Hamid Guls grandfather supported Mirwais neeka?

[Toramana]

Looool, same age old canard. Now Ahmad Shah Abdali's letters are an ISI creation! They went to Istanbul and forged his letter where he castigates the Iranians for breaking the laws of God and his rasool. LOOOOOL.

Thats rich, you get more and more paranoid every year. Soon you will believe that green tea is an ISI Chinese joint conspiracy.

What do letters prove---that is stupid---I am afraid it is too farther a journey into Akhwani utopia...Leaders and rulers use a variety of tools and sentiments to invoke political alliances and seek common ground against potential adversaries and enemies---

Powers like US also do that---e.g., "people of the book" view for a broader alliance against the communist infidel....Stop *******ising history---research is not like that where you select one source while ignore (hunddreds of other sources)---Furthermore, true researchers don't over-interpret historical data----and give a crude conclusive statements as typical of half-educated ignorants....

[BarakzaiAbdali]

What do letters prove---that is stupid---I am afraid it is too farther a journey into Akhwani utopia...Leaders and rulers use a variety of tools and sentiments to invoke political alliances and seek common ground against potential adversaries and enemies---

Powers like US also do that---e.g., "people of the book" view for a broader alliance against the communist infidel....Stop *******ising history---research is not like that where you select one source while ignore (hunddreds of other sources)---Furthermore, true researchers don't over-interpret historical data----and give a crude conclusive statements as typical of half-educated ignorants....

You mean like your ignoring his letters and your ignoring his moves on behalf of the Khoja?

You mean like your attempt to propagandize history into saying he was a red hat party supporter?


Not only do you *******ize history, you get it wrong too. Like your attempt to claim he would sack the seat of the Caliphate in Baghdad when it did not exist there, but in Istanbul.

Where he as low quality as the people you support, i.e. Mr. Asfandyaaaaaaar and Mr Kartheftzai why not just ship the Khojas off and declare a relationship with the powerful Manchu Chinese? If one is to believe he would risk the conflict for a land grab, why send letters to the Ottoman Caliphate attempting to rally a united force of Muslims as the Dutch professor clearly shows???

Your theory falls flat when examined through the true prism of history.

Now, get to it. Deal with the references one by one.

Deal with Ahmad Shah's attempt to incorporate shiite Iran and his writing the Caliphate for approval to include shiites as a fifth madaab. He saw far and knew clearly that the Safavids had Shiified it and that under Afghan auspices and rulership it would reverse course and he would undo the damange done to Iran by the Safavids who he railed against in the Istanbul letter.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

What do letters prove---that is stupid---I am afraid it is too farther a journey into Akhwani utopia...Leaders and rulers use a variety of tools and sentiments to invoke political alliances and seek common ground against potential adversaries and enemies---

Powers like US also do that---e.g., "people of the book" view for a broader alliance against the communist infidel....Stop *******ising history---research is not like that where you select one source while ignore (hunddreds of other sources)---Furthermore, true researchers don't over-interpret historical data----and give a crude conclusive statements as typical of half-educated ignorants....

So we await your discussion with each of the references. Provide us the hundred other sources that show your supposed claim that he would be willing to deal with secular democracy or non Muslim invasion forces to make gains.

Also, regarding Mir Wais Neka... the proof is in the pudding as the Americans say. He could have lived a good life under Persian auspices. He could have been Gurgin's right hand man. Why secure the fatwa from those supposed camels in Mecca? After all, Gurgin was a Christian and Iran was shiite. He wouldnt even need a fatwa in most states today just based on the presence of an invading foreign force. Yet he secured a fatwa Toramana. LOooooool. And from who? From the folks you call Camel Jockeys. He didnt write to the Jamestown Colony or to King Philip. He held mashwaraa with M-E-C-C-A.

And for that matter, he lived true to the fatwa and aided his Abdali adversaries when the Persians attempted to raid Herat.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Here you go Toramana:

The Iranians, according to Ahmad Shah had "transgressed to decadence and sensual pleasures...this time, no one heeded religious prescriptions (Nawahi yi Allahi wa iqtiza yi asar u sunun i hazrat e rasulat i
panahi)....

Sure sounds like a red top hat wearer to meeee (sarcasm).

[BarakzaiAbdali]

What do letters prove---that is stupid---I am afraid it is too farther a journey into Akhwani utopia...Leaders and rulers use a variety of tools and sentiments to invoke political alliances and seek common ground against potential adversaries and enemies---

Powers like US also do that---e.g., "people of the book" view for a broader alliance against the communist infidel....Stop *******ising history---research is not like that where you select one source while ignore (hunddreds of other sources)---Furthermore, true researchers don't over-interpret historical data----and give a crude conclusive statements as typical of half-educated ignorants....

Loool, oh and thank you for admitting you view abdali as an ikhwaniite. Now folks here who were fence sitters will have to decide whether they want Asfandyaar's view of the world or Abdalis when it comes to you.

Also, if you want to talk about selective evidence, how about ignoring communist programs in Afghanistan, including land reforms and social reforms that the people did not view as "reforms" but as usurption of rights... but somehow that all gets glossed over in your propaganda to Brzenzskiiii. Who makes the sun rise? Brzenzski... who stole the cookies? Brzenzski. Who killed Oj Simpson's wife... you guessed it... Brzenzski.
Thats called *******izing history and ignoring the unnecessary deaths of your own people for a stupid a-s-s pipe dream.
But its OK for you to ignore these errors and pertend that Esmat Muslim never happened to Kandahar. Its OK for you and Soldat to post videos about some mystery caper where Tribal leaders are being killed by Taliban... oh but you gotta brush Esmat Muslim's killings and Najib's massacres under the rug.

Face it, you lost against history. Abdali would never have sat in the same room as you or Karzai. Deal with the original posts. Otherwise, its just more propaganda.

From now on, each time you post, I will answer with pieces of the original post.

YOu always get whiney like this when cornered with evidence. I expect an evidence based rebuttal dealing with the Dutch Professors text, with the primary references, and with Abdali's moves in Delhi with destroying the Hindu Temples when he did not even have to do so.

[thetruth]

Looool, same age old canard. Now Ahmad Shah Abdali's letters are an ISI creation! They went to Istanbul and forged his letter where he castigates the Iranians for breaking the laws of God and his rasool. LOOOOOL.

Thats rich, you get more and more paranoid every year. Soon you will believe that green tea is an ISI Chinese joint conspiracy.

