Original Articles

Some common fallacies often shared by Taliban apologists and (fake) liberals

Brothers in one arm

Related posts:

Intellectual dishonesty in misrepresenting Shia massacres in Pakistan

Unloading the entire blame of sectarian terrorism on Saudi Arabia and Iran is unfair – by Adnan Farooq

LUBP archive on Shia genocide in Pakistan

Here is a list of some common fallacies, often shared by Taliban apologists and (fake) liberal analysts, which are frequently propagated through media and personal conversations:

Pakistani Taliban are different from Afghan Taliban (wrong: They are one and the same; both groups consider Mullah Omar as their Ameer-ul-momineen; and operate along the same violent sectarian and jihadi agenda.) For example:

One senior Taliban commander explicitly makes the point that the Afghan Taliban, the Pakistani Taliban and the Al Qaeda in the region are all the same: “Pakistani Taliban leaders themselves confirmed their close relationship with the Afghan Taliban. Asked in 2008 if the Pakistani Taliban were close to the Afghan Taliban, Faquir Mohammed, the deputy commander of the Pakistani group, replied “No questions about it.” And he added: “They are the true Muslims. We are their staunch supporters and there is no difference in our beliefs.” Mawlawi Omar, a spokesman for the Pakistani Taliban, went a step farther and stated flatly in an interview that “there is no difference between Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Those fighting in foreign countries are called Al Qaeda while those fighting in Afghanistan and Pakistan are called Taliban. In fact, both are the name of one ideology. The aim and objectives of both organizations is the same.” (Source)

Taliban and Sipah-e-Sahaba are two different organisations (wrong: Sipah-e-Sahaba and Taliban are, in the main, radical Deobandi organisations with a violent sectarian and jihadi agenda. However, majority of educated Deobandis do not subscribe to the views and operations of these two organisations. Sipah-e-Sahaba is, for all practical purposes, the name of Punjabi Taliban. In Karachi, Sipah-e-Sahaba could not get significant support from ethnic Sindhis or Muhajirs, hence the majority of their supporters in Karachi (and also in Balochistan) come from radical Deobandi madrassahs and Pashtun Taliban.)

Sipah-e-Sahaba and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi are two different organisations (wrong: All those Sipah-e-Sahaba terrorists who get arrested or accept responsibility of an attack on Shias, Barlevis, Christians or Ahmadis are labelled as Lashkar-e-Jhangvi for certain legal and political gains, i.e., to save the Sipah-e-Sahaba leaders from arrest or wrath of the masses.)

Taliban and Sipah-e-Sahaba are Sunni organisations: (wrong: The Taliban and Sipah-e-Sahaba are extremist Deobandi organisations. Not a single Barelvi (or Soofi) Muslim (who constitute a majority of Muslims in the subcontinent) is a part of them. In fact, Taliban / Sipah-e-Sahaba are involved in a number of Sunni (Barelvi) killings including the attack in Nishtar Park Karachi (killing almost entire leadership of the Sunni Tehreek) and also various attacks on Eid-Milad-un-Nabi processions and sufi shrines.

Iran supports Shia terrorists in Pakistan (wrong: Not all Pakistani Shias support the Iranian mullahs. In fact, majority of Shias in Pakistan support liberal and left-wing forces (not unlike what majority of Muslims do in the UK or US). For example, Shia religio-political organisation TNFJ (later TJP) was hugely rejected by Pakistani Shias in 1988 elections and afterwards even in those constituencies where there is a sizeable Shia vote. It was an old tactic used by Saddam Hussain (and also by Arab kings and Emirs) to declare their local Shia population as Iranians thus to justify their oppression and suppress their resistance. “The demonisation of the Arab Shia wherever they live in the Arab world is not new. In modern times, this practice began by the ideologues of Arab nationalism who revised history and created a scapegoat for the failing of their ideology, having been supported by intolerant religious leaders. The symptoms of this folly then moved fast to the mostly semi-illiterate part of the Arab masses and finally found its way to the corridors of politics. The Shia were said to be responsible for the killing of the third caliph, Othman, the wars against the fourth caliph, Ali, the killing of Imam Hussein, the fall of the Umayyad state and the fall of Baghdad in the hands of the Mongols. Hence, Shiism came to be considered, as Ahmed Amin put it in his book Fajr Al-Islam, “a refuge for anyone who wanted to destroy Islam”. In the current times, this practice is on the rise. The accusation by Egypt’s former President Hosni Mubarak that the Shia “are mostly always loyal to Iran and not to the countries where they live” were preceded by statement of King Abdullah of Jordan alleging the rise of a “Shia Crescent” threatening the region as he perceived it. While the allegation of the Jordanian king was a novelty so absurd that even he did not stand by it, President Mubarak’s statement is more deep-rooted in the minds of many people who suffer from the Shia scare.” Saddam Hussain, moments before his execution insulted Iraq’s Shia Muslims by terming that as Iranians. Bahrain’s Saudi-backed king and his ministers routinely reject and stereotype pro-democracy Shia Bahrainis as Iranian agents. Same goes for Saudi Arabia which routinely discriminates against and suppresses Shia Muslims in its Eastern and Southern provinces as Iranian proxies. When terrorists of Taliban / Sipah-e-Sahaba hit Shia individuals and gatherings, they do not distinguish between pro-Iran Shias and pro-liberal Shias. Similarly, any rare incident of reaction from Shia violent individuals (which is particularly directed against Sipah-e-Sahaba, not against all Sunnis) is independent of their pro-mullah or pro-liberal inclinations. Evidence suggests (given the disproportionately high number of Shias killed in the last two decades) that Shia violent individuals are far outnumbered than TTP/SSP/LeJ activists and do not enjoy a systematic support by Pakistan army or its Jihad Enterprise.)

This is Iran versus Saudi Arabia proxy war in Pakistan: (wrong: This is a fight between violent Taliban (including Sipah-e-Sahaba and other affiliate organisations) and the humanity. While Saudi Arabia’s funded madrassahs are involved in sectarian hate speech against Shias and Barelvis, it is our own people killing our own people.) Also see this detailed post: https://lubpak.net/archives/223752 and this one: https://lubpak.net/archives/70496

This is Sunni versus Shia: (wrong: This is extremist Deobandis versus rest of the Muslim and non-Muslim population of Pakistan. Majority of educated Deobandis, however, do not subscribe to a violent sectarian and jihadi agenda of the Taliban and Sipah-e-Sahaba who have currently hijacked the Deobandi madrassahs and ideology.)

This is sectarianism: (wrong: This is terrorism unleashed by the Taliban and Sipah-e-Sahaba against all Pakistanis and the entire humanity. This is not a Sunni vs Shia or Deobandi vs Barelvi sectarianism. This is a terrorist war by a violent group of people who want to enforce their sectarian and political views on others.)

About the author

Abdul Nishapuri

84 Comments

Click here to post a comment