Wikipedia

Talk:Lashkar-e-Taiba/Archive 1

< Talk:Lashkar-e-Taiba
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Community Tech bot in topic A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
Archive 1

Vandalism?

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

i dont understand how my actions and adding statements that are truthful with references (GlobalSecurity.org), which is used by many of you users, is vandalism. Furthermore, I don't understand the necessity to call this vandalism, when Wikipedia is after-all opensource, meaning people should be able to add information which is correct and honest, unlike the actions you guys are doing in thinking it is okay to correct and undermine everyone else's infromation for you're own! Please do reply. P.S- The first time I added this information my info. was deleted because it did not have proper links, but this time I added links and now whats the problem?

  • Since no one has replied to you yet, and I have been also deleting your comments. First of all, you do need references for something you put in an article. Second, you are stating you own opinion, something that is not either encyclopedic nor neutral. You obviosuly don't have neutral point of view. I am talking about comments you added on the article Muzaffarabad. this is what you wrote there:
    • ==Indian Territory==

This land always has belonged to the Indians, and we will not give it up to some Pakistanis who claim for self-pride. the underdevelopment of this area, is clearly seen in the 2005 earthquake, as no damage or limited damage was done in Indian Kashmir, while thousands died in POK controlled Kashmir. If this land was developed by the rightful land owners(Indians) nothing horrible or inhumane would happen to the residents!

  • This is considered vanadlism. I deleted it the first time you put it. YOu put it again, and I deleted it again today.

Svetlana Miljkovic 01:54, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Urdu

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I changed Persian to Urdu and corrected the script. The -e- particle is called an izafat and represented by the diacritical dash under the re. Valiant effort though, easy mistake to make. The 't' in taiyyib(ah) should in my opinion preferably have two dots under it in normalized Urdu transliteration. However; I don't know of a unicode character for this. A tashdid can be added as well, but I didn't feel it necessary. Khirad 00:43, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Pakistani Involvement

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Can someone please reference the claims of Pakistani involvement in this group. Especially in regards to official involvement (such as the claim that leading Pakistani officials have visited the groups HQ) these claims need to be either evidenced or withdrawn. لقمانLuqman 12:58, 11 August 2006 (UTC) jvyyf j gcn

Why not to leave this article to specialists?

Latest comment: 18 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

I really wonder why so many Indians who know only what government news agencies serve them feel so authorised to write about the issues of the country they have never seen and have very faint idea about. The issue of jihadi organisations in Pakistan, as with lot of things concerning South Asia, is a very complex one, and it would be better for all Wikipedia users to leave its edition to real specialists - political scientists and researchers. Imagine an article on Vishwa Hindu Parishad or Shiv Sena edited by an average Pakistani who reads only daily "Jang"! It would correspond to the level of your comments. Don't feel offended please. Kacper 20:16, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Reply:

It is unbelievable to see someone here 'Why not to leave this article to specialists' is justifying acts of terrorism or taking a sympathetic stand towards LeT and distracting attention by spilling-out buzz words about Indian media, politics etc. To whomsoever wrote above discussion, it seems your knowledge about India, Pakistan is extremely shallow and is based on few books you have read while back-packing in this region. Please do not comment on such deep and intense topics you do not understand well. Such comments and attitude have in fact fuelled and encouraged terrorism in South Asia and subsequently caused wide loss of life and economic destruction of this region.

I believe you are most likely a post-graduate student in UK/EU trying to make a living by becoming an expert on terrorism in South Asia. Please leave it to South Asians. Inteference, soft stand and political support (sometimes unintentional) within Europe has caused already an havoc in India and Pakistand and have destroyed many lives. - Indra

Reply by: Kacper

Acts of terrorism can never be justified, I think we agree as to this. Your comments on backpacking are childish at the best and rude at the worst. Your argument going "you are wrong because you are perhaps a backpacker" is also not really academic - argumentum ad personam has been despised of ever since the ancient Greeks. But I don't assume you have ever studied logics or philosophy. Pity.

As to the point, I oppose two things: (1) Attributing all terrorist acts in India whatsoever to LeT, even before they are investigated - as you have done. (2) Language full of "dreadful Islamic terrorists ruthlessly murdering innocent women and children". Quote only facts, and not media-facts!!! Before writing anything in Wikipedia, please please read the Neutral Point of View Policy, especially the section on Bias. Your language does not conform to Wikipedia standards - ultimately if not me then someone else will edit out your comments.

