Syiah bukan Islam?

Ketua MUI: Syiah Itu Sah dan Benar sebagai Mazhab dalam Islam

Di hadapan lebih dari seratus pelajar Indonesia yang belajar di Iran, Prof. Umar Shihab menyatakan, "Sunni dan Syiah bersaudara, sama-sama umat Islam, itulah prinsip yang dipegang oleh MUI. Jika ada yang memperselisihkan dan menabrakkan keduanya, mereka adalah penghasut dan pemecah belah umat, mereka berhadapan dengan Allah swt yang menghendaki umat ini bersatu."


Menurut Kantor Berita ABNA, dalam kunjungannya ke Iran atas undangan Majma Taghrib bainal Mazahib Ketua MUI Pusat Prof. DR. KH. Umar Shihab beserta beberapa anggota rombongan menyempatkan mengadakan tatap muka dan pertemuan dengan pelajar Indonesia yang sedang menuntut ilmu di kota suci Qom, Iran. Pertemuan yang dimediasi oleh Sayyid Farid, salah seorang ulama Iran yang sering berkunjung ke Indonesia bertempat di kediaman beliau di Mujtama Maskuni Ayatullah Sistani, Qom. Hadir lebih dari seratus pelajar Indonesia beserta keluarganya dalam pertemuan sederhana yang berlangsung kurang lebih dua jam tersebut.

DR. Khalid Walid, wakil ketua Komisi Ukhuwah Islamiyah MUI memberikan sambutan pengantarnya dengan menjelaskan kedatangan rombongan MUI ke Iran atas undangan Majma Taghrib bainal Mazahib. Rombongan MUI terdiri dari ketua pusat, beberapa ketua harian dan ketua komisi, namun beberapa dari rombongan telah bertolak ke tanah air sehingga tidak sempat mengikuti pertemuan dengan para pelajar Indonesia tersebut. "Dalam kunjungan ini kami telah melakukan beberapa hal, diantaranya, atas nama ketua MUI. KH. Prof. DR. Umar Shihab dan atas nama Majma Taghrib bainal Mazahib Ayatullah Ali Tashkiri, telah dilakukan penandatanganan MOU kesepakatan bersama. Diantara poinnya adalah kesepakatan untuk melakukan kerjasama antara MUI dengan Majma Taghrib bainal Mazahib dan pengakuan bahwa Syiah adalah termasuk mazhab yang sah dan benar dalam Islam. " Jelas DR. Khalid.

Lebih lanjut beliau menjelaskan,"Diantara bentuk kerjasama yang disepakati adalah pengiriman para peneliti dan ulama Indonesia ke Iran untuk mengikuti pertemuan dan pendidikan khusus mengenai beberapa hal yang beragam di Iran begitu juga sebaliknya, ulama-ulama dan peneliti Iran akan berkunjung ke Indonesia. Di samping itu juga kita telah bertemu dengan Menteri Luar Negeri Iran, Departemen Pengurusan Haji dan juga berkunjung ke Kamar Dagang Industri Iran untuk bekerjasama dalam produk halal. Insya Allah, jalinan kerjasama ini diharapkan dengan tujuan mengeratkan hubungan antara Republik Islam Iran dengan masyarakat muslim Indonesia."

"Semoga dengan adanya kesepakatan dan kerjasama tersebut ukhuwah Islamiyah dapat terjalin dengan baik dan kedua belah pihak bisa saling memahami." Harapnya.
Perpecahan dan Kebodohan, Ujian bagi Umat Islam Saat Ini

Selanjutnya, KH. Prof. DR. Umar Shihab menyampaikan nasehatnya di hadapan seratus lebih pelajar Indonesia yang hadir. Beliau menyatakan bahwa hidup di dunia ini penuh dengan tantangan, ujian dan kesulitan-kesulitan. "Tidak ada seorangpun yang hidup ini di dunia ini tidak luput dari ujian, diantara ujian tersebut adalah fitnah, kekurangan harta, kelaparan dan kematian. Namun dalam konteks kehidupan kita sekarang kata para ulama, ujian terberat yang dihadapi kaum muslimin saat ini ada dua. Yang pertama, adalah ujian perpecahan. Betapa sulitnya kita menjalin persatuan. Perpecahan begitu mudah terjadi, antara keluarga, sesama pengikut agama, antar Negara dan sebagainya. Ujian yang kedua adalah kebodohan. Mayoritas umat Islam sulit untuk melepaskan diri dari belenggu kebodohan, karena pura-pura tidak tahu atau memang sama sekali tidak mau tahu."

Lebih lanjut menjelaskan, "Masyarakat Indonesia saat ini diuji dengan perpecahan. Dalam internal umat Islam sendiri terdapat berbagai macam kelompok yang mengarah kepada perpecahan, ada yang menyatakan diri sebagai kelompok liberal, kelompok anti agama, kelompok anti Syiah dan lain-lain. Keberadaan kelompok-kelompok ini sangat mengancam persatuan umat Islam. Pada kesempatan ini saya akan menyampaikan ada dua kelompok pemecah umat Islam. Yang pertama kelompok pemecah dari luar umat Islam, yakni dari kalangan Yahudi dan Nasrani. Sebagaimana yang dijelaskan Al-Qur'an keduanya tidak akan senang sampai umat Islam mengikuti agama dan kelompok mereka. Mereka melakukan berbagai macam cara dengan giat utuk memecah belah umat, melalui buku-buku, selebaran dan memanfaatkan tekhnologi yang mereka miliki. Mereka menipu dan menghasut umat misalnya melalui pemahaman pluralisme yang menyatakan semua agama sama. Ini adalah pemahaman yang sesat bahkan mengarah kepada kekafiran. Karena itu MUI telah mengeluarkan fatwa bahwa pernyataan dan keyakinan semua agama sama adalah pernyataan yang tidak bisa dibenarkan dan MUI telah mengharamkannya."

"Yang kedua, kelompok pemecah dari kalangan umat Islam sendiri. Tidak sedikit dari kelompok umat Islam yang justru memecah belah umat. Mereka mengeluarkan pernyataan-pernyataan yang memicu perpecahan umat, mereka misalnya menyebut maulid itu bid'ah, mengucapkan shalawat di setiap kegiatan itu bid'ah sehingga dengan pemahaman yang seperti itu mereka menyesatkan dan memusuhi kelompok Islam yang mengamalkannya. Kita harus waspada terhadap kelompok pemecah dari dalam ini, mereka bahkan sampai menggunakan banyak uang saking gigihnya untuk memecah belah umat ini."