Im sure this is exactly what most of these communist/secularist idealists want to believe, knowing that they are lying to themselves- and that is the saddest part.

This is also similar to where it was said the other day here http://www.pashtunforums.com/politic...an-wars-22998/ where a group of people tell me that the Mujahideen were in cahoots with some Communists in the assassination of Daud Khan. Not only did they go against historical fact, they then alluded to the Mujahideen as being behind the assassination-? It is also mentioned here http://www.pashtunforums.com/politic...ud-khan-22983/

Then, after having failed to provide evidence to support these claims (evidence that is still promised to be shown), they change track and start reaffirming that Daud Khan was not an Islamist (posting up pictures of his wife) as if this would somehow redeem the failure to not provide evidence yet for Mujahideen involvement in his assassination, as if we did not know that Daud Khan was as secular as Zulfiqar Bhutto, and as if that had anything to do with the point being made that the Militant Communist assassination of Daud Khan/Communist Revolution was the start point for the conflicts in Afghanistan, disproving the false narrative that has so far been pushed forward as fact. We are then reminded by another as to "what is the point to look for someone to blame?" Suddenly, instead of talking and figuring the start point, we are supposed to ignore this fact, and assist them in forwarding their version of events which go against historical record - to simply drop it in the name of "unity" and we are all supposed to now equally spread the blame for Afghanistan problems. Hence, to attribute blame to the Hekmatyars, Amins, Masoods, Rabbanis, who were the reaction, and not to the Tarakis, Karmals, Najibs, who were the perpetrators.

It is critical to find and direct people to the source of Afghanistan's problems- very critical.

Am still awaiting answers and the promised evidence on that thread about Daud Khan's assassination and Militant Communist activity. Im all ears for a civil and factual debate.

[Soldat_Amir]

And one can well-deduce why are Americans are propagating such views now---the same they did during Soviet period ---using Islamist zeal/fanaticism against the infidel Chinese---

And your Baba in Akhwani ideology General Hamid Gul is a strong ally of Chinese although Chinese are oppressing Ughur Muslims in Xinging---Go and persuade him instead of Akhwanizing Afghan history...

Toramana

can you spot the burqa?



Who this well known international recognized Terrorist?

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Toramana

can you spot the burqa?



Who this well known international recognized Terrorist?

No need to divert, point by point discussion please:

Sorry wrorre, actually its you that fails against the arc of historical fact!

Historically inaccurate commentary. Let me devastate you now with a historical reference you and the other secularist nationalists must deal with when attempting to reinvent history. Once again, please respond to the quote, not to me. And all others here better date to think twice before besmirching graan Ahmad Shah Baba and even associating such a brilliant person with Karzai and Achakzai. Thats like compariing Einstein and two gophers.

From The Rise of the Indo Afghan Empire by Jos JL Gommans [Another ISI agent I presume???? (sarcasm)]:


"Not surprisingly Ahmad Shah mentioned repeatedly that he came to India for the support of the Afghans, whose territories were threatened by Jat and Maratha idolators. "

Oh and once he succeeded Mr. Maseed, in taking those gems, what exactly did he do... once again STRONG reference. He did not endorse your secular respect for idolatory:

"In the case of India, infidels threatened the beleagured padshah and his ministers in Delhi. In order to reestablish the lawful Mughal rule, Ahmad Shah declared a holy war (jihad) against the kuffar of Hind, in casu the Marathas and Sikh, who had dared to build their temples even in Delhi, at the center of the dar ul islam. Performing his religious duty, the Durrani had, immediatly on arrival in the Mughal capital, razed these symbols of idolatory to the ground." (Page 56)

http://books.google.com/books?id=-2T...20shah&f=false

Oops, he's beginning to look more like he would have had some shnaay chai more comfortably with Mullah Omar than that idiot wataan farosh khanzeer Karzai.

And what of his predecessor Hotak Ghilzai:?

"The Afghan Ghilzai chiefs had turned to the mughals for imperial approval of their revolt against the Safavids. As sincere sunnis they had first procured a fatwa from the establishment ulama in Mecca which authorized them to dissociate themselves from the Iranian Shiite court."

Oooooooops Maseed, looks like Nationalist Mir Wais Neeka took off his red hat and decided he needed to write the Arabists in Mecca, or the Camelists as you call them, for a fatwa to overthrow Isfahan.

Oh and in regard to the Ghilzai recognition of a universal caliphate... or dare I say Pan Islamism in the context of a stronger regional united sunni powerbase (<---- Oh Toramana just did this while reading this!)

"In 1727 the Ghilzais acknowledged the rightful succession of the Ottomon Sultan to the Caliphate, which means that 40 years before the treaty Kucuk Kaynarka (1774) between the Ottomans and the Russians, The Ottomans found significant support for their claim to the universal caliphate (sub reference in primary reference on 46 footnote to MA Hemkat 182-185)"

And Ahmad Shah's great success? Unlike Mr Karzai, he let NO ONE set the rules for him... he not only thought outside of the box... he destroyed the box and dispended its ashes:

"The Afghans defied the Mughal and Safavid embrace and created a particular Durrani form of Irano Islamic universalism..."
page 47

In regard to the charge that Ahmad Shah was simply Nadir's lacky... WRONG. After Nadir's death, the safavid pertender Sulaiman sent "two agents who consdescendingly demanded the handing over of Herat to its rightful safavid soveriegn... he severely punished the agents and decided he would do the same to their preposterous masters in Mashad"
page 49

Regarding Ahmad Shah Abdali's religious mysticism:

In fact there is a letter PRESERVED IN TURKEY In the state annals in its original form from Ahmad Shah to the Ottoman Sultan. In it Ahmad Shah expresses his religious ideology that Nadir Shah was a punishment of God. Why Maseed?

The Iranians, according to Ahmad Shah had "transgressed to decadence and sensual pleasures...this time, no one heeded religious prescriptions (Nawahi yi Allahi wa iqtiza yi asar u sunun i hazrat e rasulat i
panahi)....

and their marry making and dumthop was termed by him as:

"asar i fitna u shararaat"

page 50 FROM THE PERSIAN QUOTES OF THE LETTER THEMSELVES.
Page 50: Secondary reference from Jilani Jalali via the manuscript preserved in the National Archives in Istanbul

He went on in the letter to say that he was leading the life of a "mystic sufi, contemplating the truths of the "hidden world" and renouncing worldly pleasures... and he credited God with bestowing on him his earthly leadership. (page 50)

In the famous Ahmad Shah, Nama

"he situates himself in the tradition of the early associates of the Prophet and the first rightly guided caliph (page 51 and sub reference)"

According to page 51, Ahmad Shah Baba took such tutelage from the Ottoman Sultanate and asked the Caliph to recognize the 12ver shiites as an additional madhab so that he could establish , in the words of the author himself:

"An Eastern Pan Islamic empire...." page 51.. though Ahmad Shah was not personally convinced of Shiism as per "this was not determined by any personal religious convictions" in regard to any view that he had in regard to shiism actually being acceptable.