Kacper 20:16, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Reply to Kacper by Richard I have never come across so much sympathy for LeT by anyone. It is astonishing that you are using nice and clever words to justify your stand towards terrorism. It is indeed a sad fact such attitude towards terrorism has fuelled it to an extent we see it as a part of daily life today. By your philosophical arguments you are making lives of many people difficult since your views are seen as encouraging by many terrorist organisations. Finally as an outsider of South Asia, frankly you have no moral right to justify the terror activities in India by LeT as right or wrong.

The study of logic and philosohpy you are mentioning sadly you have no idea what you are talking about. There is absolutely no connection of it to this topic of discussion. So let's not use some art studies to justify anything here.

I feel sorry to see fairly educated individuals like you indirectly supporting terrorism under the name of balanced views and other specious arguments. - Richard

I cant believe you (Kacper) can insult Indians like this. LeT is like Al-qaida, the poeple kill innoncent civilians. Also they have no justification fro any of their activities except for pure hatred. I have to concur with the IP address, don't talk about LeT in a positive manner unless you can prove they're some angelic freedom-fighting group. As for NPOV, the facts are biased so the article reflects the facts. Bakaman Bakatalk 16:42, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Reply by: Kacper

Dear Richard,

This is an encyclopedia. Please now prove - and reference - the following statements of yours:

"LeT is like Al-qaida", and what it precisely means in your opinion.
"such attitude towards terrorism has fuelled it" (By "such attitude" you mean any attempts to understand the phenomenon of jihad, jihadi organisations, holy wars, Kashmir issue, etc.?);
"[to] kill innocent civilians" always consitutes an act of terrorism;
that I want to prove "they're some angelic freedom-fighting group".

Before you start answering, please read the debate at the start of this page - particularly concerning the word "terrorism". Don't edit anything there please.

Requested for Mediation on this article.

Kacper 18:33, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Reply by: Kaaccper

(This is a fake letter, please read "watch out" below.)

To Indians,

I apologise for supporting or being sympathetic to LeT even though it has been involved in killing of civilians and waging a war against a democratic country. I am well aware that LeT has a support from military undemocratic regime, still my love of jihadi brotherhood keeps me appealing to support LeT. I am ready to close my eyes towards their activities and want to keep using my meaningless arguments in their support.

I spent some years in Pakistan and currently my living expenses and tuition fees in UK are paid by certain elements of terrorist organisations. Hence I continue to spread their propaganda on internet. My knowledge of India and Pakistan is most based on anecdotal interviews and talks I initiated with few locals while travelling this land as a backpacker. Nobody really gave me any importance while I was there. This great country which has a civilisation of more than 5000 years old is beyond my understanding or capability of my intelligence. Hence I continue to look at it through my narrow judgement based on my high school level education which only contained Roman civilisation centric teachings and total vindication of all other cultures in the world.

I choose to ignore the facts that Pakistan is only 60 years old and in fact it is a historical aberration on this great land called Bharat with a history that is many thousand years old. My lack of knowledge is due to mainly my limited Eurocentric upbringing which is hinged on the notions of racial superiority over the people in Africa, South America, China and India.

I am sorry for indirectly supporting terrorism. My apologies if LeT like organisations feel inspired by my actions/support and resort to more killings of many more civilians.

Honestly, I have no respect for human life and civilian decency. For me what matters most is my ego, my academic views and my survival which depends on my becoming a self-proclaimed observer on terrorism. This is a hot topic today and all I want to do is cash in.

Words to Avoid: Terrorist

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

According to WP:WTA Terrorist, the description "terrorist" shouldn't be used. However, factually stating they are considered a terrorist organization by the US, for example, is acceptable. Addhoc 17:44, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Please watch out

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Someone has created an nick "Kaaccper" which resembles mine, and is posting under this profile in this discussion. My own profile has also been copied to the new, false one (including my copyrighted image).

Please kindly watch out the editor's nick. The Wikipedia administration has been already notified about the falsification. Thanks.