"Ujian yang kedua adalah kebodohan. Pelajari dan tuntutlah ilmu agama ini dengan benar dan dari sumbernya yang asli. Al-Qur'an menyebutkan, yang manakah lebih layak kamu ikuti, orang yang memiliki pengetahuan atau orang yang tidak memiliki pengetahuan?. Dan Nabi Muhammad saww dalam haditsnya menyebutkan, Aku adalah kota ilmu, dan Ali adalah pintunya. Dari riwayat Nabi ini, jelas disebutkan bahwa Sayyidina Ali lebih layak diikuti setelah Nabi. Karenanya tuntutlah ilmu yang berasal langsung dari sumbernya. Sayangnya kebanyakan kaum muslimin menyingkirkan dan melupakan hadits-hadits yang bersumber dari Sayyidina Ali, keluarga, sahabat utama dan terdekat dengan Nabi, dan lebih banyak mengamalkan dan menerima hadits dari selain beliau."

Lebih spesifik mengenai ujian kebodohan ini, Prof Umar Shihab menasehatkan kepada para hadirin, "Selama di Iran belajarlah dengan sungguh-sungguh, rauplah ilmu sebanyak-banyaknya disini, dan ketika kembali ke tanah air, sampaikanlah argumen-argumen yang benar mengenai Islam. Tanggung jawab menjaga Islam berada di pundak kalian, para penuntut ilmu. Jauhilah kebodohan! Karena kebodohan adalah musuh kita bersama. Salah seorang ulama terkemuka Sunni asal Kairo, Syaikh Mutalawid Sayhrawi pernah mengatakan, persatuan umat Islam tidak akan tercapai jika umat Islam masih terbelenggu dalam kebodohan. Persatuan umat Islam hanya bisa dicapai jika umat Islam ini pandai. Mereka yang berhak untuk memberikan kritik atas pemahaman orang lain adalah mereka yang pandai dan berilmu, yang memiliki argumen-argumen yang kuat. Namun bukan berarti harus menyalahkan pemahaman yang berbeda. Ketika kalian kembali ke tanah air, silahkan ingin bermazhab apa, selama mazhab tersebut mendapat pengakuan dan pembenaran dari Islam. Sebagaimana MUI telah menyatakan bahwa Sunni dan Syiah sebagai mazhab yang benar. Maka dibenarkan umat Islam di Indonesia untuk memeluk salah satunya. Dan tidak dibenarkan satu sama lain saling menyalahkan yang dapat memecah belah persatuan."

"Satu hal yang mesti ditanamkan dalam benak pikiran saudara-saudara semua, adalah umat Islam hanya akan kuat dengan persatuan, dan menjadi lemah dengan perpecahan. Dan perintah Al-Qur'an umat Islam harus menjalin persatuan dan melarang kita untuk berpecah. Alhamdulillah, kita bersyukur dengan keberadaan Republik Islam Iran, yang sangat gigih bekerja keras untuk mewujudkan persatuan umat Islam ini dan diantara Negara yang menyatakan perlawanan terhadap imperialisme. Presiden SBY pernah berkata langsung kepada saya, Indonesia adalah Negara yang penduduknya umat Islam terbesar di dunia, namun mengapa tidak mampu memberi peranan terhadap terwujudnya persatuan umat Islam, khususnya persatuan antara Sunni dan Syiah?. Karenanya kami dari MUI menyambut baik ajakan dan undangan dari Republik Islam Iran untuk bekerjasama mewujudkan persatuan umat Islam."

Dipenghujung ceramah beliau, Ketua MUI Pusat Prof. DR. Umar Shihab kembali mempertegas pesan beliau kepada para pelajar Indonesia yang hadir, "Pesan Al-Qur'an Innamal mu'minuna ikhwa, orang-orang yang beriman itu bersaudara. Saudara-saudara belajarlah yang bersungguh-sungguh, dan ketika kembali ke tanah air, sampaikanlah ajaran Islam yang benar. Saya tidak menyatakan yang benar itu Syiah atau Sunni, tetapi keduanya. Jadilah rahmat bagi umat sekembali kalian ke tanah air, jangan justru menjadi pemecah belah umat. Dalam Sunni dan Syiah memang ada sekte-sekte atau kelompok yang menyimpang, itu harus kalian jelaskan kepada umat, singkap kekeliruan-kekeliruan mereka dan sampaikan ajaran yang benar. Sunni dan Syiah bersaudara, sama-sama umat Islam, itulah prinsip yang dipegang oleh MUI. Jika ada yang memperselisihkan dan menabrakkan keduanya, mereka adalah penghasut dan pemecah belah umat, mereka berhadapan dengan Allah swt yang menghendaki umat ini bersatu. Saya sudah tua, dan kiprah saya tidak lama lagi akan berakhir. Karenanya kalianlah yang saya harap untuk melanjutkan perjuangan untuk mempersatukan umat. Kembalilah ke tanah air, tunjukkan kiprah dan peran kalian. Semoga Allah swt mempersatukan umat Islam ini, sehingga bisa menjadi rahmat bagi sekalian alam."


Prinsip MUI: Sunni dan Syiah Bersaudara

Setelah Prof. Umar Shihab menyampaikan nasehatnya, dilanjutkan dengan sesi tanya jawab. Beberapa pelajar kemudian mengajukan pertanyaan. Diantara pertanyaan yang diajukan, bisakah MUI wilayah di daerah mengeluarkan fatwa yang bertentangan dengan fatwa yang dikeluarkan oleh MUI Pusat?. Prof Umar Shihab memberikan jawaban, MUI wilayah jika berkaitan khusus dengan persoalan umat di daerahnya dibenarkan untuk mengeluarkan fatwa sendiri, namun jika berkaitan dengan kepentingan nasional, maka yang berhak mengeluarkan fatwa hanya MUI Pusat yang harus diikuti oleh MUI-MUI di daerah. Dan MUI di daerah tidak memiliki wewenang untuk menganulir fatwa yang telah dikeluarkan MUI Pusat. "Misalnya ada MUI Daerah yang mengeluarkan fatwa Syiah itu sesat -namun Alhamdulillah syukurnya belum ada MUI Daerah yang mengeluarkan fatwa seperti itu- maka fatwa tersebut tidak sah secara konstitusi, sebab MUI Pusat menyatakan Syiah itu sah sebagai mazhab Islam dan tidak sesat. Jika ada petinggi MUI yang mengatakan seperti itu, itu adalah pendapat pribadi dan bukan keputusan MUI sebagai sebuah organisasi." Jelas beliau.