According to Dr. Gommans:

"from the Durrani point of view, the Indian descendents of Timur (Gurganiya) had been negligent and powerless in holding up the empire and the right religion." (page 55)

According to Tarikh e Ahmad Shah as referenced in the text (page 56) Ahmad Shah believed he was rushing there to "destroy the unbelievers"

In fact, Ahmad Shah Durrani recieved the letters inviting him to committ to Jihad in India by Shah Waliullah, "who urged the Durrani emperor to intervene in Indian affairs for the sake of Islam" the subreference given on page 56 KA Nizami's 1950's era text on Shah Waliullah.

His contemporary and freind, the Rohilla hafiz Rahmat Khan "history subscribes to the Durrani motive of invasion: to wage jihad against the marathas, sikhs, farangi, and jat infidels." page 61 sub reference to Hafiz Rahmat's Khulasaat

Submit Maseed... you have lost. The proof of history lays against you. Do not even dare to encroach on the history of Ahmad Shah or Mir Wais and claim that they would be sick, sell out Karzai and Achakzai style people.

And in regard to that personage of Shah Waliullah Delvi... do you know why your friend Baygham would cring when he would hear that name of that friend and advisor of Ahmad Shah Abdali's?

Because that same Shah Waliullah would give birth to a son... named Shah Abdul Aziz... do you know who that was Maseed? No, you probably do not wrorre. So i will tell you:
He was the seed, the son, the scion of Shah Waliullah and the advisor to.... wait for it... wait for it...

http://www.tribalanalysiscenter.com/...Deobandism.pdf

Syed Ahmad Barelvi

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Toramana

can you spot the burqa?



Who this well known international recognized Terrorist?

Please also address Ahmad Shah Abdali's China issue:

Loooool Oh and Maseed Wrorre, I am sorry, but I am about to crush your ahistorical attitude in regard to your view that true Pashtuns have no focus on the plight of other Islamic people. You rage against the Uzbeks and the Xuighars and the others who have taken refuge in the Pashtun lands...

In fact he was involved in Pan Islamist moves against even China!! I will now provide neutral, STRONG, academic sources for this.

"As in India, Ahmad Shah tried to legitimize his activities in Turkestan by taking up the cause of endangered Muslims." page 63 of the same text by Jos JL Gommans called The Rise of the Indo Afghan Empire 1710-1780

Just as Shah Waliullah was a part of the Naqshbandiyaa political order in India (page 56)... Pan Islamism in that era stretched to Central Asia:

In a fascinating discussion that Dr. Gommans gives about the "Muslim Brotherhood of its Day"

Beginning under the discussion of Turan on page 61:

"In central Asia the Most Powerful representatives of Islam were the numerous sufi orders... amongst with Naqshbandiyaa was the most influentiall" Page 63...

.... "the political influence of these khojas (term used for a subsection of these Muslim networks)

"The Political influence of these Khojas recieved a serious blow during the Chinese annexation of East Turkestan. Some of them were incorporated into Chinese nobility... but by sending them to Beijing, they were deprived of all former attachments in the area. The leading figures were forced to flee to Khokan and Badakhshan. They appealed to the local Muslim rulers to take action, to mount a holy war, and to restore them in their former eminence. In order to counter these instigations, the Chinese authorities paid large amounts of cash and tea to enlist the help of the Muslim rulers to keep these refugee Khojas at bay."

So let us halt here... we now have refugee Muslims taking refuge in Badaskhan. LET US REPEAT THIS FOR YOU MASEED... WE HAVE MUSLIM REFUGEES TAKING REFUGE IN AN AFGHAN PROVINCE IN THE ERA OF AHMAD SHAH. HMMMMM, DOES THIS SOUND FAMILIAR????

And these Muslims were asking the Muslim brethren to aid them in resisting the imperial chinese. HMMMM, SOUND FAMILIAR MASEED?

Out comes the LION OF KANDAHAR, the true Ahmad Shah Abdali of history:

Once again, not my words, but the words of the esteemed professor himself:

"These Chinese annexation of eastern Turkisten and the perilous conditions of the Khojas posed an ideal challenge to the Durrani championship of Islam."

PAGE 65

And what did Ahmad Shah Durrani Abdali, God bless his soul do next? He took on an empire at the risk of his own people. All of the secularist atheist nationalists cannot even counter this or explain this risk he put Afghanistan into when, once again, according to the same source:

"In 1763, Ahmad Shah played the leading role in striving to marshall a United Islamic force to push the Manchus back into China."...

"he planned to send an army to stand between Kokand and Tashkent while he tried to raise enough military support to expel the invaders and to arrange a central asian embargo on Chinese trade. The sublime Durrani Shah also sent an embassy to Beijing to enter a plea on behalf of the Khojas, but the Chinese emperor, true to his own inherited ideal of world supremecy, mistook the embassy for a tribute mission, and a sign of surrender, so the embassy did not achieve its purpose. Page 65

SUBREFERENCE from primary source: Eichorn, Kolonialkampfe p 315-316 and in J Fletcher, "China and Central Asia 1368-1884 in the Chinese World Order from harvard university press pages 220, 359

"Thus reviewing the the Durrani claims in Turkistan, we may conclude that, although Ahmad Shah could not as openly and visibly claim Durrani suzerainty over Turkistan ... he nevertheless propagated his championship of Islam, as he had done in India." page 66

http://books.google.com/books?id=-2T...20shah&f=false

So Maseeda, the guests of the faithful Mehsuds and the faithful honorable, God fearing Wazirs and other unnamed tribes: The Uzbeks, the Arabs, and the Chinese, the Sudanese, the Malaysians, the Turks, all of them... are welcomed under the auspices of Ahmad Shah's Tarikh to Pashtun lands. The Khojas were forced out by the anti Islamic Chinese and they found refuge in Afghanistan under Ahmad Shah, and they openly asked his intervention on behalf of Islam. Ahmad Shah OPENLY sough to rally Muslims and to take on the Chinese Manchurian juggernaut at the risk of his own empire. This is Pashtunwali, this is Islam, and this is the rules of Ahmad Shah Nama. He is ours and purely ours. You can, by way of history, lay no claim to Ahmad Shah Abdali's legacy. He was in no way in the same lower caste and class as Achakzai, Karzai, Asfandyaar, Ghani, and the whole lot of them.

