This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
1988 Gilgit massacre article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on 1988 Gilgit Massacre. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:24, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
I've noticed that all of the sources claiming Osama Bin Laden was involved come from one Journalist, B. Raman. Searching for more sources on google brought up a few more articles, but yet again all were by B. Raman. Is there any evidence of his involvement outside the claims of B. Raman? Or is there any credible evidence presented by B. Raman? In all the articles he only briefly mentions that OBL was involved. Fredepd ( talk) 06:00, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
This was posted at another page in this diff; I have moved it here Jytdog ( talk) 17:08, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
Confirmed sockpuppet User:Towns Hill on December 31 2016 added a large section about OBL's involvement in the Gilgit Massacre 1988. He extensively plagiarized material, copying entire paragraphs word-for-word. As User:Fredepd correctly noted on the talk page for the Gilgit Massacre Talk:Gilgit Massacre 1988, all allegations about OBL's involvement stems from a single source, B. Raman, who was a founder of India's spy agency, the Research and Analysis Wing. India's prestigious The Hindu newspaper called him "A perfect spy" at the time of his death. There are no sources that can corroborate this accusation. I thought I had found a 2009 book edited by K. Warikoo that may have offered another source for the claim, but it turns out B Raman also wrote the chapter in that book. See below for more issues regarding the reliablity of B Raman. As noted on the talk page from that site: In his Outlook India piece, B. Raman states: " Faced with a revolt by the Shias of the Northern Areas (Gilgit and Baltistan) of Jammu & Kashmir (J&K), under occupation by the Pakistan Army, for a separate Shia State called the Karakoram State" I can find absolutely no references to this alleged revolt aside from works which directly quote B Raman's work. I can't even find any information about this "Karakoram State" that does stem from this intelligence officer. I found a 2009 book "Himalayan Frontiers of India: Historical, Geo-Political and Strategic Perspectives" which I thought might be a corroborating source, yet it turns out that the section was again written by B Raman. In it he states that Shias agitated for a separate autonomous state, but nothing about a revolt (which he mentioned in his 2003 article). The author's tone is also highly biased with weasel wording, which isn't unexpected given the fact that he was a former Indian government official I also found a Self-Published book The General and Jihad: Pakistan Under Musharraf which mentions this issue, but it offers no source for its claims. Further, it states the revolt was suppressed by General Musharraf (not Zia ul Haq), and that the Shias were demanding an independent state, which is another claim I cant find support for elsewhere. Again, it is a self published book. It was written by "Wilson John," and published by "Wilson John", so it's not entirely surprising that the author confused Musharraf for Zia, and embellished Raman's claim to state that the Shias were not just agitating for an autonomous state, but instead for an independent state. Can anyone else find information regarding this that doesnt quote B Raman/Outlook India as a source? Preferably a source written prior to Raman's 2003 article so we can be sure the source didnt indirectly quote Raman. If no one can find a reliable source for these serious allegations, the entire Gilgit Massacre section should be erased. Willard84 ( talk) 04:22, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
B. Raman was a founder of India's Research and Analysis Wing, which immediately throws his reliability as a source into question. The Hindu called him "A perfect spy" as well, which doesnt help his credibility as a scholarly source. Anyway, in his Outlook India piece, B. Raman states:
" Faced with a revolt by the Shias of the Northern Areas (Gilgit and Baltistan) of Jammu & Kashmir (J&K), under occupation by the Pakistan Army, for a separate Shia State called the Karakoram State"
I can find absolutely no references to this alleged revolt aside from works which directly quote B Raman's work. I can't even find any information about this "Karakoram State" that does stem from this intelligence officer.