Ketika ditanyakan langkah-langkah MUI Pusat yang akan dilakukan untuk mewujudkan persatuan umat dan menyelesaikan perselisihan Sunni-Syiah, Prof. Umar Shihab menjelaskan bahwa MUI akan menjadi penyelenggara seminar Internasional Persaudaraan umat Islam di bulan Desember akhir tahun ini. "MUI akan mengundang ulama-ulama dari berbagai Negara, dari Mesir, Iran bahkan dari Arab Saudi termasuk Syaikh Yusuf Qhardawi untuk hadir sebagai pembicara. Indonesia insya Allah akan menjadi perintis persatuan umat Islam khususnya antara Sunni dan Syiah, semoga Allah membantu usaha-usaha kita." Jelas beliau.

Setelah memasuki waktu maghrib, dilakukan shalat maghrib berjama'ah. Yang diimami oleh Sayyid Farid, dan Prof. Umar Shihab menjadi jama'ah di shaf pertama. Acara pertemuan tersebut diakhiri dengan makan malam bersama, dan do'a bersama dipenghujung acara dipimpin oleh KH. Prof. DR. Umar Shihab.

Pertemuan Ketua MUI Pusat Prof. DR. Umar Shihab dengan pelajar Indonesia yang sedang berada di Qom Iran ini adalah pertemuan yang kedua kalinya, setelah sebelumnya dua tahun lalu diadakan pertemuan di tempat yang sama.

* Tapi masih ada golongan yang bodoh dan sentiasa mahu jadi bodoh.. Sibuk mahu menghukumkan kafir ke atas syiah dgn pelbagai hujah yang dangkal yg bersifat FITNAH semata2!!!

Isu Bahrain : Qaradhawi dicabar berdebat

Agensi Berita Ahlul Bait (ABNA.ir) – Ayatullah Al-Uzma Makarim Syirazi hari ini memulakan kuliah Bahsil Kharij di masjid A’zam dengan kisah pembentukan revolusi-revolusi serantau terutamanya kebangkitan rakyat Bahrain, jenayah Aali Khalifah dan kenyataan tidak waras beberapa ulama Sunni tentang perkara ini. Beliau menyatakan, “Qardawi adalah seorang pemimpin daripada ulama-ulama Ahlusunnah yang cukup terpelajar, namun baru-baru ini, kata-katanya tentang kebangkitan Syiah dan Sunni di Bahrain menunjukkan beliau bukan seorang alim agama.

“Beliau menyatakan bahawa dirinya tidak berminat terhadap kebangkitan di Bahrain dan ingin mereka ini dibubarkan, sedangkan seorang ugamawan tidak sepatutnya berbicara seperti ini, iaitu pilih kasih antara umat Islam. Bagaimana mungkin beliau menyokong Mesir dan Libya akan tetapi mempertahankan diktator di Bahrain? Tidak benar satu atap dua udara buat sebuah alam”.


Ketaksuban membawa keuntungan buat Zionis

Beliau menyatakan, “Di Bahrain, tidak semuanya Syiah. Syiah dan Sunni bersama-sama bangkit dan ulama Sunni Bahrain turut berucap untuk kebangkitan. Anda hendaklah menyingkirkan ketaksuban dan berdalillah dengan logika. Dua udara satu atap merupakan fanatik kaum dan ia memberi keuntungan untuk Israel dan musuh Islam”.

Ayatullah Makarim Syirazi sambil menunjukkan perancangan musuh yang masih mengugut Iran berkata, “Qarawi, pemimpin Al-Azhar, mufti besar Syria, marilah berbincang bersama saya, sampai kita tahu jikalau tidak ada revolusi Islam Iran dan kamu tidak berbicara tentang Amerika, apakah yang akan terjadi kepada situasi serantau? Benarkah rakyat Mesir mampu membentuk revolusi? Apakah Israel tidak punya komplot untuk seluruh Timur Tengah?


Jikalau tidak ada Iran, nescaya Zionis menelan Timur Tengah

Marji’ Taqlid ini mengingatkan, “Jikalau Syiah di Iran dan Lubnan tidak menyerang Israel, situasi serantau tidak akan jadi seperti ini, setelah itu mereka sangat berwaspada supaya revolusi ini tidak diambil alih, sekiranya tidak ada Iran nescaya Israel menelan Timur Tengah, Qardawi hendaklah lebih banyak membaca”.

Beliau sambil mengisyaratkan perpaduan umat Islam berkata, “Wahabi adalah penentang Syiah di mana kita hendaklah bertoleransi dalam berdepan dengan mereka, sehinggakan ada riwayat menyebut kita hendaklah menyertai solat jemaah mereka, kerana jikalau kita berbalah dalam situasi seperti ini maka Israel dan musuh Islam akan meraih keuntungan.

“Meskipun begitu ia bukanlah bermaksud kita mengabaikan pandangan kita sebagai Syiah Imam Dua Belas, dan hendaklah kita berdiri teguh dengan pendirian sendiri dalam menghadapi musuh-musuh yang menghina Ahlul Bait, walaupun golongan ini kecil.

“Barangsiapa yang mengikuti maktab Ahlul Bait adalah dihitung sebagai Syiah, mereka wajib patuh kepada arahan Ahlul Bait dalam menghadapi para Mukhalif seperti Wahabi dan Nasibi. Lihatlah bagaimana Ahlul Bait bertingkah dan ikutilah mereka” (abna.ir)

Wahabis-US killing Muslim Shia on Bahrain

Is this what they call sectarian revolution?

What are really happen in Bahrain

Bahrain Is My Homeland - البحرين ديرتي

SOme peoples said this revolt is a sectarian revolt.. how stupid there are because didn't saw what is really happen there..

World become silent about Bahrain issues

No one ask about the sect of the Egyptian, Tunisian or Libyan people

“We stood as Shia and Sunnis with the Palestinian people. No one asked about the religion or sect of the Palestinian, Egyptian, Tunisian or Libyan people,” said Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah.
Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah delivers a televised speech on revolutions and unrest in multiple Arab countries:

-Our gathering today is to voice our support for our Arab people and their revolutions and sacrifices, especially in Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain, Libya and Yemen.

-The value of this solidarity is moral, political, and ethical, and its effects are also moral. The origin of what is going on – which could decide the fate of an uprising here, a confrontation there, or a resistance there – the origin is the steadfastness of peoples, linked to their faith and high spirituality.

-You remember that during the July [2006] war, every word and statement in any state and anywhere in the world had its impact on the resistance, the people and the displaced.

-The same is the case with the Arab revolts. We tell them that we support them, that we stand by your side and we are ready to help you toward your interest and ours, with your and our capabilities.

-We have to stress that these revolutions are the will of the people themselves. Any accusation that the US manufactured and launched these revolutions is unjust speech toward these peoples, especially that we are talking about regimes which are allied with the USA, serve the American project and pose no threat to Israel.