Now we have provided par excellence, without any certain doubt, the basis for Islamism in Pashtunlands and for the welcoming of those you deem outsiders. Those that welcome them and fight aggression are following purely in the example of Ahmad Shah as per his intervention on behalf of the refugee Khojas against the Chinese.

[abassinafghan]

barkzai , why do you always mention only western sources , i mean no one time i see you qouting habibi for exampel or other afghan sources .

do you have no access to the books ? should i sent you one ? even one can buy them in kabul .and even peshawar .

its really funny how you try to profile yourself as a critical scholar , by qouting western authors because they are more objective ? or because they use more so calles evidence ?


you know barakzai instead wasting you time , being a historian or wanna be future politician .

become a professor in your art of medicine , and go to kabul at the university , teach and educate doctors .

this would be much more of a help than wasting your time with western historians who write just on which direction the wind blows own.


doctors never happen to be good politicians , especially not in afghanistan

[Soldat_Amir]

Please also address Ahmad Shah Abdali's China issue:

Loooool Oh and Maseed Wrorre, I am sorry, but I am about to crush your ahistorical attitude in regard to your view that true Pashtuns have no focus on the plight of other Islamic people. You rage against the Uzbeks and the Xuighars and the others who have taken refuge in the Pashtun lands...

In fact he was involved in Pan Islamist moves against even China!! I will now provide neutral, STRONG, academic sources for this.

"As in India, Ahmad Shah tried to legitimize his activities in Turkestan by taking up the cause of endangered Muslims." page 63 of the same text by Jos JL Gommans called The Rise of the Indo Afghan Empire 1710-1780

Just as Shah Waliullah was a part of the Naqshbandiyaa political order in India (page 56)... Pan Islamism in that era stretched to Central Asia:

In a fascinating discussion that Dr. Gommans gives about the "Muslim Brotherhood of its Day"

Beginning under the discussion of Turan on page 61:

"In central Asia the Most Powerful representatives of Islam were the numerous sufi orders... amongst with Naqshbandiyaa was the most influentiall" Page 63...

.... "the political influence of these khojas (term used for a subsection of these Muslim networks)

"The Political influence of these Khojas recieved a serious blow during the Chinese annexation of East Turkestan. Some of them were incorporated into Chinese nobility... but by sending them to Beijing, they were deprived of all former attachments in the area. The leading figures were forced to flee to Khokan and Badakhshan. They appealed to the local Muslim rulers to take action, to mount a holy war, and to restore them in their former eminence. In order to counter these instigations, the Chinese authorities paid large amounts of cash and tea to enlist the help of the Muslim rulers to keep these refugee Khojas at bay."

So let us halt here... we now have refugee Muslims taking refuge in Badaskhan. LET US REPEAT THIS FOR YOU MASEED... WE HAVE MUSLIM REFUGEES TAKING REFUGE IN AN AFGHAN PROVINCE IN THE ERA OF AHMAD SHAH. HMMMMM, DOES THIS SOUND FAMILIAR????

And these Muslims were asking the Muslim brethren to aid them in resisting the imperial chinese. HMMMM, SOUND FAMILIAR MASEED?

Out comes the LION OF KANDAHAR, the true Ahmad Shah Abdali of history:

Once again, not my words, but the words of the esteemed professor himself:

"These Chinese annexation of eastern Turkisten and the perilous conditions of the Khojas posed an ideal challenge to the Durrani championship of Islam."

PAGE 65

And what did Ahmad Shah Durrani Abdali, God bless his soul do next? He took on an empire at the risk of his own people. All of the secularist atheist nationalists cannot even counter this or explain this risk he put Afghanistan into when, once again, according to the same source:

"In 1763, Ahmad Shah played the leading role in striving to marshall a United Islamic force to push the Manchus back into China."...

"he planned to send an army to stand between Kokand and Tashkent while he tried to raise enough military support to expel the invaders and to arrange a central asian embargo on Chinese trade. The sublime Durrani Shah also sent an embassy to Beijing to enter a plea on behalf of the Khojas, but the Chinese emperor, true to his own inherited ideal of world supremecy, mistook the embassy for a tribute mission, and a sign of surrender, so the embassy did not achieve its purpose. Page 65

SUBREFERENCE from primary source: Eichorn, Kolonialkampfe p 315-316 and in J Fletcher, "China and Central Asia 1368-1884 in the Chinese World Order from harvard university press pages 220, 359

"Thus reviewing the the Durrani claims in Turkistan, we may conclude that, although Ahmad Shah could not as openly and visibly claim Durrani suzerainty over Turkistan ... he nevertheless propagated his championship of Islam, as he had done in India." page 66

http://books.google.com/books?id=-2T...20shah&f=false

So Maseeda, the guests of the faithful Mehsuds and the faithful honorable, God fearing Wazirs and other unnamed tribes: The Uzbeks, the Arabs, and the Chinese, the Sudanese, the Malaysians, the Turks, all of them... are welcomed under the auspices of Ahmad Shah's Tarikh to Pashtun lands. The Khojas were forced out by the anti Islamic Chinese and they found refuge in Afghanistan under Ahmad Shah, and they openly asked his intervention on behalf of Islam. Ahmad Shah OPENLY sough to rally Muslims and to take on the Chinese Manchurian juggernaut at the risk of his own empire. This is Pashtunwali, this is Islam, and this is the rules of Ahmad Shah Nama. He is ours and purely ours. You can, by way of history, lay no claim to Ahmad Shah Abdali's legacy. He was in no way in the same lower caste and class as Achakzai, Karzai, Asfandyaar, Ghani, and the whole lot of them.

Now we have provided par excellence, without any certain doubt, the basis for Islamism in Pashtunlands and for the welcoming of those you deem outsiders. Those that welcome them and fight aggression are following purely in the example of Ahmad Shah as per his intervention on behalf of the refugee Khojas against the Chinese.