Computers are used by everyone. Also by idiots. Unfortunately.

Kacper 16:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Mediation Cabal request

Latest comment: 18 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion

There has been a Mediation Cabal request filed in regards to this article, and I anticipate having to use the talk page here shortly to help in sorting matters out. Would anyone be opposed to creating an archive of this page so we can start with a fresh slate? CQJ 18:11, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Of course not. Addhoc 18:14, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Is there still an issue with this article requiring mediation? Both the requesting editor and the disputing editor have been contacted to no avail. CQJ 16:52, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Possibly not, the edit history of the last week has been fairly quiet.[1] Addhoc 16:58, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, did not have access to the Internet last week. The issue continues - shall I resubmit the request? Kacper 14:49, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

I would suggest leaving a comment on CQJ's user page. Apologies for my comment, I obviously didn't know. Addhoc 14:57, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Tagged Sentences

Latest comment: 18 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

I'll start deleting the tagged sentences tomorrow, unless references are found. The BBC reference appears to be fairly comprehensive and so I'll see if that can't be used before deleting anything. Addhoc 14:35, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

By "tagged sentences" do you mean the ones you added the {fact} tag to yesterday? Er, um, do you really think it is collegial and cooperative to give other contributors just 24 hours notice? Particularly on a long weekend?
I don't have a dog in this fight. I already documented my own brief contribution to this article. I have sometimes given warnings like yours. But I think I almost always give people at least a week. And I don't think give them a deadline at all, unless the authors of the unreferenced -- or to my perception at least -- biased sections have shown hints of a lack of cooperation. But YMMV. -- Geo Swan 19:24, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I'll separate the exercises of looking to see what the BBC article could be used to verify and deleting the unsupported information. The only sentence that I consider really should be deleted tomorrow relates to the London bombing, which certainly isn't a majority view. The rest can wait until after the weekend. Addhoc 19:56, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

On second thoughts, possibly ignore my comment. If mediation is about to restart, then clearly I shouldn't make any significant changes that could trigger an edit war. Addhoc 21:25, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I have tagged the article for cleanup and source identification. Please make the appropriate changes as soon as possible. CQJ 18:36, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Self proclaimed experts on LeT

Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

There are individuals portraying themselves as LeT observers and claim to be neutral. Ironically the neutralism has more to do with removing words ‘terrorism’ and ‘terrorists’ in the description of LeT.

This self proclaimed observer needs a scrutiny and his/her role-connections within jihadi terrorism network. Some connections will be easily exposed debunking all the neutrality nonsense.

Using Terrorist

Calling it a terrorist organization is a fairly large POV. Remember the quote, "One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter" ? Now going into that quote would start quite a flame, so I offer a compromise. How about in these articles Wikipedia says something like "ABC is a group that is fighting for revolutionary purposes." <-- Note that the stuff following "is" would be the organizations definition or mission statement for themselves. Then, afterwards, Wikipedia would say "The United States Government labels ABC as a top ten terrorist group. Blah blah blah".
This way, its not as blatant a POV. Remember, it goes both ways. One's man freedom fighter is another man's terrorist. For example, many people believe the United States or Russia may be terrorist states (regarding their large killing of innocents, wars, etc). It doens't matter if YOU actually think their actions are justified, not meant, innocent etc., but if you disagree with the statement about the USA and Russia, then you can understand that labeling someone a terrorist is definetly a big POV.
What do you think?
Theuedimaster 23:16, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree that when the article writes that the Collin Powell claimed it the status of a terrrorist group....it may on the surface seem as though the group belongs in the definition. However, Collin Powell alone should not be the one to define terms...wikipedia is not the property of the Republican party of America. The groups tactics, however, are pretty close to labeling them as such. Your point on "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" is well taken....would George Washington be a terrorist in modern times?....It is best to leave it as "this so-called terrorist group". Atleast this is as I feel.

Terrorism as a fact

It is true that using a clever and sophisticated language even the most heinous crime against humanity can be portrayed correct and justified. This is the strategy seems to be adopted by many fundamentalist jihadi individuals starting debates about use of correct terms while describing terrorism in today’s world. This is the most unfortunate reality of open forums. Indeed sometime in future these jihadis will even justify acts of killing of innocent people by using arguments that sound plausible.