- Is it reasonable that America would come to obedient and submissive regimes and launch popular uprisings in their face? This would make no sense.

-These popular revolutions are real. They came from the people and the political parties followed. They express awareness, enthusiasm and willingness to sacrifice. This should not be forgotten by the regimes that are facing these peoples.

-We saw people baring their chests and saying “open fire”. This means that killing, threats and massacres could not take the people out of the squares and the arenas of confrontation.

-It is a divine law that when a people comes with this level of will, sacrifice and patience, it cannot be met with defeat – not by America, Israel, or any tyrannical regime anywhere in the world.

-Our call, from the Resistance in Lebanon that liberated in 2000 and was victorious in 2006, is that the only choice is to stand firm, be patient and trust in God’s victory and help to you, if you stay in the squares of confrontation and jihad.

-What was the reaction of these regimes to rightful popular demands? Instead of starting an honest dialogue and making true reforms, and instead of entering honest dialogue with the representatives of the revolutions, they resorted to repression, murder, and humiliation.

-They [the revolutionaries] were insulted and described as rats and sectarian, [accused of] taking hallucinating pills and being American agents. This complicated the issue and disabled any possibility of dialogue. It raised the level of the demands and expectations of these peoples.

-A great victory was achieved in Egypt and Tunisia. Libya entered civil war, and in Bahrain and Yemen the regimes put their own peoples on the brink of civil war.

-We should contemplate the US and Western performance. We can understand the US policy toward the revolutions via multiple scenarios. [At first maybe] it is possible to preserve the puppet regime by making some superficial reforms or giving the regime a chance to abolish the revolution. When it starts to cost the US, its administration asks the puppet rulers to go into exile and send the people to their homes without realizing their demands.

-In all this, the US administration is trying to look like it supports the Arab revolts, but this will not be believed by our peoples who are aware enough of the US policies. They know that their regimes are made in the US and have enjoyed US protection for decades. The US administration is complicit in the crimes of these regimes and everything they did against their own peoples.

-As long as US policy towards Palestine and its people remains as it is, then any US comments about defending the peoples of Egypt, Tunisia, Bahrain or Yemen will have bad intentions. The background is not that [US President Barack] Obama’s administration is a different administration and wants to support the rights of the peoples. The Arab peoples should keep their eyes on Palestine. We can review our stance on the US administration if the administration itself changes its policy toward the Palestinian cause.

-In Tunisia and Egypt a great victory was achieved thanks to many circumstances, of which the most important are: First, the steadfastness of the Tunisian and Egyptian people and their great sacrifices. Second, the neutrality of the army, despite the circumstances of this neutrality. Third, popular hostility to the regime, since no regime in Tunisia or Tunisia found anyone to defend it.

The US and the West gave the Libyan regime time to smash the revolt, but the people stood firm. If this people collapsed, then the world would have sat down with Qaddafi and negotiated with him. Qaddafi’s money would have gone into the pockets of figures in the EU and elsewhere. The rebels in Libya had no choice but to fight.

-In my experience, I have found that in all the faces of the Libyan rebels I saw, there was determination and will. The Libyan situation became complicated because of the international intervention that has begun, which could take this country into the game of nations. From the resisting Lebanon, I salute the rebels in all the cities of Libya.

-The greatest crime against Lebanon, Jerusalem and Palestine is the Qaddafi’s kidnapping of Imam Moussa Sadr. This remains subject to condemnation. Qaddafi’s last speech, in which he praised Sadr and said that Sadr visited Libya and was martyred by the verdicts of the Libyan judiciary, is all lies. We are looking forward to the day when Sadr can be liberated from this dictatorial tyrant.

-In Yemen there are many complications, but no doubt that we absolutely cannot be silent about the murder and crimes that are occurring. We salute the resistance of the Yemeni people and their commitment the peacefulness of their movement. The Yemeni people is armed, yet they show awareness by staying calm, keeping the movements peaceful, and not going to civil war.

-Concerning Bahrain, we all saw what happened in Bahrain. There is a special unjustice. As you know Bahrain is a small island and its people are fewer than one million. The people came out asking for rights in a peaceful way.

-It was possible to absorb this without reacting against the youth. The regime could have taken steps to rebuild lost trust with the opposition, but unfortunately it responded against the humble youth movement by inviting to dialogue under [cover of] murder. The people affirmed national unity and replied with flowers, and affirmed that there is no sectarian division. The [regime] sought help from armies against them and killed, wounded, and detained.

-Here there is strange irony: the Arab League and the Arab peoples, faced with the situation in Libya, did not say a word and did not send any army to defend the people. Yet in Bahrain they sent armies to defend a regime that was not threatened with collapse.

-The regime in Bahrain was not threatened and the resistance was peaceful, yet the army was used against it. This is a first. We heard that some arrested opposition leaders had their houses demolished. This is Israeli style, by the way. They demolished Pearl Square the same way. All this we could remain quiet about, since violence is the nature of tyrants and sacrifice is the nature of the holy warrior.

-The biggest injustice was to blockade these people and wound them under the banner of sectarianism. Here I salute all the Sunni movements, and I should salute the expressive stance of [Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyep Erdogan]. I ask some in the Arab and Islamic world who are remaining silent about the injustice that our brothers in Bahrain are facing: Why stay silent about these peaceful protests or condemn their movements? Is it because they are Shia? If someone in a country belonged to a certain sect, should he be relieved of his human rights? Is it because the majority of the Bahraini opposition belong to the Shia sect that they are relieved of their rights and fatwas are issued against them? Where is the justice in this?

-We stood as Shia and Sunnis with the Palestinian people. No one asked about the religion or sect of the Palestinian, Egyptian, Tunisian or Libyan people.

We all stood with them, and this is our duty. The [Iranian Supreme Guide] Imam [Ali] Khamenei stood with the Tunisian, Egyptian and Libyan peoples, not to mention his historic stand with the Palestinian people. Does this stance have a sectarian background, or a humanitarian one?

-With all courage I want to ask – and it was not meant that someday I would stand and speak about an Arab regime here and an Arab regime there – what is the difference between the Khalifah family in Bahrain, the Mubarak family in Egypt, and Qaddafi’s regime in Libya?

-What is happening in Bahrain is not a sectarian movement, and these useless arms will not stop the free rebels. Our brothers and sisters should not be affected by the sectarian rhetoric because many people in the Arab world are standing with you.

-I tell these brothers to resist in defending your rights, and I tell them that they have a wise and courage leadership that you have to listen to. Your blood and wounds will defeat the tyrants. What you are doing today is worth the sacrifice. To the leaders of Libya, Bahrain and Yemen: how can you remain on your thrones after all these crimes?