I found a 2009 book "Himalayan Frontiers of India: Historical, Geo-Political and Strategic Perspectives" which I thought might be a corroborating source, yet it turns out that the section was again written by B Raman. In it he states that Shias agitated for a separate autonomous state, but nothing about a revolt (which he mentioned in his 2003 article). The author's tone is also highly biased with weasel wording, which isn't unexpected given the fact that he was a former Indian government official
I also found a Self-Published book The General and Jihad: Pakistan Under Musharraf which mentions this issue, but it offers no source for its claims. Further, it states the revolt was suppressed by General Musharraf (not Zia ul Haq), and that the Shias were demanding an independent state, which is another claim I cant find support for elsewhere. Again, it is a self published book. It was written by "Wilson John," and published by "Wilson John", so it's not entirely surprising that the author confused Musharraf for Zia, and embellished Raman's claim to state that the Shias were not just agitating for an autonomous state, but instead for an independent state.
Can anyone else find information regarding this that doesnt quote B Raman/Outlook India as a source? Preferably a source written prior to Raman's 2003 article so we can be sure the source didnt indirectly quote Raman. Willard84 ( talk) 07:19, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
The fact that B. Raman was associated with RAW doesn't matter particularly, once he has been cited in peer-reviewed sources. How else can we get information about secretive military dictatorships if not via the spying agencies of other countries?
However, the whole article is overemphasizing the Bin Laden connection. The Pakistani Army is the main culprit. Both Zia ul-Haq and Musharraf are involved. Here are some decent sources:
Cheers, Kautilya3 ( talk) 11:11, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
Willard84 ( talk) 14:25, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
Sockpuppet User:Towns Hill on 31 December 2016 extensively plagiarized from his/her source:
The user wrote: When Shias in Gilgit celebrated Eid al-Fitr, a group of extremist Sunnis, still fasting because their religious leaders had not announced the sighting of the moon, attacked them. This led to violent clashes between Sunnis and Shias. After a brief calm of nearly four days, the Pakistani military regime allegedly used certain militants along with local Sunnis to ‘teach a lesson’ to Shias, which led to hundreds of Shias and Sunnis being killed.
This is absolutely identical to the source provided: "When Shias in Gilgit celebrated Eidul Fitr, a group of extremist Sunnis, still fasting because their religious leaders had not announced the sighting of the moon, attacked them. This led to violent clashes between the two sects. In 1988, after a brief calm of nearly four days, the military regime allegedly used certain militants along with local Sunnis to ‘teach a lesson’ to Shias, which led to hundreds of Shias and Sunnis being killed"
He also wrote in the same December 31 edit: "Pakistan`s first major Shia-Sunni riots erupted in 1983 in Karachi during the Shia holiday of Muharram, leaving at least 60 people dead. More Muharram disturbances followed over the next three years, spreading to Lahore and the Baluchistan region and leaving hundreds more dead. In July 1986, Sunnis and Shias, many of them armed with locally made automatic weapons, clashed in the northwestern town of Parachinar, where at least 200 died"
which is almost identical to:
"Pakistan`s first major Shiite-Sunni riots erupted in 1983 in Karachi during the Shiite holiday of Muharram; at least 60 people were killed. More Muharram disturbances followed over the next three years, spreading to Lahore and the Baluchistan region and leaving hundreds more dead. Last July, Sunnis and Shiites, many of them armed with locally made automatic weapons, clashed in the northwestern town of Parachinar, where at least 200 died," directly plagiarized from the Chicago Tribune source.
Not cool. Plagiarized information is not tolerated on WIkipedia, and should be deleted/redone. Willard84 ( talk) 06:50, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
@Excelse: Please tell me, what are your concerns regarding the page I wrote? Why are you intent on making this entire page about what a single source said, and restoring a page written by a confirmed sock puppet? You yourself appear to have been banned as a sock puppet. Willard84 ( talk) 05:23, 11 July 2017 (UTC) @Excelse: Here are several sources mentioning the massacre. Note how none seem to mention that OBL was involved (which is obviously an explosive allegation): 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 (and this is SATP, not exactly pro-Pakistan, 8.