There can not be any other description of organisation such as Al-Queda and Laskar-e-Toiba than Terrorists. To term their actions as just ‘militancy’ is in real sense itself an act of terrorism and unjustified fundamentalism. 

       Richard

'The word Terrorism is appropriate'

The main argument against using the word "terrorist" to describe the LeT seems to be this: "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." Consider this: A man murders another. We cant say here that one man's murderer is another man's saviour. A murder is a murder. A terrorist act is a terrorist act. The fact is that terrorists KILL. They kill INNOCENTS. That should fit the definition of terrorism reasonably. The LeT therefore, should be called a terrorist organisation.

Some have said "Shouldnt the US also be called terrorists because they too are responsible for killing innocent people in Afghanistan and Iraq then?" The US cannot be called a terrorist state because of two crucial differences:

1. Unlike terrorist organisations like the LeT, the US does not bomb primarily to create terror and panic among the civilian population.
2. Unlike terrorist organisation like the LeT, the US does not AIM its attacks on civilians. The attacks are aimed at military personnel though they end up killing civilians, unfortunately.
3. The US when it attacks makes no secret of its intentions. Its intentions are clearly mentioned before any attack takes place. However, terrorists always attack from behind. They take us by surprise.
4. The US doesnt fly planes into buildings! :)

- Anonymous 18:04 Indian Standard Time, 4th Oct. 2006.

Indeed! Nor does the US behead journalists on television, or operate madrassas that teach hate before the alphabet.Given LeT's tactics and methodology it is entirely appropriate to call them terrorist. There is no partisan bias here as the Ku Klux Klan, the Stern Gang, the Jewish Defense League and other non-muslim orgs are also listed as terrorists for their use of terror tactics.Hkelkar 12:39, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Recruitment

"Almost all LT members are Pakistanis from madrassas across Pakistan or Afghan veterans of the Afghan wars." http://library.nps.navy.mil/home/tgp/lt.htm. LeT terrorist do not have any support base in the Kashmir Valley. The cadres generally terrorise the localites into submission to provide them with food, shelter and even women.

New BBC Story

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

An LeT member convicted in France. [2] Thinking of adding this. Hypnosadist 16:35, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Language

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This article had Persian script at some point, and later it was replaced with the current Urdu script. Why not have them both? --tyomitch 18:40, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

They're identical. - Azimsultan (talk) 06:24, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

LET is a terrorist organization. It has been added to the US list of terror organizations

definitions as per Merriam-Webster:

terorist -

  1. the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

'''Lashkar has links to al-qaeda and its global network.they also supply kashmiri and pakistan based men to conduct attacks in iraq and US.Many of its sympathisers are hiding in europe and US.'''

LET is a TERROR organization, not a militant organization.--IMpbt 17:05, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC) to army of the pure, it had been changed by someone to a derogatory word in Hindi- fkh8

Translation of Name: Army of the Good vs. Army of the Pure/Righteous

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

lashkar is Persian for army
tayyib is Arabic for good
-e- in this case means of

Thus, lashkar-e-tayyiba means army of the Good

See Google Translation for tayyib to English

Army of the Pure would be lashkar-e-paak
Army of the Righteous would be lashkar-e-wara'a

Thanks, Azimsultan (talk) 02:09, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

This may be the correct answer. At the same time LeT is also known under Army of the Pure, Army of the Righteous and Army of the Pure and Righteous. Therefore, I believe that these translations (even if they are wrong) should also be mentionend in the opening.

nichmehrda (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 10:17, 28 November 2008 (UTC).

I don't agree. They are known as lashkar-e-tayyiba, and not by any other name - just because some journalist decided to translate the word "tayyib" as "righteous" doesn't mean it's correct. This is essentially two issues: a mistranslation that has proliferated and should be corrected, and two, an attempt to paint this organization as some sort of religious fanatics/jihadists. As I'm sure no one here has met any members of this group, it's non-NPOVish of us to assume that they carry out their attacks for Islamist/religious reasons. There are literally hundreds of reasons a terrorist group could exist. - Azimsultan (talk) 11:59, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
So basicly you don't agree with LeT being a religously driven group? Still this has nothing to do with how the name of this group has been translated and used. As I mentionend before, I won't argue about the question whether the translation is appropriate or not (as I don't believe to know this), but in the sense of a enzyclopedic knowdledge the article should also include a reference to how it is known. This is like the article should include the different spellings of the name in the translation (again even though they may not all be correct). - Nichmehrda (talk)