-As a result of the abandonment of the Arab leaders, or the majority of them, the door has been opened to foreign intervention in Libya and in every Arab country. This brings us back to the era of direct colonialism. In this fateful phase, every able side should intervene to find a solution. Where is Arab mediation and where is the mediation of the Organization of the Islamic Conference? There are trusted frameworks in the Arab world that could seriously mediate. There is still a chance for this. Instead of sending armies, the Arab countries should send their foreign ministers.

-Over the last two months, after the collapse of the cabinet and the appointment of a new figure, we witnessed an organized campaign under the slogan of “the removal of non-state arms.” Everything that could be said was said, and all media means were used, even cartoons like ‘Mufasa and Simba’.

-The fact that they were able to say all these things without any clashes occurring proves that they are lying. It is proof that no one has a gun to their head. Moreover, the Amal Movement and Hezbollah were partners with the LAF day and night to protect whoever attacks the Resistance. We found nothing to debate or discuss in the content.

-The issue of the Resistance cannot be addressed through incitement. We always used to say that we are not afraid of dialogue and we do not mind having dialogue, since our approach to national defense is being studied in the most important military academies in the world. All this noise will not affect the Resistance’s performance. It is continuing to train and arm to improve its level and to cooperate in the “People, Army, and Resistance” formula. The most recent result was the dismantling of an espionage device. This will not decrease the faith of the Resistance’s supporters – rather, it will increase it.

-We should deal with everything being said in a calm way, and there is no need for worry. The arms of the Resistance are fine and are pointed at the enemy. Our eyes are looking toward to the enemy, and there is no need for worry.

-WikiLeaks show the hopes hung on the [Israeli] attack [of July 2006] and show the size of March 14’s disappointment in the [Resistance’s] victory. We will wait until the documents finish. The first section of WikiLeaks is where [former US Ambassador to Lebanon Jeffrey] Feltman transmits the wishes and hopes of some figures and we have no problem with this. Let them analyze as they please. In this section, if any figure is denying that [the leaks] are true, we will accept it.

-However, the second section is not analysis, but requests. Someone asked the US ambassador to ask Israel to invade Bint Jbeil and to not stop the war unless these conditions were fulfilled: the deployment of UNIFIL. This is a call for the enemy to kill and destroy Lebanon and a part of its people, Resistance and army. These are not emotions.

-In this section, there are people who reviewed their stances, changed their political path, and stood with the resistance; and there are others who are still saying the same things and doing what they did during the July 2006 war: calling for the destruction of Lebanon for political purposes.

-In fact we are preparing a judicial file in a civilized way, especially when one of them comes and says “bomb them [the Resistance]” after July 15. The blood of all those who were martyred after that date is on his neck.

-I stood in the victory ceremony and said let us rebuild Lebanon together with those who plotted against us and participated in killing our women and children. We all knew then what had happened and who plotted against us, but today everything is in the newspapers and the Internet. We will deal with this in a modern way: we will prepare a judicial file and prosecute the people who participated in killing us.

-The majority should be counted after the Bristol conference and March 14’s refusal to participate in the cabinet. Of course there are many questions. There are pressures on the cabinet formation and its ministerial statement. The issue is not internal – [although] there are legitimate internal requests – but rather the issue is that March 14 is asking for a cabinet of technocrats. Did you accept a centrist premier in order to form a cabinet of technocrats? The PM-designate is under much pressure, and if someday we have to tell details, we will say them. Hopefully the new majority will work to form a cabinet headed by PM-designate Najib Mikati and this is a political challenge which we will withstand.

I've saw a lot of differences about people between Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Bahrain. World today includes pious peoples among Sunnis become silent about what happen in Bahrain because this revolt is made by Shia people. Seems they Shia, no body cannot support this sectarian revolt (said Qaradhawi ) and the protester deserve pay what have they done. No matter if this people been killed or finished as long as they cannot take over the tyrant Wahabis-Sunnis kingdom. The Sunnis have forgot what happen at July 2006 when the Zionis army come to invade Lubnan and killed a lot of people among Sunnis there. The Hezbollah came to defend the country without care either they are Sunnis or not but a human and Muslim, they must be helped.

At Palestine that full of Muslim Sunnis, Iran never stop from being support them even they are from difference sect. To help people doesn't care about which sect, country are from as long as they a Muslims and being suppress by other part, they must be helped. How shamed to be hypocrites Muslims like this could dare to prejudis other part only because different sect.

click to enlarge

Shi'ism in Malaysia: In the Crosshairs of Regional and Imperial Agendas

In the shadow of the imperialist project against the heart of the Muslim world, the causes of ethnic and sectarian frictions, as well as the mechanisms for their resolution, have been dragged into a wider, more complex political dynamic. Over the past decade, we have witnessed sectarian tensions, in one form or another, encumbering nations and peoples spanning from the westernmost point of the Sahara to the southern tip of continental Eurasia. The extent to which the rise of this phenomenon is an outcome of the imperialist project is entirely overlooked in western analysis. Instead, focus is laid squarely on 'indigenous factors' and so-called 'historical motivations' that are buried somewhere deep in history's endless bosom.

In essence, the sectarian phenomenon is a smokescreen; a myth of sorts, that is amplified and propagated in order to conveniently merge with the political objectives of stakeholders who neither have qualms with 'playing dirty', nor have any moral issues against plastering the '(un/intended) collateral damage' label wherever and whenever possible. [1]

Through its financial backing and institutional propagation of Wahhabism, Saudi Arabia (a key US ally) has played a critical role in fomenting sectarian strife. For a sect whose early beginnings are peppered with tales of overwhelming victories that involved the ransacking and desecration of some of the most sacred sites in Islam, it is not hard to grasp the special utility that Wahhabism affords as a medium to provoke inter-sectarian tensions. Indeed, the fashionable practise of takfir (labelling fellow Muslims as infidels) in recent times has its roots in the hostile and exclusionary outlook of the Wahhabi school of thought. [2]

One of the principal manifestations of this trademark hostility is found in the severe condemnations and juridical verdicts issued by Wahhabi scholars against mourning ceremonies for the grandson of the Holy Prophet, Imam Hussain, as well as celebrations held to mark the birth of the Holy Prophet. Whilst there is wide-scale state repression to prevent such gatherings in Saudi Arabia and nearby Gulf states such as Kuwait and the UAE, the level of repression is arguably far worse in countries outside the Middle East where Wahhabism has gained a foothold – as the dominant religious current – either in the national or sub-national contexts. For instance, it has become customary for mourning gatherings and processions in Pakistan to be the target of deadly attacks; particularly in the north-western FATA and NWFP provinces, resulting in the deaths of tens, if not hundreds, each year.