Ahmad Shah, was your typical imperial leader at the time, he used Islam to fight off the Sikhs and Hindus, and access Indian's vast wealth and resouces, If we look logically at his actions, he was no different than any other leader at that time, even the Uzbeks of North Afghanistan rebelled against his rule that led to many revolts. He could not subdune his own Muslim brothers in the Uzbek lands, so he made a compromised with the Uzbek Emir of Bujhara, this goes to show, your claims of him being an Islamist is flawed, as his ideology and rule was even opposed by Muslims too.

Are you telling me looting and pouring cow blood on Hindu gods is part of Pashtun culture, just because Ahmad Shah Durrani did it, are you telling me discriminating against other Pashtuns such as the Ghilzai, by imposing a Durrani monarchy, that only appointed Durranis as the natural leaders of the Pashtun people as part of Pashtun culture just because Ahmad Shah did it?

How can you base todays realities on a man from the 17th century? The Americans slaughtered many native indians, does that mean they should do it now, because their forefathers did it?

Barakzai that is a flawed opinion of yours. Todays terrorists who have occupied Pashtun lands are not sword weilding horsemen, they are armed with an ideology, that attacks the fabric of Pashtun society i.e bombing Hamza Baba's grave, attacking school teachers and hanging political figures in public.

If we all reverted back to the days of Ahmad Shah, most of the Pashtun people would be divided on the grounds of a Durrani dominated Pashtun land, no wonder Durranis empire fell apart, it was due to this Durrani Supramacy over other tribes, which led to Timur Shah being appointed soley on his tribal status and bloodline and we saw how that went.

Another factor you can look at, is the fact, that he appointed his whole bloodline to be leaders, which seems very unislamic, in my eyes, and typical of your usual king or ruler during those days, Europe was the same too, kings and queens were appointed due to blood line and hertiage.

Accepting foreigners as part of Pashtun culture in the form of Islamism is quite desparate, especially from you. Look at the case of the Indian Mujahideen leader, who came to Pashtun lands to fight the Sikhs, but was booted out and his men were killed handed over to the Sikhs.

How can you say and use Ahmed Shah Baba as an example to justify foreigners, who kill Pashtuns daily, as part of Pashtun culture to shelter them? What makes you think all Pashtuns have accepted these Islamists with accordance to thier traditions? BarakzaiAbdali, a Maseed is banned from entering Wana, but an Arab is accepted, I cant see why you can not see the political sense of this arguement, in "todays" reality, foreigners are sheltered in the Pashtun region by ISI and other intelligence agencies, hence the reason why many tribal anti foreigner elders have been killed off.

We are not living in Ahmad Shah Babas era, we are in the 21st century, there nations that fight for interests, there are agencies that battle eachother through all kinds of means and ways.

I find quite insulting of you, to suggest Pashtuns are born into a culture that gives shelter to Suicide bombers from the middle east.

[Soldat_Amir]

barkzai , why do you always mention only western sources , i mean no one time i see you qouting habibi for exampel or other afghan sources .

do you have no access to the books ? should i sent you one ? even one can buy them in kabul .and even peshawar .

its really funny how you try to profile yourself as a critical scholar , by qouting western authors because they are more objective ? or because they use more so calles evidence ?


you know barakzai instead wasting you time , being a historian or wanna be future politician .

become a professor in your art of medicine , and go to kabul at the university , teach and educate doctors .

this would be much more of a help than wasting your time with western historians who write just on which direction the wind blows own.


doctors never happen to be good politicians , especially not in afghanistan

He is trying to associate the current situation with the time of Ahmad Shah baba by saying he gave shelter to Islamists to fight for Muslim interests.

He absolutely ignores Toramana's point that Islam, Christanity are tools used to put ones agenda across.

Look at Mirza Ali Khan Faqir of ipi, he was a religionous man, but he was a Nationalist too, he opposed Pakistan's creation and also voice his opposition towards Wazirs going to fight India for Pakistan in Kashmir.

Islam is a good political tool. and Ahmed Shah baba used it to rule over his subjects in the Non Muslim part of the world i.e India.

Even the Uzbek Muslim leaders opposed Ahmad Shah Durrani, and fought him for their control over land.

Barakzaiabdali, fails to mention this, and how Muslims rebellion against (Timur Shah Son?)Zaman Durrani's period of ruling Afghanistan.

In this 21st century, we can see, Islamists have put themselves into the Pashtun region due to the hand of agencies, thats why many Pashtuns who have opposed these Islamists have been killed off, but another aspect of it, is due to lawlessness.

[thetruth]

Sorry wrorre, actually its you that fails against the arc of historical fact!

Historically inaccurate commentary. Let me devastate you now with a historical reference you and the other secularist nationalists must deal with when attempting to reinvent history. Once again, please respond to the quote, not to me. And all others here better date to think twice before besmirching graan Ahmad Shah Baba and even associating such a brilliant person with Karzai and Achakzai. Thats like compariing Einstein and two gophers.

From The Rise of the Indo Afghan Empire by Jos JL Gommans [Another ISI agent I presume???? (sarcasm)]:


"Not surprisingly Ahmad Shah mentioned repeatedly that he came to India for the support of the Afghans, whose territories were threatened by Jat and Maratha idolators. "

Oh and once he succeeded Mr. Maseed, in taking those gems, what exactly did he do... once again STRONG reference. He did not endorse your secular respect for idolatory:

"In the case of India, infidels threatened the beleagured padshah and his ministers in Delhi. In order to reestablish the lawful Mughal rule, Ahmad Shah declared a holy war (jihad) against the kuffar of Hind, in casu the Marathas and Sikh, who had dared to build their temples even in Delhi, at the center of the dar ul islam. Performing his religious duty, the Durrani had, immediatly on arrival in the Mughal capital, razed these symbols of idolatory to the ground." (Page 56)

http://books.google.com/books?id=-2T...20shah&f=false

Oops, he's beginning to look more like he would have had some shnaay chai more comfortably with Mullah Omar than that idiot wataan farosh khanzeer Karzai.

And what of his predecessor Hotak Ghilzai:?

"The Afghan Ghilzai chiefs had turned to the mughals for imperial approval of their revolt against the Safavids. As sincere sunnis they had first procured a fatwa from the establishment ulama in Mecca which authorized them to dissociate themselves from the Iranian Shiite court."