Pakistan Affiliation

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

'Organisations like the LeT have been used to absorb the resilient remnants of The Taliban and Al Qaeda operatives in the region and to salvage the strategic objective of using the tool of terror for state purpose, particularly against neighbouring India, by the Pakistani state'

There a couple instances in this article in which the interests of LeT are conflated with those of "the Pakistani state." It is important not to make this assertion as it a) smacks of bias, and b) is wrong. It would be far more accurate to describe the interests of LeT as falling in line with those of the ISI, but to claim that the Pakistani government shares the interests of the ISI is simply false. The ISI acts almost as a renegade organization at this point and should not be considered to speak for the Asif Ali Zardari or the legitimate government of Pakistan. This is an important distinction. Olmucky (talk) 17:14, 1 December 2008 (UTC) Ol Mucky

objectives

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Okay, I'm gonna later take a look at the citations used for the "objectives" section of the article, but the "objectives" section in the profile is ridiculous. For starters, even organisations whose MAIN goal is the dismantling of the state of Israel don't have a big "Destroy Israel" at the top of the page, so the "destroy India and Israel" thing seems pretty ridiculous. Annihilate Hinduism and Judaism, again seems to be POV and propaganda-esque. I'm leaving "Independence of Jammu and Kashmir from India, pan-South Asian Islamic influence" but I'd really like it if someone could find a better wording for "pan-South Asian Islamic influence". There must be available information on their objectives and a precedent for how wikipedia is supposed to phrase those objectives. "Anti-Russian" "Anti-Chinese" and "antisemitic" are all ridiculous for one reason or an other. Not to say that they're not these things, but I didn't think we were supposed to class terrorist organisations in such a fashion, and I'm pretty sure they'd describe their ideals as being in favour of the independence of Islamic regions of those states. Okay. Makin' some changes. Please give your two cents. סרסלי, קײק פּלז (talk) 04:39, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Spelling

Latest comment: 15 years ago5 comments4 people in discussion

Can we please change the title of this article to its real name; Lashkar-e-Taiba.

Thank You. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.235.193.4 (talk) 05:49, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, shouldn't this be done? "Lashkar-e-Toiba" is not the first spelling listed in the header, in fact it isn't among any of the spellings listed. -- AvatarMN (talk) 06:39, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
Seconded, the most common transliteration of طيبه would be tayyibah, the letters are T Y Y B H
- Azimsultan (talk) 02:11, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
Yes. The long term preferred spelling, which reflects standard transliteration and pronunciation, is Lashkar-e-Taiba. It is also the more prevalent spelling result in Google. Menaus (talk) 03:37, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
So... Anyone gonna do this? An admin, maybe? It's kind of difficult to do moves efficiently when there are redirects already. -- AvatarMN (talk) 19:36, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Confusion over the identity of Jamaat ud-Da'wa

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The lead recounts that Lashkar-e-Taiba was created out of a nonmilitary organization which itself later changed its name to Jamaat ud-Dawa. Until just now, the last sentence of the lead was a report that "some sources" -- in fact a single source --claimed that Lashkar-e-Taiba itself renamed itself Jamaat ud-Dawa. Turns out the source is a passing mention, a caption to a photo, that is several years old. This is weak evidence. Beyond that, in the copious reportage from the last two weeks occasioned by the raid on Mumbai with nearly 200 slain, I have seen no repetition of this strange claim. Finally, a feature article in today's New York Times describes Jamaat ud-Dawa as "the charity wing of Lashkar". Now whether the precise truth is that, or rather that Lashkar is the military wing of Jamaat ud-Dawa, or some third option, there is abundant evidence that Lashkar has not renamed itself period. Hurmata (talk) 10:57, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Leader?

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The introduction and overview states that Hafiz Muhammad Saeed is the leader of LeT yet in the Leadership section it states that the new leader is Maulana Abdul Wahid (Supreme Leader). Maulana Abdul Wahid (Kashmiri) is stated as the current armed leader in a number of searchable sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.16.22.252 (talk) 19:37, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Removal of uncited section

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Wikipedia requires cited facts from reliable sources. I have removed an entire uncited section that has remained uncited since being flagged as such in November 2008.