In connection, on the night of 15th December last year, security forces from the Selangor Islamic Affairs Department (JAIS) in Malaysia raided a Shi'ite centre and arrested at least 128 of those in attendance; the gathering was commemorating the martyrdom of the grandson of the Prophet of Islam. Some of those arrested are being held under the infernal Internal Security Act (ISA) which allows for the detention of an individual without trial or criminal charges under the pretext of national security. Other charges include violation of Article 12(c) of the Selangor Syariah Crimes Enactment 1995 which relates to conduct 'that is in contempt of the rightful authorities, or defies, violates or questions an order or directive that ... the mufti has stated or issued through a fatwa.' Rather conveniently, a fatwa issued in Selangor province prohibits being involved in, learning or propagating Shi'ite teachings. In simpler terms, there is to be no place for Shi'ites – as a religious denomination – in Malaysia.

Subsequent to the December raid, the extent of vitriolic abuse against Shi'ites in the national press has often bordered on outright lunacy. Take for instance, the suggestion by Mohamad Rais Rasid, JAIS deputy director for enforcement, to build a detention centre especially for followers of deviant Islamic teachings – in other words, Shi'ites:

"They must not be allowed to share cell rooms with other detainees because we are worried that this group would affect the faith of others ... Let them be confined together among themselves ... If we don't have such detention centres, we will have a dilemma." [3]

Far from being a one-off anomaly, the above mentality is in fact illustrative of the attitude of JAIS towards the country's Shi'ite citizens. On the heels of the December raid, the rector of the International Islamic University of Malaysia (IIUM), Dr. Syed Arabi, signed a memorandum of understanding with his counterpart from the Islamic University of Medina (located in Saudi Arabia) on the need to prevent students from getting involved with Shi'ites; a clear indicator of the pervasive influence of the Saudi Kingdom on the religious infrastructure in Malaysia. [4]

It is interesting to note that US Secretary of State, Ms. Hillary Clinton, was an invited guest at IIUM in early November last year. The rectors of the respective institutions evidently had no problems offering a platform to the secretary of state of an imperial state that is overtly engaged in unjust wars against two fellow Muslim nations, but they regarded it imperative to urgently set-up an MoU to ensure that no students encounter Shi'ite teachings – speaks volumes!

On their part, the demands of Malaysia's Shi'ite population have been very straight-forward. Community leader, Kamil Zuhairi Abdul Aziz, asked: "If other communities like Hindus, Buddhists, Christians, Sikhs and others have their right to worship and practice under the constitution, then why not us?" [5] In a dire attempt to address the violation of their rights, the country's Shi'ites have made a plea to the Malaysian Human Rights Commission (Suhakam). Those arrested in the raid are expected to attend a court hearing on January 20. If found guilty, the punishments may range from 'six strokes' to 3 years in prison; those held under the ISA can, in theory, be held indefinitely without charge.

Beneath an ostensible veneer of sectarian motivations for the recent escalations in Selangor, the real issues relate to what are fundamentally the crude political interests of local and regional actors. Within this context, it is easy to overlook the pressing need to overhaul existent legal and constitutional mechanisms in countries such as Malaysia, which generate systemic discrimination on sectarian or other grounds. Lasting reforms cannot be achieved however, in the midst of friction and hostilities.

In conclusion, Saudi Arabia's role as patron of a global network of Wahhabist surrogate institutions on the one hand, and the kingdom's permanent presence within the orbit of US influence on the other, presents formidable challenges for leaders across the Muslim world who are striving for closer ties between various Islamic sects. Furthermore, the phenomenon of rising sectarianism overlaps with the wider imperialist project which is both contingent on, and thrives within, a climate of regional instability and tension. In this regard, bodies such as the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) must begin to take decisive stances if they indeed seek to 'safeguard and protect the interests of the Muslim world'.

At another level, governments that acquiesce to the Wahhabist, Saudi project must realise sooner rather than later, that it is impossible to reconcile the promotion of a nation's image on the regional and world scenes as brotherly and democratic, whilst the most basic human rights are not merely trampled upon, but very explicitly abused by functionaries of the state. Additionally, leading figures in such states would do well to observe patterns of correlation between the promotion of Saudi Arabia's Wahhabi doctrine and the growth of extremism. In this respect, the disastrous project undertaken by Pakistani General Zia Ul-Haq in the late Seventies and Eighties that has turned political and civil life in the country into an unrelenting nightmare is a case in point.

For seekers of justice, the overriding responsibility at the present time is to stand in solidarity with the oppressed in Malaysia and elsewhere around the world where the imperialist project continues to bring untold suffering to the lives of millions on a daily basis. Organisations such as the Islamic Human Rights Commission (IHRC) have urged the general public to partake in a mass letter-writing campaign aimed at pressuring the Malaysian government to ensure the safety and welfare of all its citizens. [6] As a final word of caution: it is absolutely crucial that religious leaders and the Muslim masses in general, do not resort to a 'sectarian discourse' in reaction to such instances of oppression, because that is the precise end sought by imperial powers and their regional proxies.

Notes:

1. 'The Myth of Sectarianism in the "New Middle East"', Global Research, 27 April 2009
2. Wahhabism: A Critical Essay' (2002) by Professor Hamid Algar, Islamic Publications International
3. 'Jais Moots Special Detention Camp for Deviationists', Malaysiakini, 24 December 2010
4. 'No Shi'ite Islam in IIUM, says rector', The Malaysian Insider, 30 December 2010
5. 'Shiites Demand Rights of Worship in Malaysia', Jakarta Globe, 28 December 2010
6. 'Action Alert: Malaysia – Raid on Ashura gathering', Islamic Human Rights Commission, 17 December 2010

Written by Ali Jawwad (Source)

Ayatollah Taskhiri: Ashura Raid Against Shia Muslims in Malaysia "Shocking"

Head of the World Forum for the Proximity of Islamic Schools of Thought, Ayatollah Mohammad Ali Taskhiri, condemned the attack on Ashura mourners in Malaysia and warned against the differences. Following the recent raid by security forces on an Ashura commemoration in the Selangor state of Malaysia, leading scholar Ayatollah Taskhiri asked religious leaders and top figures of the country, in a letter, to prevent the detained scholars to be tried on alleged accusations.

In this letter addressed to Malaysian top figures including head of Jamiat Ulama and head of Muslim Unity community, the senior scholar said: "What happened on the eve of Ashura was quite shocking to us all." He also added: "On the pretext of the fatwa of Sheykh Al-Monadi, the religious official of Selangor - who accuses the Shia for having misguided beliefs - police forces attacked the mourning ceremony of Imam Hussein."