Are you really under the impression that if Osama Bin Laden himself were involved, that more sources other than just B. Raman would not have made note of this? Willard84 ( talk) 05:50, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
The only reference to Osama bin Laden being involved is a claim by the Indian intelligence officer B Raman. This specific claim was recycled by this individual a number of times over the years. It is highly unlikely he was involved for a variety of reasons DaveGalaxy ( talk) 22:08, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
Some sources and quotes here:
As a member of the CIA-backed mujahideen who fought the USSR in Afghanistan during the 1980s, Osama bin Laden (1957—2011) quickly distinguished himself as an effective military leader. But he also soon developed a reputation for exceptional cruelty, shocking the Middle Eastern press when he and his men raped, tortured, and killed as many as seven hundred Shiite civilians in northern Pakistan over a nine-day period in May 1988. Public response to the incident, later referred to as the Gilgit massacre, made bin Laden a pariah among Sunni militants and ultimately contributed to his decision to create a new organization: al-Qaeda.
Attacking Shiite civilians was not new to al-Qaeda. Several hundred Shiite civilians in Gilgit, Pakistan, were massacred in 1988 by Osama bin Laden and his Taliban fighters (Raman, 2004). However, from the early 1990s onward, the Taliban and al-Qaeda sought a new strategy. Bin Laden urged tactical and logistical cooperation among like-minded Shia and Sunni groups (Hunt, 2005). Al-Zarqawi disagreed and all but ignored many of bin Laden's directives.
It was from the late 1980s and the mid-1990s that Pervez Musharraf [whose "Special Services Group" was in charge of the security for Gilgit-Baltistan] established close links with groups like the HuM and LeT and Tabligi Jamaat. There are reports that Musharraf also has links with Osama bin Laden's international Islamic Front for Jehad against the US and Israel.
President Musharraf himself has had long-standing close links with fundamentalist organisations [Raman, 'Musharraf and Terrorism Part-II', South Asia Analysis Group Paper No 333), Outlook, 4 October 2001]. During the Afghan war he had been assigned the job of training mercenary Mujahideen groups. His contact with Osama bin Laden also dates back to the Afghan war. Subsequently, Musharraf worked as a brigadier in the Special Services Group in Siachen under the Zia regime in 1987. He was also responsible for suppressing the revolt of the Shia population in Gilgit with support from Pakhtoon tribesmen. His close links with Javed Nasir, the then director-general of ISI and other top army officials who were Deobandis, brought him in close contact with several fundamentalist groups linked to bin Laden.
Unfortunately, this was perceived by Pakistani establishment as a ‘Shia Revolt’ sponsored by Iran. General Zia ordered a Special Service Group (SSG) commanded by then Brigadier Pervez Musharraf to suppress the revolt and the latter reportedly responded by bringing in a large number of Pakhtoon tribesmen led by Osama Bin Laden from outside the region to help the SSG in this goal. These tribesmen destroyed property and killed hundreds in the villages in and around Gilgit. According to one estimate, more than 700 people were killed and injured and the brutality of these marauding hordes left an indelible mark in this hitherto peaceful region.[10: Adrian Levy and Catherine Scott-Clark, Deception: Pakistan, the United States and the Global Nuclear Weapons Conspiracy, 2007, pp. 239–240.]
There are also plenty of sources that mention the presence of Pashtuns [who are connected to Bin Laden's organisations]. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 22:52, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
I've removed the emotive language, broad claims that have no evidence (Shia demands for independent status, ) and added in some more references from other viewpoints.
Xcia0069 attempt to change the "revolt" in the lead sentence to "dispute". Other than the cited reference, here are some more:
For Shias in Gilgit-Baltistan, Sunni Islam became an embodiment of Pakistani domination. In the 1980s, especially Shias raised the voice to demand a change in the political status of the Northern Areas. In May 1988, in a particularly violent event, more than 100 Shias were killed by Sunnis in villages around Gilgit without police or army attempting to stop the violence.