Please only replace it with a correctly cited section. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 23:41, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism of Article?

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The "History" section has obviously been vandalised. It talks about RAW. I guess someone had an agenda but no time to be actually misleading. I'd delete it but am not an expert on LeT's history. Please share your views. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamcraze (talk • contribs) 10:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Large portions of this article are copy-and-pasted from http://satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/states/jandk/terrorist_outfits/lashkar_e_toiba.htm. It appears as though early during this article's history it was a direct copy and edits since have been added so we cannot revert the article back without removing valid information. The South Asia Terrorism Profile is listed as reference #12 but the article has copied-and-pasted direct passages which is still a copyright violation.--RDavi404 (talk) 18:34, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I am going to remove the Operational Strategies section altogether. The whole section either lacks citations or is copied-and-pasted, from two main sources (http://satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/states/jandk/terrorist_outfits/lashkar_e_toiba.htm and http://www.eyespymag.com/terrorgroupsL-M.htm ).--RDavi404 (talk) 15:28, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

IISC attack Bangalore 2005

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Perhaps this attack should be added. I don't know if it really counts as confirmed, but at least it is alledged User:nielsle

http://www.hinduonnet.com/2008/02/11/stories/2008021160341200.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.166.24.166 (talk) 18:33, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

What's Wrong With Terrorist?

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Terrorism seems to be taken as a pejorative term by everyone writing here. Isn't it possible for a group to be 'terrorist' and not be apologetic about that? One could argue that terrorism is the strategy of 'stateless armies' which do not have the legitimising institutions backing them, nor do they have official armies which can go to 'war'. If that is the case then arguing over whether LeT is a terrorist organisation or not seems meaningless. To state that 'terrorism' is somehow ontologically wrong seems to be a rationalist/humanist POV notion.

People who believe LeT is not a terrorist organisation seem to be ashamed about what it is doing in India. The innate need to deny that LeT has any role in terror tactics is already POV and not neutral. I would also like to remind my fellow Indians that our school textbooks call Bhagat Singh a 'revolutionary terrorist'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Modern Tribal (talk • contribs) 08:43, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

The targets of the LeT have been predominantly civilian in nature. Though civilian casualties can be expected in a war intentionally targeting civilians for the sole purpose of generating fear in the minds of the populace in order to coerce public opinion in it’s favor can be viewed as nothing less than criminal behavior. A large number of countries including Pakistan have categorized the LeT as a terrorist organization. Viewing the LeT’s actions as anything other than criminal would amount to a very biased POV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.64.12.203 (talk) 20:10, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Shi'a or Sunni?

Latest comment: 14 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Why is there nowhere in the article mentioned to which of the two major Muslim sects this group adheres? __meco (talk) 11:33, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

because terrorists have no religion —Preceding unsigned comment added by Azimsultan (talk • contribs) 02:11, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
They're Sunni. If a group defines itself as Sunni Muslim then it should be listed as such. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.72.129 (talk) 22:55, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Aga Khani/Ismailli Institutions

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

If you want to know about and want to do some thing contact me, email me at adevshi@gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.92.144.10 (talk) 16:18, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

anti pak

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This article is very anti pakistani and biased it does not take into account that LET was formed due to Indian human rights abuses and US defence secretary has gone on record to say Pakistani does not support Terrorist as has the Pakistan Ambassador is not for Wikipedia to base articles based on hear say —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.1.250.215 (talk) 23:37, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Ok, please provide reputable sources to back up those claims and maybe they can go in a Controversy/Defense section? Politicians say all kinds of things, but doesn't mean that LeT apologists/supporters shouldn't have their say. I'm fairly sure there's an Indian Human Rights abuse page that balances this page. Pär Larsson (talk) 17:01, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2011_April_8#File:Logo_of_Lashkar-e-Taiba.png

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

All opinions welcome. walk victor falk talk 10:07, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Merger proposal

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I propose that Jama'at-ud-Da'wah be merged into Lashkar-e-Taiba. It seems that the JuD is widely considered (by media and the UN) to be the same organization as the LeT. I think that the content in the JuD article can easily be explained in the context of LeT. RDavi404 (talk) 13:07, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Lashkar-e-Taiba

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Mr. Hafiz Muhammad Saeed is not ladder of Lashkar-e-Taiba.

