayyaf...And then Mohseni this and that.

When the head of MP was elected a few years ago and the MPs voted, the main player of Hizbe - e Wahdat, Hajji Mohammad Mohaqiq stood by Abdur Rasul Sayyaf and many Hazara MPs loyal to Mohaqiq voted for Sayyaf against Qanoni and others.

Sayyaf was the only reason why Afshar and other Shia areas were destroyed and Masood had to choose either between Hizbe Wahdat or lose his lunatic desires for power and lose a Pashtun that he wanted to use to gain support from Pashtuns.. Sayyaf's men looted Afsharis homes and took every single item and even their dust to Paghman... And Sayyaf did the majority of crimes at the time...

But, when times came for political reasons, Mohaqiq stood by Sayyaf. And nowadays by Masood's brother... There was a war, then a civil war and then politics and etc... all parties and leaders, even Ayatollahs and Islamic clerics like Mohseni and Mazari were dragged into this dirty politics. Believe it or not even our own Shia brothers did very bad crimes in Kabul-Afghanistan as well... I mean against civilians..

Also, Masood's relation with Iran was on and off... Masood had no choice, because Saudi and the West chose Pashtun Islamists over Jamiyat or Tajik Islamists... Masood had to make deals with Iran and then few months later broken when he got a different door opened. Iran never provoked Masood to massacre Shias or side with Sayyaf.. that is unrealistic... Iran always demanded the recognition of Jahfariya Madhab in Afghanistan whenever it made an alliance with any government in Afghanistan... Iran's only mistake was that it wanted a joint alliances of Shias with Masood and under the influence of Jamiyat.. It should instead directly supported Shia group as it did just months before the civil war and during the communists. Iran claimed that Shias are not able to make a difference themselves and should instead work with the Pashtun-Tajik groups who were allied to Iran and Russia and were opposing the Western-Saudi-Paki fronts..

Well, at the end it worked in Iran's way... Iran supported the government of Karzai and Jamiyat and Shia groups including Wahdat had to join Jamiyat and other friendly Pashtun groups to form a government... and later the Shia Jahfariya fiqh was recognized, Shias got some positions here and there and found other social and religious freedom. While Gulbudeen is still fighting... and once he left Iran, he again began to bash Shia Islam and complain about too much Shia power in the current government and too much religious freedom for Shias.

Edited by Noah-, 31 May 2012 - 04:43 PM.

[Wahdat]

Noah-, on 31 May 2012 - 04:39 PM, said:

Today, Masood is considered a 'Shaheed' and a 'hero' in every speech by Karim Khalili and Mohammad Mohaqiq...

Iran's only mistake was that it wanted a joint alliances of Shias with Masood and under the influence of Jamiyat.

Khalili spends more than 100K US dollar per month for his tv broadcast and other publications. Mohaqiq has gotten filthy rich as well like Mohsini or Anwari. They both do not talk without a picture of Mazari behind them. Mazari was martyred and his family is left penniless. . So its clear who was genuine and who corrupt.

You hit the nail right on the top with your second point. This is where Mazari's clash began with Iran and pro-Iranian shia leaders in Afghanistan. Mazari wanted a system based on equality and saw no difference between being sub-ordinate to Pashtuns or Tajik. Mazari's fight was against subordination and for equality.
The predicaments of Afghan Shias is like any and every other Shia community that are within the majority Sunni communities. There are the militant (Hussieni) approach of demanding equal right at any cost, and then there are leaders who are pro-compromise borne of their concerns for their possessions. Mazari was the former one and he gave his life for it. While other leaders- from Khalili to Mohaqiq to Mohsini are swimming in dollars. But overall Mazari showed Afghans that the Hazaras/Shias of today are not like those from before the war. They are a force to reckon with and their demand for equal rights should not be laughed at but taken seriously otherwise........

You are right, the tone of my posts are as if we are at the midst of the civil war and that recent politics has shuffled old alliances and animosities. But I believe that reality of those time should remain crystal clear otherwise the blood of the martyrs have spelt for nothing. Otherwise the corrupt money of hte corrupt leaders shall corrupt the Shia community in Afghanistan.