The Iranian revolution infused a new feeling of anti-imperialism in the Shia youth obliquely adding a soft corner for the Afghan government. Hatred against the 'Punjabi' rulers also gained ground mainly because of the military dictatorship and its support to the Afghan Mujahideen. A faction of the Mujahideen in an effort to make room for their base had waged a full-blast attack on the Shia population of Parachinar. Gulbadin Hikmetyar reportedly was leading the attack. But they were not successful. Attackers armed with Kalashnikovs and medium-range rocket launchers had a bloody nose.
Hence the Shias have been deprived of local political power and have benefited little from modernization. This deprivation. of course, has been worsening over a period of time, and to be called 'heathen' on smeared graffiti was to add insult to injury. Religious affiliation has served as a symbol for this growing tension. and it has become the dominating factor in the distinction between 'us' and 'them' (ibid.). This example shows how stable, local factors change when influenced by external structural forces. but in specified ways that make an understanding of local conditions crucial.
In May 1988, the majority of Shias in Gilgit revolted against the Sunni administration. An SSG group commanded by Gen Musharraf was sent there to suppress that uprising. Gen Musharraf transported a large number of Wahabi Pakhtoon tribesmen from the NWFP to Gilgit to teach the Shias a lesson.
The attempts by Zia-ul-Haq to introduce Sunni Deobandi Islam in the region exacerbated the sense of alienation in Gilgit and Baltistan. As a result the Sunni Deobandi militant groups especially Sipah-e-Sahaba spread their tentacles in this remote tribal region and the Shias and the “Ismailis were made to submit to their puritanical aggression‘’.[18] The local population perceived the local administration to be siding with these Sunni extremists. This resulted in the first major violent manifestation of their discontent by the majority Shias in Gilgit in May 1988. This was perceived by Pakistani establishment to be an Iranian sponsored ’Shia Revolt’. Zia put a Special Service Group (SSG) group commanded by then Brigadier Pervez Musharraf to suppress the revolt and Musharraf responded by transporting ”a large number of Wahabi Pakhtoon tribesmen from the NWFP and Afghanistan” to Gilgit “to teach the Shias a lesson. These tribesmen massacred hundreds of Shias”.
{{
citation}}
: CS1 maint: date format (
link)The world does not know that in 1988 the harassed Shia people revolted in sheer desperation. The Islamisation drive of Gen Zia-ul-Haq was imposing Sunni mores on the Shias which bred a great deal of resentment. This boiled over into the streets in a virtual revolt. The Pakistani Army had cracked down in a way that was reminiscent of Tikka Khanís genocide in Bangladesh. Thousands of Sunni Pathan tribesman were brought in from the frontier and Afghanistan and let loose on the hapless Shia population.
So, I am afraid "revolt" cannot be removed. I will add some more content to the Background to make it clear. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 21:09, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
In the light of this, I've made some other edits
Xcia0069 ( talk) 20:08, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Following the excellent recent edits by user:Filmergirl96 and others, I have removed the copy edit required template Xcia0069 ( talk) 19:00, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
This article needs a lot of work on the neutrality front, including unsourced additions and claims made to the lead regarding the religious demographics. Is there also a reason why the infobox mentions 400–900 casualties, which is then contradicted within the article claiming "150 to 400 people were killed"? There is a daylight's worth of difference between both reported figures. Consider putting ranges for the figure. Mar4d ( talk) 13:15, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
According to the 1941 census, [1] the Gilgit tehsil (the same as the present day Gilgit District) had 11274 Shias out of 22495 total population, which amounts to 50%.