He is a ladder of Falah Insaniat Foundation and Jamat dawa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.11.233.96 (talk) 06:42, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Merger proposal

Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

I am going to be merging the content of Lashkar-e-Taiba training camps into this main article, Lashkar-e-Taiba. The training camp article is not very extensive, and all of its info can be included in this article's History or Activities section. If you see any reason why this merge should not occur, please respond. Thank you. --RDavi404 (talk) 14:15, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Merge completed.--RDavi404 (talk) 14:58, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Islamic terrorisim

Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I added an internal link to Islamic terrorism which was reverted citing wp: terrorism. However there is no doubt that this is an Islamic terrorist group. If the reverter does not want them called terrorists then change the text, the internal is wholly appropriate. Darkness Shines (talk) 10:44, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

I WANT KNOW WHAT IS THIS GROUP MAIN AIM — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.16.34.194 (talk) 10:51, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

According to their spokesperson their goal or mission is "freedom" for Kashmiris. See, for example, here. Whether that means an independent Kashmir or union with Pakistan is unclear. --Bejnar (talk) 05:01, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Lashkar-e-Taiba. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:44, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Lashkar-e-Taiba. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:24, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Lashkar-e-Taiba. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:18, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Lashkar-e-Taiba. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:38, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Lashkar-e-Taiba. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:53, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

'Keep adding content to this article' — Forgot to put name (talk) 10:27, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Lashkar-e-Taiba. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:18, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Lashkar-e-Taiba. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:23, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Name changes

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

JuD and FIF have existed in Pakistan with other names before, most prominently Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT). Even today, they continue to operate merely by changing names... Some of the names that the proscribed organisation has now started using includes ‘Al Madina’ and ‘Aisar Foundation’.

Pakistani Newspaper Daily times reports that Ban not fully enforced and the group has changed its names yet again. --DBigXrayᗙ 05:25, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

The EU banned organisation reference and the UNSCR 1267 List issue

Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Just wanted to inform all editors, that the current reference being used to cite that EU has banned LeT is an old reference from 2003. The EU maintains two lists of banned organisations/terror groups. The first automatically borrows from the UNSCR 1267 Al Qaeda and ISIL sanctions list. The second is what the EU mantains itself - and is the one that was cited in the reference for EU. However the LeT is not in the latest EU list (nor is the JeM). This new list is available here (2019) - https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32019D0025&from=EN Hence the importance of mentioning the UNSCR 1267 list - https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/sanctions/1267/aq_sanctions_list Since LeT and JeM and others are now considered terror organisations in EU owing to the automatic borrowing from the UN list. Pranav (talk) 13:11, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Cool, noted. ∯WBGconverse 07:11, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Potential high-quality sources

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Azzam as co-founder

Latest comment: 3 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

His biographer writes Azzam had nothing to do with the foundation of Lashkar-e-Taiba.

Hegghammer, Thomas (2020). The Caravan. Abdallah Azzam and the Rise of Global Jihad. Cambridge University Press. p. 203–204. ISBN 978-0-521-76595-4.

Small groups of Pakistani Ahl-e Hadith activists fought in Afghanistan from around 1984, but it was mainly after the founding of the Markaz al-Da‘wa wa’l-Irshad (MDI) in 1987 that substantial numbers– at least several hundred– joined the war. The main founder of the MDI, Hafiz Saeed, had got to know Abdallah Azzam in Islamabad in the early 1980s and had studied the Qur’an with him there. It is not clear how they met, but it probably helped that Saeed spoke Arabic and had taught at King Saud University in Riyadh in the late 1970s. When Hafiz Saeed founded the MDI, he appears to have involved Abdallah Azzam in some way. This has led Azzam to be presented in several works on Pakistani Islamism as a co-founder of the MDI. However, new research suggests that Azzam’s role was more peripheral; he was just one of between fifteen and twenty people involved, and he likely only had an advisory role. [...] In any case, Azzam had nothing to do with the MDI’s more famous armed wing, Lashkar-e Tayyiba, which only emerged in the early 1990s.