Ayatollah Taskhiri also asked religious figures not to let religious differences lead to accusations against each other of excommunication (takfir), religious innovation and thus result in greater divisions among Muslims. During the mourning ceremony of Imam Hussein (a) in Hauzah ar Radah in the state of Selangor, security forces raided the mourners arresting 200 mourners among them the local scholar as well as the visiting schoar from Iran. The two scholars have been released on bail and will appear at a hearing to be held on January 20th.

---
Source: ABNA

Why the US Wants to Delegitimize the Iranian Elections

Are You Ready for War with a Demonized Iran?


How much attention do elections in Japan, India, Argentina, or any other country, get from the U.S. media? How many Americans and American journalists even know who is in political office in other countries besides England, France, and Germany? Who can name the political leaders of Switzerland, Holland, Brazil, Japan, or even China?

Yet, many know of Iran’s President Ahmadinejad. The reason is obvious. He is daily demonized in the U.S. media.

The U.S. media’s demonization of Ahmadinejad itself demonstrates American ignorance. The President of Iran is not the ruler. He is not the commander-in-chief of the armed forces. He cannot set policies outside the boundaries set by Iran’s rulers, the ayatollahs who are not willing for the Iranian Revolution to be overturned by American money in some color-coded “revolution.”

Iranians have a bitter experience with the United States government. Their first democratic election, after emerging from occupied and colonized status in the 1950s, was overturned by the U.S. government. The U.S. government installed in place of the elected candidate a dictator who tortured and murdered dissidents who thought Iran should be an independent country and not ruled by an American puppet.

The U.S. “superpower” has never forgiven the Iranian Islamic ayatollahs for the Iranian Revolution in the late 1970s, which overthrew the U.S. puppet government and held hostage U.S. embassy personnel, regarded as “a den of spies,” while Iranian students pieced together shredded embassy documents that proved America’s complicity in the destruction of Iranian democracy.

The government-controlled U.S. corporate media, a Ministry of Propaganda, has responded to the re-election of Ahmadinejad with non-stop reports of violent Iranians protests to a stolen election. A stolen election is presented as a fact, even thought there is no evidence for it whatsoever. The U.S. media’s response to the documented stolen elections during the George W. Bush/Karl Rove era was to ignore the evidence of real stolen elections.

Leaders of the puppet states of Great Britain and Germany have fallen in line with the American psychological warfare operation. The discredited British Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, expressed his “serioU.S. doubt” about Ahmadinejad’s victory to a meeting of European Union ministers in Luxembourg. Miliband, of course, has no source of independent information. He is simply following Washington’s instructions and relying on unsupported claims by the defeated candidate preferred by the U.S. Government.

Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany, had her arm twisted, too. She called in the Iranian ambassador to demand “more transparency” on the elections.

Even the American left-wing has endorsed the U.S. government’s propaganda. Writing in The Nation, Robert Dreyfus’s presents the hysterical views of one Iranian dissident as if they are the definitive truth about “the illegitimate election,” terming it “a coup d’etat.”

What is the source of the information for the U.S. media and the American puppet states?

Nothing but the assertions of the defeated candidate, the one America prefers.

However, there is hard evidence to the contrary. An independent, objective poll was conducted in Iran by American pollsters prior to the election. The pollsters, Ken Ballen of the nonprofit Center for Public Opinion and Patrick Doherty of the nonprofit New America Foundation, describe their poll results in the June 15 Washington Post. The polling was funded by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and was conducted in Farsi “by a polling company whose work in the region for ABC News and the BBC has received an Emmy award.”*

The poll results, the only real information we have at this time, indicate that the election results reflect the will of the Iranian voters. Among the extremely interesting information revealed by the poll is the following: 

  “Many experts are claiming that the margin of victory of incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was the result of fraud or manipulation, but our nationwide public opinion survey of Iranians three weeks before the vote showed Ahmadinejad leading by a more than 2 to 1 margin -- greater than his actual apparent margin of victory in Friday's election.

  “While Western news reports from Tehran in the days leading up to the voting portrayed an Iranian public enthusiastic about Ahmadinejad's principal opponent, Mir Hossein Moussavi, our scientific sampling from across all 30 of Iran's provinces showed Ahmadinejad well ahead.

  “The breadth of Ahmadinejad's support was apparent in our pre-election survey. During the campaign, for instance, Moussavi emphasized his identity as an Azeri, the second-largest ethnic group in Iran after Persians, to woo Azeri voters. Our survey indicated, though, that Azeris favored Ahmadinejad by 2 to 1 over MoU.S.avi.

  “Much commentary has portrayed Iranian youth and the Internet as harbingers of change in this election. But our poll found that only a third of Iranians even have access to the Internet, while 18-to-24-year-olds comprised the strongest voting bloc for Ahmadinejad of all age groups.

  “The only demographic groups in which our survey found Moussavi leading or competitive with Ahmadinejad were university students and graduates, and the highest-income Iranians. When our poll was taken, almost a third of Iranians were also still undecided. Yet the baseline distributions we found then mirror the results reported by the Iranian authorities, indicating the possibility that the vote is not the product of widespread fraud.”

There have been numerous news reports that the U.S. government has implemented a program to destabilize Iran. There have been reports that the U.S. government has financed bombings and assassinations within Iran. The U.S. media treats these reports in a braggadocio manner as illustrations of the American Superpower’s ability to bring dissenting countries to heel, while some foreign media see these reports as evidence of the U.S. government’s inherent immorality.

Pakistan’s former military chief, General Mirza Aslam Beig, said on Pashto Radio on Monday, June 15, that undisputed intelligence proves the U.S. interfered in the Iranian election. “The documents prove that the CIA spent 400 million dollars inside Iran to prop up a colorful but hollow revolution following the election.”

The success of the U.S. government in financing color revolutions in former Soviet Georgia and Ukraine and in other parts of the former Soviet empire have been widely reported and discussed, with the U.S. media treating it as an indication of U.S. omnipotence and natural right and some foreign media as a sign of U.S. interference in the internal affairs of other countries. It is certainly within the realm of possibility that Mir Hossein Moussavi is a bought and paid for operative of the U.S. government.
We know for a fact that the U.S. government has psychological warfare operations that target both Americans and foreigners through the U.S. and foreign media. Many articles have been published on this subject.  

Think about the Iranian election from a common sense standpoint. Neither myself nor the vast majority of readers are Iranian experts. But from a common sense standpoint, if your country was under constant threat of attack, even nuclear attack, from two countries with much more powerful military establishments, as is Iran from the U.S. and Israel, would you desert your country’s best defender and elect the preferred candidate of the U.S. and Israel?

Do you believe that the Iranian people would have voted to become an American puppet state?