Zeex.rice, what is the basis for your claim of Shia majority? -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 15:58, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
exceptional claims require exceptional sources. Kautilya3, please do not restore the uncited material in question regarding the demographics as you did here without providing reliable, secondary sources. I will have no option otherwise but to tag the page as I did previously. Please consult WP:BURDEN; as the reinstating user, the burden also falls on you to demonstrate verifiability of the material you are restoring. Kind regards, Mar4d ( talk) 11:45, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
References
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
1988 Gilgit massacre article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on 1988 Gilgit Massacre. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:24, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
I've noticed that all of the sources claiming Osama Bin Laden was involved come from one Journalist, B. Raman. Searching for more sources on google brought up a few more articles, but yet again all were by B. Raman. Is there any evidence of his involvement outside the claims of B. Raman? Or is there any credible evidence presented by B. Raman? In all the articles he only briefly mentions that OBL was involved. Fredepd ( talk) 06:00, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
This was posted at another page in this diff; I have moved it here Jytdog ( talk) 17:08, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
Confirmed sockpuppet User:Towns Hill on December 31 2016 added a large section about OBL's involvement in the Gilgit Massacre 1988. He extensively plagiarized material, copying entire paragraphs word-for-word. As User:Fredepd correctly noted on the talk page for the Gilgit Massacre Talk:Gilgit Massacre 1988, all allegations about OBL's involvement stems from a single source, B. Raman, who was a founder of India's spy agency, the Research and Analysis Wing. India's prestigious The Hindu newspaper called him "A perfect spy" at the time of his death. There are no sources that can corroborate this accusation. I thought I had found a 2009 book edited by K. Warikoo that may have offered another source for the claim, but it turns out B Raman also wrote the chapter in that book. See below for more issues regarding the reliablity of B Raman. As noted on the talk page from that site: In his Outlook India piece, B. Raman states: " Faced with a revolt by the Shias of the Northern Areas (Gilgit and Baltistan) of Jammu & Kashmir (J&K), under occupation by the Pakistan Army, for a separate Shia State called the Karakoram State" I can find absolutely no references to this alleged revolt aside from works which directly quote B Raman's work. I can't even find any information about this "Karakoram State" that does stem from this intelligence officer. I found a 2009 book "Himalayan Frontiers of India: Historical, Geo-Political and Strategic Perspectives" which I thought might be a corroborating source, yet it turns out that the section was again written by B Raman. In it he states that Shias agitated for a separate autonomous state, but nothing about a revolt (which he mentioned in his 2003 article). The author's tone is also highly biased with weasel wording, which isn't unexpected given the fact that he was a former Indian government official I also found a Self-Published book The General and Jihad: Pakistan Under Musharraf which mentions this issue, but it offers no source for its claims. Further, it states the revolt was suppressed by General Musharraf (not Zia ul Haq), and that the Shias were demanding an independent state, which is another claim I cant find support for elsewhere. Again, it is a self published book. It was written by "Wilson John," and published by "Wilson John", so it's not entirely surprising that the author confused Musharraf for Zia, and embellished Raman's claim to state that the Shias were not just agitating for an autonomous state, but instead for an independent state. Can anyone else find information regarding this that doesnt quote B Raman/Outlook India as a source? Preferably a source written prior to Raman's 2003 article so we can be sure the source didnt indirectly quote Raman. If no one can find a reliable source for these serious allegations, the entire Gilgit Massacre section should be erased. Willard84 ( talk) 04:22, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
B. Raman was a founder of India's Research and Analysis Wing, which immediately throws his reliability as a source into question. The Hindu called him "A perfect spy" as well, which doesnt help his credibility as a scholarly source. Anyway, in his Outlook India piece, B. Raman states:
" Faced with a revolt by the Shias of the Northern Areas (Gilgit and Baltistan) of Jammu & Kashmir (J&K), under occupation by the Pakistan Army, for a separate Shia State called the Karakoram State"
I can find absolutely no references to this alleged revolt aside from works which directly quote B Raman's work. I can't even find any information about this "Karakoram State" that does stem from this intelligence officer.