Oooooooops Maseed, looks like Nationalist Mir Wais Neeka took off his red hat and decided he needed to write the Arabists in Mecca, or the Camelists as you call them, for a fatwa to overthrow Isfahan.

Oh and in regard to the Ghilzai recognition of a universal caliphate... or dare I say Pan Islamism in the context of a stronger regional united sunni powerbase (<---- Oh Toramana just did this while reading this!)

"In 1727 the Ghilzais acknowledged the rightful succession of the Ottomon Sultan to the Caliphate, which means that 40 years before the treaty Kucuk Kaynarka (1774) between the Ottomans and the Russians, The Ottomans found significant support for their claim to the universal caliphate (sub reference in primary reference on 46 footnote to MA Hemkat 182-185)"

And Ahmad Shah's great success? Unlike Mr Karzai, he let NO ONE set the rules for him... he not only thought outside of the box... he destroyed the box and dispended its ashes:

"The Afghans defied the Mughal and Safavid embrace and created a particular Durrani form of Irano Islamic universalism..."
page 47

In regard to the charge that Ahmad Shah was simply Nadir's lacky... WRONG. After Nadir's death, the safavid pertender Sulaiman sent "two agents who consdescendingly demanded the handing over of Herat to its rightful safavid soveriegn... he severely punished the agents and decided he would do the same to their preposterous masters in Mashad"
page 49

Regarding Ahmad Shah Abdali's religious mysticism:

In fact there is a letter PRESERVED IN TURKEY In the state annals in its original form from Ahmad Shah to the Ottoman Sultan. In it Ahmad Shah expresses his religious ideology that Nadir Shah was a punishment of God. Why Maseed?

The Iranians, according to Ahmad Shah had "transgressed to decadence and sensual pleasures...this time, no one heeded religious prescriptions (Nawahi yi Allahi wa iqtiza yi asar u sunun i hazrat e rasulat i
panahi)....

and their marry making and dumthop was termed by him as:

"asar i fitna u shararaat"

page 50 FROM THE PERSIAN QUOTES OF THE LETTER THEMSELVES.
Page 50: Secondary reference from Jilani Jalali via the manuscript preserved in the National Archives in Istanbul

He went on in the letter to say that he was leading the life of a "mystic sufi, contemplating the truths of the "hidden world" and renouncing worldly pleasures... and he credited God with bestowing on him his earthly leadership. (page 50)

In the famous Ahmad Shah, Nama

"he situates himself in the tradition of the early associates of the Prophet and the first rightly guided caliph (page 51 and sub reference)"

According to page 51, Ahmad Shah Baba took such tutelage from the Ottoman Sultanate and asked the Caliph to recognize the 12ver shiites as an additional madhab so that he could establish , in the words of the author himself:

"An Eastern Pan Islamic empire...." page 51.. though Ahmad Shah was not personally convinced of Shiism as per "this was not determined by any personal religious convictions" in regard to any view that he had in regard to shiism actually being acceptable.

According to Dr. Gommans:

"from the Durrani point of view, the Indian descendents of Timur (Gurganiya) had been negligent and powerless in holding up the empire and the right religion." (page 55)

According to Tarikh e Ahmad Shah as referenced in the text (page 56) Ahmad Shah believed he was rushing there to "destroy the unbelievers"

In fact, Ahmad Shah Durrani recieved the letters inviting him to committ to Jihad in India by Shah Waliullah, "who urged the Durrani emperor to intervene in Indian affairs for the sake of Islam" the subreference given on page 56 KA Nizami's 1950's era text on Shah Waliullah.

His contemporary and freind, the Rohilla hafiz Rahmat Khan "history subscribes to the Durrani motive of invasion: to wage jihad against the marathas, sikhs, farangi, and jat infidels." page 61 sub reference to Hafiz Rahmat's Khulasaat

Submit Maseed... you have lost. The proof of history lays against you. Do not even dare to encroach on the history of Ahmad Shah or Mir Wais and claim that they would be sick, sell out Karzai and Achakzai style people.

And in regard to that personage of Shah Waliullah Delvi... do you know why your friend Baygham would cring when he would hear that name of that friend and advisor of Ahmad Shah Abdali's?

Because that same Shah Waliullah would give birth to a son... named Shah Abdul Aziz... do you know who that was Maseed? No, you probably do not wrorre. So i will tell you:
He was the seed, the son, the scion of Shah Waliullah and the advisor to.... wait for it... wait for it...

http://www.tribalanalysiscenter.com/PDF-TAC/Hindustani%20Fanatics-Deobandism.pdf

Syed Ahmad Barelvi

Loooool Oh and Maseed Wrorre, I am sorry, but I am about to crush your ahistorical attitude in regard to your view that true Pashtuns have no focus on the plight of other Islamic people. You rage against the Uzbeks and the Xuighars and the others who have taken refuge in the Pashtun lands...

In fact he was involved in Pan Islamist moves against even China!! I will now provide neutral, STRONG, academic sources for this.

"As in India, Ahmad Shah tried to legitimize his activities in Turkestan by taking up the cause of endangered Muslims." page 63 of the same text by Jos JL Gommans called The Rise of the Indo Afghan Empire 1710-1780

Just as Shah Waliullah was a part of the Naqshbandiyaa political order in India (page 56)... Pan Islamism in that era stretched to Central Asia:

In a fascinating discussion that Dr. Gommans gives about the "Muslim Brotherhood of its Day"

Beginning under the discussion of Turan on page 61:

"In central Asia the Most Powerful representatives of Islam were the numerous sufi orders... amongst with Naqshbandiyaa was the most influentiall" Page 63...

.... "the political influence of these khojas (term used for a subsection of these Muslim networks)

"The Political influence of these Khojas recieved a serious blow during the Chinese annexation of East Turkestan. Some of them were incorporated into Chinese nobility... but by sending them to Beijing, they were deprived of all former attachments in the area. The leading figures were forced to flee to Khokan and Badakhshan. They appealed to the local Muslim rulers to take action, to mount a holy war, and to restore them in their former eminence. In order to counter these instigations, the Chinese authorities paid large amounts of cash and tea to enlist the help of the Muslim rulers to keep these refugee Khojas at bay."

So let us halt here... we now have refugee Muslims taking refuge in Badaskhan. LET US REPEAT THIS FOR YOU MASEED... WE HAVE MUSLIM REFUGEES TAKING REFUGE IN AN AFGHAN PROVINCE IN THE ERA OF AHMAD SHAH. HMMMMM, DOES THIS SOUND FAMILIAR????