--Jo1971 (talk) 09:00, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

We don't have a separate page on MDI. At the moment, this page serves as a proxy for MDI as well. The founding year of 1987 is obviously that of MDI. (It is not our fault of course. MDI was relatively unknown until recently, and even now most sources have no knowledge of it.)
Bruce Reidel, who is our main source here, says:

In addition to creating the Service Bureau with bin Laden, Azzam was instrumental in setting up another organization to assist jihad in nearby Kashmir, the Markaz-ud-Dawa-wal-Irshad (MDI), or Center for Proselytization and Preaching. Here he had the help of Hafez Saeed, a prominent Pakistani Sunni scholar who, like Azzam, had studied in Saudi Arabia in the 1980s. The mission of the MDI was to apply the lessons of the Afghan war—which was winding down in 1987 as the Soviet forces prepared to leave—to Kashmir and India.[1]

-- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:12, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Riedel, Bruce. Deadly Embrace (p. 32). Brookings Institution Press.
Thomas Hegghammer provides quite some references in the footnote for the claim that Azzam had nothing to do with the foundation of MID.
p. 575

Samina Yasmeen, Jihad and Dawah: Evolving Narratives of Lashkare-Taiba and Jamat ud Dawah (London: Hurst, 2017), p. 47; Stephen Tankel, Storming the World Stage: The Story of Lashkare-Taiba (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), pp. 20– 21. Christine Fair says that the MDI was founded by Saeed and Iqbal and that Azzam “provided assistance”: C. Christine Fair, Bruce Hoffman, and Fernando Reinares, ‘Leader-Led Jihad in Pakistan: The Case of Lashkar-e-Taiba’, in The Evolution of the Global Terrorist Threat: From 9/11 to Osama bin Laden’s Death (New York: Columbia University Press, 2014), 571– 599, p. 576. Fair and Tankel put the date at 1986, but Yasmeen, who has more detailed information, dates the foundation to the spring of 1987. Arif Jamal says Azzam had nothing to do with the MDI’s foundation: Arif Jamal, Call for Transnational Jihad: Lashkar-e-Taiba 1985–2014, 1st South Asian ed. (New Delhi: Kautilya, 2015).

So most likely he wasn't involved in the foundation of MDI but he definitely wasn't involved in the foundation of Lashkar-e-Taiba since he was already dead by then. --Jo1971 (talk) 21:59, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
Lashkar wasn't "founded". It was spun out. So, until it is spun out, MDI = Lashkar.
Riedel knows Hegghammer and cites him in his book. So I am afraid Riedel can't be dismissed. Intelligence agencies (Riedel was a CIA analyst) have access to a lot more information than academics do. I am happy to go with compromise wording similar to Christine Fair's: "provided assistance". -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:10, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
Riedel's book is dated 2011, Hegghammer's 2020 and all references Hegghammer lists are 2011 or newer but the wording "provided assistance" is ok and compatible with what Hegghammer is writing. --Jo1971 (talk) 14:56, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Refs

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 04:39, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Terrorist

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Why we shy away from using the word in the lead-line? TrangaBellam (talk) 06:57, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Me?

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

sorry but i consider what you guys do vandalism, in trying to control the writings and facts of everything, especially something that i am being very neutral on(Lashkar...). I have stopped putting it one, only to find that someone else has updated my writing with sources of not myself but government agencies and international intelligence agencies. obviously with more tha one source it shows that my writing is not only my belief but the belief of many people, including the American government. After this, I let go and left my work to be deleted by you guys only to find that someone else, probably across the world had updated my article information and changed it completely using my information. Today when checking i see that LABCOAT has blamed this on me too. Does he or she(LABCOAT) not realize the difference in IP addresses? that he has to blame that on me too! Please do not take this offensive, but adding knowledge that many nationalities and people share shows tha tit the belief of many people and that this info. is okay. As for my writing on Muzaffarabad, i agree i was being vandalisitic.

Assalamualikum,

I want to know about the current activities of Lashker-e- Taiba.... Mahmud Faiyaz (talk) 09:58, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:23, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lashkar-e-Taiba/Archive_1&oldid=1235065399"