I found a 2009 book "Himalayan Frontiers of India: Historical, Geo-Political and Strategic Perspectives" which I thought might be a corroborating source, yet it turns out that the section was again written by B Raman. In it he states that Shias agitated for a separate autonomous state, but nothing about a revolt (which he mentioned in his 2003 article). The author's tone is also highly biased with weasel wording, which isn't unexpected given the fact that he was a former Indian government official
I also found a Self-Published book The General and Jihad: Pakistan Under Musharraf which mentions this issue, but it offers no source for its claims. Further, it states the revolt was suppressed by General Musharraf (not Zia ul Haq), and that the Shias were demanding an independent state, which is another claim I cant find support for elsewhere. Again, it is a self published book. It was written by "Wilson John," and published by "Wilson John", so it's not entirely surprising that the author confused Musharraf for Zia, and embellished Raman's claim to state that the Shias were not just agitating for an autonomous state, but instead for an independent state.
Can anyone else find information regarding this that doesnt quote B Raman/Outlook India as a source? Preferably a source written prior to Raman's 2003 article so we can be sure the source didnt indirectly quote Raman. Willard84 ( talk) 07:19, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
The fact that B. Raman was associated with RAW doesn't matter particularly, once he has been cited in peer-reviewed sources. How else can we get information about secretive military dictatorships if not via the spying agencies of other countries?
However, the whole article is overemphasizing the Bin Laden connection. The Pakistani Army is the main culprit. Both Zia ul-Haq and Musharraf are involved. Here are some decent sources:
Cheers, Kautilya3 ( talk) 11:11, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
Willard84 ( talk) 14:25, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
Sockpuppet User:Towns Hill on 31 December 2016 extensively plagiarized from his/her source:
The user wrote: When Shias in Gilgit celebrated Eid al-Fitr, a group of extremist Sunnis, still fasting because their religious leaders had not announced the sighting of the moon, attacked them. This led to violent clashes between Sunnis and Shias. After a brief calm of nearly four days, the Pakistani military regime allegedly used certain militants along with local Sunnis to ‘teach a lesson’ to Shias, which led to hundreds of Shias and Sunnis being killed.
This is absolutely identical to the source provided: "When Shias in Gilgit celebrated Eidul Fitr, a group of extremist Sunnis, still fasting because their religious leaders had not announced the sighting of the moon, attacked them. This led to violent clashes between the two sects. In 1988, after a brief calm of nearly four days, the military regime allegedly used certain militants along with local Sunnis to ‘teach a lesson’ to Shias, which led to hundreds of Shias and Sunnis being killed"
He also wrote in the same December 31 edit: "Pakistan`s first major Shia-Sunni riots erupted in 1983 in Karachi during the Shia holiday of Muharram, leaving at least 60 people dead. More Muharram disturbances followed over the next three years, spreading to Lahore and the Baluchistan region and leaving hundreds more dead. In July 1986, Sunnis and Shias, many of them armed with locally made automatic weapons, clashed in the northwestern town of Parachinar, where at least 200 died"
which is almost identical to:
"Pakistan`s first major Shiite-Sunni riots erupted in 1983 in Karachi during the Shiite holiday of Muharram; at least 60 people were killed. More Muharram disturbances followed over the next three years, spreading to Lahore and the Baluchistan region and leaving hundreds more dead. Last July, Sunnis and Shiites, many of them armed with locally made automatic weapons, clashed in the northwestern town of Parachinar, where at least 200 died," directly plagiarized from the Chicago Tribune source.
Not cool. Plagiarized information is not tolerated on WIkipedia, and should be deleted/redone. Willard84 ( talk) 06:50, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
@Excelse: Please tell me, what are your concerns regarding the page I wrote? Why are you intent on making this entire page about what a single source said, and restoring a page written by a confirmed sock puppet? You yourself appear to have been banned as a sock puppet. Willard84 ( talk) 05:23, 11 July 2017 (UTC) @Excelse: Here are several sources mentioning the massacre. Note how none seem to mention that OBL was involved (which is obviously an explosive allegation): 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 (and this is SATP, not exactly pro-Pakistan, 8.