Iran is an ancient and sophisticated society. Much of the intellectual class is secularized. A significant, but small, percentage of the youth has fallen in thrall to Western devotion to personal pleasure, and to self-absorption. These people are easily organized with American money to give their government and Islamic constraints on personal behavior the bird.  

The U.S. government is taking advantage of these westernized Iranians to create a basis for discrediting the Iranian election and the Iranian government.

On June 14, the McClatchy Washington Bureau, which sometimes attempts to report the real news, acquiesced to Washington’s psychological warfare and declared: “Iran election result makes Obama’s outreach efforts harder.” What we see here is the raising of the ugly head of the excuse for “diplomatic failure,” leaving only a military solution.

As a person who has seen it all from inside the U.S. government, I believe that the purpose of the U.S. government’s manipulation of the American and puppet government media is to discredit the Iranian government by portraying the Iranian government as an oppressor of the Iranian people and a frustrater of the Iranian people’s will. This is how the U.S. government is setting up Iran for military attack.  

With the help of Moussavi, the U.S. government is creating another “oppressed people,” like Iraqis under Saddam Hussein, who require American lives and money to liberate. Has Moussavi, the American candidate in the Iranian election who was roundly trounced, been chosen by Washington to become the American puppet ruler of Iran?  

The great macho superpower is eager to restore its hegemony over the Iranian people, thus settling the score with the ayatollahs who overthrew American rule of Iran in 1978.
That is the script. You are watching it every minute on U.S. television.

There is no end of “experts” to support the script. For one example among hundreds, we have Gary Sick, who formerly served on the National Security Council and currently teaches at Columbia University: 

"If they'd been a little more modest and said Ahmadinejad had won by 51 percent," Sick said, Iranians might have been dubious but more accepting. But the government's assertion that Ahmadinejad won with 62.6 percent of the vote, "is not credible."

"I think,” continued Sick, “it does mark a real transition point in the Iranian Revolution, from a position of claiming to have its legitimacy based on the support of the population, to a position that has increasingly relied on repression. The voice of the people is ignored."

The only hard information available is the poll referenced above. The poll found that Ahmadinejad was the favored candidate by a margin of two to one. 

But as in everything else having to do with American hegemony over other peoples, facts and truth play no part. Lies and propaganda rule.

Consumed by its passion for hegemony, America is driven prevail over others, morality and justice be damned. This world-threatening script will play until America bankrupts itself and has so alienated the rest of the world that it is isolated and universally despised.

Adopted from  PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS.

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com 

Rigi’s brother exposes U.S. ties with Jundullah

TEHRAN (Press TV) - Revelations by the brother of Jundullah leader Abdolmalek Rigi confirm reports that the U.S. helped the armed separatist ring carry out terror activities in Iran. 

In a recent interview conducted prior to his execution, Abdulhamid Rigi told Press TV that since 2005, his brother had repeatedly met with U.S. agents in Islamabad and Karachi and communicated with them through a common link. 

“In Pakistan, Malek (Abdolmalek Rigi) contacted an individual that resided in the U.S. who then put him through to the FBI. So, Malek said that he would go to Islamabad and meet with the Americans,” he explained. 

“A few days after he returned from his first meeting, we asked him about it. God knows what really passed, but according to what he told us, he said he met with the Americans. As Malik was involved with al-Qaeda and the Americans knew about it, they had questioned him about it,” he added. 

“Malik had told them that since 2002 he had no links with al-Qaeda any more. He said he had told them that he is only against Iran and only fights against Iran. He said that he had asked the American for financial support and they had replied by asking him to meet with them again.” 

Abdulhamid, who blames his brother for his eventual arrest, then went on to talk about his brother’s second meeting with U.S. agents. He said that Abdolmalek had gone to the meeting alone. 

He added that the militant leader did not meet again with the Americans till 2006, when he contacted them through a link in New Jersey, who went by the name of Amanollah. 

Abdulhamid Rigi said that in 2005 he himself had met with the Americans once in Islamabad, where they had asked about the activities Jundullah was carrying out in Iran, their numbers, their positions and their requests. 

After the meeting, he added, Malek had called the Americans to only contact him not any other ring members. 

Abdulhamid said that from 2005 onwards Malik had held several “confidential” meeting with FBI and CIA agents in Karachi and Islamabad. 

He added that during one of the meetings in the Pakistani capital, two female U.S. agents had offered weapons, safe bases in Afghanistan, and professional trainers, while inquiring about how many people the group could gather for military training. 

“We said we could bring two to three thousand, but we can’t fund them,” said Abdulhamid Rigi, adding that they had finally accepted the U.S. proposal. 

Abdolhamid Rigi, who was arrested and handed over to Iranian officials last year along with three other Jundullah members, was executed on Saturday for his key role in a series of terrorist attacks against civilians. 

Jundullah is a Pakistan-based terror group closely affiliated with the notorious al-Qaeda organization and made up of disgruntled members of the Baluch ethnic minority. 

A 2007 Sunday Telegraph report revealed that Jundullah was a CIA creation designed to achieve “regime change in Iran”. The report said it was the CIA that had tried to destabilize Iran by “supplying arms-length support, supplying money and weapons” to Jundullah. 

An ABC report also indicted that officials in Washington had ordered Jundullah terrorists to “stage deadly guerrilla raids inside the Islamic Republic, kidnap Iranian officials and execute them on camera” all as part of a “programmatic objective to overthrow the Iranian government.” 

Jundullah has orchestrated a chain of deadly bombings and violent attacks in Iran. So far, it has accepted responsibility for killing at least 16 Iranian police officers in a 2008 attack, nine Iranian security guards in 2005, and another 11 in a 2007 bombing. 

The militants group also claimed responsibility for a recent mosque bombing that left at least 25 Iranians dead in the southeastern city of Zahedan. 

Source

Jundullah Claims Responsibility for Bombing

Jundullah (Soldiers of God), the militant Sunni group operating in Iranian Baluchistan, has taken responsibility for the bombing of a prominent Shia mosque in Zahedan, Baluchistan’s provincial capital, Pan-Arab channel Al Arabiya reported today. The terrorist attack last Thursday killed 25 people and injured more than 50 others.

Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs summoned Pakistan ambassador to Tehran over Jundullah’s link to the bombing. The group maintains sanctuary inside Pakistani Baluchistan.

Maj. Gen. Hassan Firozabad, chief of joint staff of Iran’s armed forces, had said on Saturday that Iran has located the group’s headquarters inside Pakistan. Gen. Firouzabadi’s claim has not been verified by independent sources. Iran also summarily executed three people in Zahedan on Saturday, linking them to the bombing.

On Friday, gunmen on motorcycles shot at President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's campaign office in Zahedan, injuring three people.