And these Muslims were asking the Muslim brethren to aid them in resisting the imperial chinese. HMMMM, SOUND FAMILIAR MASEED?

Out comes the LION OF KANDAHAR, the true Ahmad Shah Abdali of history:

Once again, not my words, but the words of the esteemed professor himself:

"These Chinese annexation of eastern Turkisten and the perilous conditions of the Khojas posed an ideal challenge to the Durrani championship of Islam."

PAGE 65

And what did Ahmad Shah Durrani Abdali, God bless his soul do next? He took on an empire at the risk of his own people. All of the secularist atheist nationalists cannot even counter this or explain this risk he put Afghanistan into when, once again, according to the same source:

"In 1763, Ahmad Shah played the leading role in striving to marshall a United Islamic force to push the Manchus back into China."...

"he planned to send an army to stand between Kokand and Tashkent while he tried to raise enough military support to expel the invaders and to arrange a central asian embargo on Chinese trade. The sublime Durrani Shah also sent an embassy to Beijing to enter a plea on behalf of the Khojas, but the Chinese emperor, true to his own inherited ideal of world supremecy, mistook the embassy for a tribute mission, and a sign of surrender, so the embassy did not achieve its purpose. Page 65

SUBREFERENCE from primary source: Eichorn, Kolonialkampfe p 315-316 and in J Fletcher, "China and Central Asia 1368-1884 in the Chinese World Order from harvard university press pages 220, 359

"Thus reviewing the the Durrani claims in Turkistan, we may conclude that, although Ahmad Shah could not as openly and visibly claim Durrani suzerainty over Turkistan ... he nevertheless propagated his championship of Islam, as he had done in India." page 66

http://books.google.com/books?id=-2TH8UYeAaoC&pg=PA65&lpg=PA65&dq=fletcher+the+chinese+world+order+ahmad+shah&source=bl&ots=Q3Z7XdbK4M&sig=CUePTmrgvsrC_ftbzoBjt1uksGk&hl=en&ei=bJrFTpTcGOng0QH1rKz0Dg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CB0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=fletcher%20the%20chinese%20world%20order%20ahmad%20shah&f=false

So Maseeda, the guests of the faithful Mehsuds and the faithful honorable, God fearing Wazirs and other unnamed tribes: The Uzbeks, the Arabs, and the Chinese, the Sudanese, the Malaysians, the Turks, all of them... are welcomed under the auspices of Ahmad Shah's Tarikh to Pashtun lands. The Khojas were forced out by the anti Islamic Chinese and they found refuge in Afghanistan under Ahmad Shah, and they openly asked his intervention on behalf of Islam. Ahmad Shah OPENLY sough to rally Muslims and to take on the Chinese Manchurian juggernaut at the risk of his own empire. This is Pashtunwali, this is Islam, and this is the rules of Ahmad Shah Nama. He is ours and purely ours. You can, by way of history, lay no claim to Ahmad Shah Abdali's legacy. He was in no way in the same lower caste and class as Achakzai, Karzai, Asfandyaar, Ghani, and the whole lot of them.

Now we have provided par excellence, without any certain doubt, the basis for Islamism in Pashtunlands and for the welcoming of those you deem outsiders. Those that welcome them and fight aggression are following purely in the example of Ahmad Shah as per his intervention on behalf of the refugee Khojas against the Chinese.

We all here want to see the above addressed point by point by AbassiAfghan, SoldatAmir, and Toramana, and any others if they wish to refute it.

Please, refute each point made here above with your supporting evidence and facts (sources)

Thanks.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

barkzai , why do you always mention only western sources , i mean no one time i see you qouting habibi for exampel or other afghan sources .

do you have no access to the books ? should i sent you one ? even one can buy them in kabul .and even peshawar .

its really funny how you try to profile yourself as a critical scholar , by qouting western authors because they are more objective ? or because they use more so calles evidence ?


you know barakzai instead wasting you time , being a historian or wanna be future politician .

become a professor in your art of medicine , and go to kabul at the university , teach and educate doctors .

this would be much more of a help than wasting your time with western historians who write just on which direction the wind blows own.


doctors never happen to be good politicians , especially not in afghanistan

This is not politics its history. I am 6 months away from being a full attending and have traveled to our regions to help.

The sources cited, such as Gommel, refer directly to the Persian sources that supercede Kabuli apologists. For instance, Ahmad Shah Nama and Tarikh e Ahmad Shah are referenced.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Ahmad Shah, was your typical imperial leader at the time, he used Islam to fight off the Sikhs and Hindus, and access Indian's vast wealth and resouces, If we look logically at his actions, he was no different than any other leader at that time, even the Uzbeks of North Afghanistan rebelled against his rule that led to many revolts. He could not subdune his own Muslim brothers in the Uzbek lands, so he made a compromised with the Uzbek Emir of Bujhara, this goes to show, your claims of him being an Islamist is flawed, as his ideology and rule was even opposed by Muslims too.

Are you telling me looting and pouring cow blood on Hindu gods is part of Pashtun culture, just because Ahmad Shah Durrani did it, are you telling me discriminating against other Pashtuns such as the Ghilzai, by imposing a Durrani monarchy, that only appointed Durranis as the natural leaders of the Pashtun people as part of Pashtun culture just because Ahmad Shah did it?

How can you base todays realities on a man from the 17th century? The Americans slaughtered many native indians, does that mean they should do it now, because their forefathers did it?

Barakzai that is a flawed opinion of yours. Todays terrorists who have occupied Pashtun lands are not sword weilding horsemen, they are armed with an ideology, that attacks the fabric of Pashtun society i.e bombing Hamza Baba's grave, attacking school teachers and hanging political figures in public.

If we all reverted back to the days of Ahmad Shah, most of the Pashtun people would be divided on the grounds of a Durrani dominated Pashtun land, no wonder Durranis empire fell apart, it was due to this Durrani Supramacy over other tribes, which led to Timur Shah being appointed soley on his tribal status and bloodline and we saw how that went.

Another factor you can look at, is the fact, that he appointed his whole bloodline to be leaders, which seems very unislamic, in my eyes, and typical of your usual king or ruler during those days, Europe was the same too, kings and queens were appointed due to blood line and hertiage.

Accepting foreigners as part of Pashtun culture in the form of Islamism is quite desparate, especially from you. Look at the case of the Indian Mujahideen leader, who came to Pashtun lands to fight the Sikhs, but was booted out and his men were killed handed over to the Sikhs.