Are you really under the impression that if Osama Bin Laden himself were involved, that more sources other than just B. Raman would not have made note of this? Willard84 ( talk) 05:50, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
The only reference to Osama bin Laden being involved is a claim by the Indian intelligence officer B Raman. This specific claim was recycled by this individual a number of times over the years. It is highly unlikely he was involved for a variety of reasons DaveGalaxy ( talk) 22:08, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
Some sources and quotes here:
As a member of the CIA-backed mujahideen who fought the USSR in Afghanistan during the 1980s, Osama bin Laden (1957—2011) quickly distinguished himself as an effective military leader. But he also soon developed a reputation for exceptional cruelty, shocking the Middle Eastern press when he and his men raped, tortured, and killed as many as seven hundred Shiite civilians in northern Pakistan over a nine-day period in May 1988. Public response to the incident, later referred to as the Gilgit massacre, made bin Laden a pariah among Sunni militants and ultimately contributed to his decision to create a new organization: al-Qaeda.
Attacking Shiite civilians was not new to al-Qaeda. Several hundred Shiite civilians in Gilgit, Pakistan, were massacred in 1988 by Osama bin Laden and his Taliban fighters (Raman, 2004). However, from the early 1990s onward, the Taliban and al-Qaeda sought a new strategy. Bin Laden urged tactical and logistical cooperation among like-minded Shia and Sunni groups (Hunt, 2005). Al-Zarqawi disagreed and all but ignored many of bin Laden's directives.
It was from the late 1980s and the mid-1990s that Pervez Musharraf [whose "Special Services Group" was in charge of the security for Gilgit-Baltistan] established close links with groups like the HuM and LeT and Tabligi Jamaat. There are reports that Musharraf also has links with Osama bin Laden's international Islamic Front for Jehad against the US and Israel.
President Musharraf himself has had long-standing close links with fundamentalist organisations [Raman, 'Musharraf and Terrorism Part-II', South Asia Analysis Group Paper No 333), Outlook, 4 October 2001]. During the Afghan war he had been assigned the job of training mercenary Mujahideen groups. His contact with Osama bin Laden also dates back to the Afghan war. Subsequently, Musharraf worked as a brigadier in the Special Services Group in Siachen under the Zia regime in 1987. He was also responsible for suppressing the revolt of the Shia population in Gilgit with support from Pakhtoon tribesmen. His close links with Javed Nasir, the then director-general of ISI and other top army officials who were Deobandis, brought him in close contact with several fundamentalist groups linked to bin Laden.
Unfortunately, this was perceived by Pakistani establishment as a ‘Shia Revolt’ sponsored by Iran. General Zia ordered a Special Service Group (SSG) commanded by then Brigadier Pervez Musharraf to suppress the revolt and the latter reportedly responded by bringing in a large number of Pakhtoon tribesmen led by Osama Bin Laden from outside the region to help the SSG in this goal. These tribesmen destroyed property and killed hundreds in the villages in and around Gilgit. According to one estimate, more than 700 people were killed and injured and the brutality of these marauding hordes left an indelible mark in this hitherto peaceful region.[10: Adrian Levy and Catherine Scott-Clark, Deception: Pakistan, the United States and the Global Nuclear Weapons Conspiracy, 2007, pp. 239–240.]
There are also plenty of sources that mention the presence of Pashtuns [who are connected to Bin Laden's organisations]. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 22:52, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
I've removed the emotive language, broad claims that have no evidence (Shia demands for independent status, ) and added in some more references from other viewpoints.
Xcia0069 attempt to change the "revolt" in the lead sentence to "dispute". Other than the cited reference, here are some more:
For Shias in Gilgit-Baltistan, Sunni Islam became an embodiment of Pakistani domination. In the 1980s, especially Shias raised the voice to demand a change in the political status of the Northern Areas. In May 1988, in a particularly violent event, more than 100 Shias were killed by Sunnis in villages around Gilgit without police or army attempting to stop the violence.