How can you say and use Ahmed Shah Baba as an example to justify foreigners, who kill Pashtuns daily, as part of Pashtun culture to shelter them? What makes you think all Pashtuns have accepted these Islamists with accordance to thier traditions? BarakzaiAbdali, a Maseed is banned from entering Wana, but an Arab is accepted, I cant see why you can not see the political sense of this arguement, in "todays" reality, foreigners are sheltered in the Pashtun region by ISI and other intelligence agencies, hence the reason why many tribal anti foreigner elders have been killed off.

We are not living in Ahmad Shah Babas era, we are in the 21st century, there nations that fight for interests, there are agencies that battle eachother through all kinds of means and ways.

I find quite insulting of you, to suggest Pashtuns are born into a culture that gives shelter to Suicide bombers from the middle east.

Here is where you logic fails Soldat and you are missing the point. Based on the references you are caught in between a rock and a hard place as is your ilk.

1) Regarding the comprimise with the Amir of Bukhara, that in no way undoes the logic, after all the Amir of Bukhara was a Muslim. Rather, it fits in line with the reasoning we provided. He gave Muslim leaders of different ethnicities, and even different sects (for example, Nadir Shah's weak progeny in Mahshad) their titles and lands... he did not do so with the Indian rulers.

2) Your key contention against Pakistan and against Mullah Omar and against pretty much any Islamist movement (and a contention that works against your own views, but you fail to see the irony): Your recurrently themed key contention is that Islam is utilized as a rallying tool and that this is evil. Yet you will quickly find yourself in a massive contradiction if you endorse Ahmad Shah utilizing Islam for political ends, but not others!

So you are caught in a Chinese fingertrap of the mind: Why? Because either Ahmad Shah is genuine (what I believe because his letters and especially his poetry does not reveal a duplicitious man) or he is politically savvy and utilizing Islam as a motivating power to.... wait for it.... wait for it.... wait for it... inflict political policy under the guise of the crescent. So you lose in this argument in that if the Muslims of FATA are using Islam as a motivating force to remove their obstacles, then they are using the same political motivators as their great forefather... if not, then they are genuine.

And then it is you, a nationalist, that will have to justify why its OK to laud Abdali's political and military accomplishments if they used Islamism as a motivating and catalytic factor!

3) Regarding Kingdoms, no one said Abdali was caliph. He was, as per his documented letters, loyal to the Ottoman Caliph. Islam lays down no commentary on dueling caliphates and Ahmad Shah did not see the Caliphate. So in his region, there was no concept of secular democracy and monarchy was the government that he knew best and learned under Nadir Qoli Beg. In fact, Monarchy is not haraam in islam as long it is exercised properly.

Also, you are historically deficient my friend... the rebellions under Zamaan and Timur were because they did not have the savvy of their forefather for granting tribal autonomy. In fact, Zaman Khan tried to kill off Barakzai tribal leaders.

4) Regarding the Ghilzai, you forget the famous poem of Ahmad Shah where he applauds the Ghilzais:

http://www.pashtunforums.com/politic...50/index7.html

Poem is embedded here ^

He says "Taolo yaw dhee, ka Ghilzai ka awdalee (abdalyaan) dhee"

and he went on to note in his face famous love of a nation anthem:

"Da Fareed au the Ashraf daur ba byaa shee"

He was talking about his era being reminiscent of that of Ashraf Hotak (Ghilzai chiefton).

Furthermore, he fought alongside good Ghilzai comrades in Nadir's cavalry.

Out of all of the Pashtuns, Ahmad Shah is the one that does not malign his opposite tribe. Even Khushaal Khaan could not reach such a sublime status. The latter referred to his adversary Yusufzais as "worse than castrated donkeys"

Ahmad Shah's Ghilzai issue also came into play when his cavalry comrade Azad Khan Ghilzai created trouble in Herat. Even then, Ahmad Shah was willing to forgive him.

5) Wana is Ahmadzai Wazir territory. In the time of war, they are perfectly justified in not allowing you in. For instance, you are an open agent that have said you would kill one of their guests and the yargukhel dont know you. It would be stupid of them to let you in there during this turbulent time. Why? So you can drop one of those batraai and guide a drone to some house?

6) Your contention of ISI protection of all outsiders is non evidence based. Its easy to assert something without proof, Farhat Taj Andersen doe sit all the time. One can just as easily assert that these folks are under Pashtun protection just as Ahmad Shah protected the Khojas who were outsiders.

7) You show that you have not read the history of Syed Ahmad. It was not the people of Peshawar that turned on him. In fact Behram Khan Arbab, a LOCAL Khalil tribal leader backed him and it was Sultan Muhammad Telai, a Barakzai outsider and Sikh confidante, that lured him to his death under the pretense of working with him.

8) Elders being killed off: Per our discussion under the tribal elders being killed thread... as noted, you said it was fine when Esmat Muslim was doing it to our tribal leaders in Kandahar. So all of these aforementioned techniques are OK as long as they promote Soldat's viewpoint right? But not when they promote an indigenous one?

9) You have left unexplained Ahmad Shah's enthusiasm for taking on China and sending his embassy. Land gain cannot explain it as the documentation, leading directly to him, shows he tried to unite a Pan Islamic force (reference provided above)

10) Regarding sacking of Hindu temples and the deaths of Red Indians. That is not the issue here... the issue here is you stating again and again that the indigenous Pashtun is some happy go lucky secularist that loves his hindu and Christian brothers and saunters down to the pub for a cold one with them. That is far from the truth. The quintiessential Pashtun may not be the perfect Muslim, just as he may not be the perfect son... but just as he will beat down someone black and blue for insulting his mother or sister... he will take offense at the insult of Islam. Ahmad Shah had no reason to destroy the Delhi temples... the reasoning given in teh text is that he was OFFENDED that the hindus had dared to build so close to dar ul islam. Can you explain this in the context of exediency??? No you cannot. After all, why would he not do what the Mughals had done and just consider Hindus "people of the book" to pacify them???

11) You have yet to deal with the verified Mecca fatwa Mir Wais obtained and his implementation of it, on the behalf of Abdalis who he had pushed to herat when the Persians threatened Herat.

Bottom line Soldat:

Ahmad Shah Baba = Pashtunwali. He was its embodiment. And his example is superior to that of Achakzai or of Asfandyaar and even of Mullah Omar Saheb.