The Iranian revolution infused a new feeling of anti-imperialism in the Shia youth obliquely adding a soft corner for the Afghan government. Hatred against the 'Punjabi' rulers also gained ground mainly because of the military dictatorship and its support to the Afghan Mujahideen. A faction of the Mujahideen in an effort to make room for their base had waged a full-blast attack on the Shia population of Parachinar. Gulbadin Hikmetyar reportedly was leading the attack. But they were not successful. Attackers armed with Kalashnikovs and medium-range rocket launchers had a bloody nose.
Hence the Shias have been deprived of local political power and have benefited little from modernization. This deprivation. of course, has been worsening over a period of time, and to be called 'heathen' on smeared graffiti was to add insult to injury. Religious affiliation has served as a symbol for this growing tension. and it has become the dominating factor in the distinction between 'us' and 'them' (ibid.). This example shows how stable, local factors change when influenced by external structural forces. but in specified ways that make an understanding of local conditions crucial.
In May 1988, the majority of Shias in Gilgit revolted against the Sunni administration. An SSG group commanded by Gen Musharraf was sent there to suppress that uprising. Gen Musharraf transported a large number of Wahabi Pakhtoon tribesmen from the NWFP to Gilgit to teach the Shias a lesson.
The attempts by Zia-ul-Haq to introduce Sunni Deobandi Islam in the region exacerbated the sense of alienation in Gilgit and Baltistan. As a result the Sunni Deobandi militant groups especially Sipah-e-Sahaba spread their tentacles in this remote tribal region and the Shias and the “Ismailis were made to submit to their puritanical aggression‘’.[18] The local population perceived the local administration to be siding with these Sunni extremists. This resulted in the first major violent manifestation of their discontent by the majority Shias in Gilgit in May 1988. This was perceived by Pakistani establishment to be an Iranian sponsored ’Shia Revolt’. Zia put a Special Service Group (SSG) group commanded by then Brigadier Pervez Musharraf to suppress the revolt and Musharraf responded by transporting ”a large number of Wahabi Pakhtoon tribesmen from the NWFP and Afghanistan” to Gilgit “to teach the Shias a lesson. These tribesmen massacred hundreds of Shias”.
{{
citation}}
: CS1 maint: date format (
link)The world does not know that in 1988 the harassed Shia people revolted in sheer desperation. The Islamisation drive of Gen Zia-ul-Haq was imposing Sunni mores on the Shias which bred a great deal of resentment. This boiled over into the streets in a virtual revolt. The Pakistani Army had cracked down in a way that was reminiscent of Tikka Khanís genocide in Bangladesh. Thousands of Sunni Pathan tribesman were brought in from the frontier and Afghanistan and let loose on the hapless Shia population.
So, I am afraid "revolt" cannot be removed. I will add some more content to the Background to make it clear. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 21:09, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
In the light of this, I've made some other edits
Xcia0069 ( talk) 20:08, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Following the excellent recent edits by user:Filmergirl96 and others, I have removed the copy edit required template Xcia0069 ( talk) 19:00, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
This article needs a lot of work on the neutrality front, including unsourced additions and claims made to the lead regarding the religious demographics. Is there also a reason why the infobox mentions 400–900 casualties, which is then contradicted within the article claiming "150 to 400 people were killed"? There is a daylight's worth of difference between both reported figures. Consider putting ranges for the figure. Mar4d ( talk) 13:15, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
According to the 1941 census, [1] the Gilgit tehsil (the same as the present day Gilgit District) had 11274 Shias out of 22495 total population, which amounts to 50%.
Zeex.rice, what is the basis for your claim of Shia majority? -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 15:58, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
exceptional claims require exceptional sources. Kautilya3, please do not restore the uncited material in question regarding the demographics as you did here without providing reliable, secondary sources. I will have no option otherwise but to tag the page as I did previously. Please consult WP:BURDEN; as the reinstating user, the burden also falls on you to demonstrate verifiability of the material you are restoring. Kind regards, Mar4d ( talk) 11:45, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
References