The Middle East Crisis

[90MPH]

Syrian government forces have bombarded the city of Homs with tank shells and mortars, killing more than 200 people, opposition groups say.

Activists say a massacre has occurred but the government denied attacking, accusing the opposition of propaganda.

A BBC correspondent outside Homs says opposition fighters, though outgunned, plan to launch a "general offensive".

A vote is expected later on a UN draft resolution, despite Syrian ally Russia voicing strong objections.

Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Saturday the current draft included measures against President Bashar al-Assad's government, but not against armed opposition groups.

He said Moscow had tabled amendments to the text to try and ensure the UN would not appear to be taking sides in a civil war.

'Savagery'

Homs appears to have come under a "pretty relentless" bombardment, which targeted areas outside government control, the BBC's Paul Woods reports from just outside the city, where he is travelling with fighters from the Free Syria Army.

He says the fighters are trying to get in via back roads with blood supplies for the casualties.

Funerals have already begun in large numbers, our correspondent was told, amid reports of a death toll as high as 260.

Russia's foreign minister said it would be a "scandal" to ask the UN Security Council to vote on the resolution in its current form.

Russia is Syria's main ally on the council, and has said it will veto any resolution calling on Mr Assad to stand down.

Moscow has continued to supply weapons to Syria despite the protests.

However, French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe said the Homs assault was a "further step in savagery" and warned against a veto.

"Those who would hinder the adoption of such a resolution would assume a heavy responsibility in history," he said.

In another blow to the Assad regime, Tunisia's government said it had begun the process of expelling the Syrian ambassador and withdrawing recognition from the government.

Embassies attacked

A death toll higher than 200 at Homs would make it by quite a long way the bloodiest day since protests began.

Homs was one of the first cities to join anti-Assad protests, and became one of the focal points of dissent after government forces fired on crowds in April last year. Many army defectors have sought refuge in the city.

Activists said most of the deaths were in the residential area of Khalidiya.

Reports said a hospital had been destroyed in Khalidiya, and residents said more than 30 houses had been wrecked in the barrage.

"We were sitting inside our house when we started hearing the shelling. We felt shells were falling on our heads," Khalidiya resident Waleed told Reuters news agency.

Video footage emerged on the internet showing several bodies covered in blood with a voiceover saying the bombardment was still going on.

State media dismissed the Homs casualty reports as a "hysterical campaign of incitement" by armed gangs designed to influence the UN.

"The civilians shown by satellite television stations are citizens who were kidnapped and killed by armed gunmen," said a report on Sana news agency.

International media outlets are restricted in Syria, making it difficult to verify the claims of either side.

Meanwhile, activists have attacked Syrian embassies around the world

-Around 50 mainly Syrian protesters broke into their country's embassy in Athens early on Saturday, smashing windows and

-About 20 protesters forced their way into the Syrian embassy in Berlin late on Friday and damaged offices, police said. German TV showed a Syrian resistance flag hanging from one of the windows and graffiti sprayed on the outside of the building

-About 150 demonstrators gathered outside the Syrian embassy in London early on Saturday and five people were arrested after entering the building

-In Cairo, protesters stormed the embassy building, smashing furniture and setting fire to parts of the building
Syria has been gripped by nationwide protests against Mr Assad's regime for almost a year.

The UN stopped estimating the death toll after it passed 5,400 in January, saying it was too difficult to confirm numbers.

The Syrian government says at least 2,000 members of its security forces have been killed fighting "armed gangs and terrorists".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16883911

 

[Bewal Express]

Will there be demos by my fellow muslims against the massacre of the innocent or is it ok for muslims to kill other muslims.

 

[Wasim_Waqar]

typical crappy media...set up a problem in Syria then allow people into the embassy. Interesting how India's government has murdered 100,000+ Kashmiris since 1989 and they choose not to bother. DOUBLE STANDARDS, MEDIA FULL OF CRAP

 

[Bewal Express]

So its ok to kill these people as long the media mention the fact that others have also been killed.

 

[Wasim_Waqar]

Assad should go.

Media hype what they want to hype. Kashmir is a brutality that is going on today and has done so for years...

Will there be demos by my fellow muslims against the massacre of the innocent kashmiris?

 

[Bewal Express]

There already have been and i have heard countless condemnations(rightly so) of the injustice in Palestine, Chechenya and Kashmir but when muslims start to murder each other we have silence from the imams and the public.Why?

 

[Wasim_Waqar]

Look at what is going on.

This is some sort of a conspiracy to protect Israel. It's so obvious.

At the end of the day, you and a lot of people are influenced by media. They show you what they want to show...so that you go out and protest like those people in London...because it suits them.

If they showed what half on my blood (kashmir) goes through, then you'd be crying and be outside the Indian embassy 24/7.

Double standards and hypocrisy.

If he is doing these things: then for sure people should condemn it.

Ps Chechnya has been bought off by Russia and Palestine is a political football for the west and Arabs.

 

[Markhor]

I am not someone who declares others 'non-Muslim' or 'UnIslamic' on a regular basis like some posters on here but the Alawi sect in Syria has some peculiar practices.

According to them, prayers are not necessary, they don't fast, nor perform pilgrimage, nor have specific places of worship.

Alawis believe Imam Ali is an incarnation of one of the persons of God and wholly divine, along with Jesus Christ and The Prophet Muhammad PBUH.

There will be sectarian unrest in Syria, particularly in post-Assad Syria - if such a thing arises.

Syria is a majority Sunni population, but Bashar al-Assad is an Alawite. There may be Sunni reprisals on Alawite communities and so forth. Most Alawites back Assad, and they fear being under Sunni domination.

Also Iran would be a major loser should the al-Assad regime fall.

 

[Bewal Express]

Another conspiracy theory(the default setting for some people). In fact the Israelis are happy with Assad as he is only interested in survival and couldn`t care less about any millitary adventures. They are more worried about what emerge rather than Assad. So out goes your conspiracy theory. It was and still is the same in Egypt where the Israelis were quite happy with Mubarak rather than democracy.

 

[90MPH]

Wasim bro it's not any conspiracy. People are being slaughtered because they have had enough of a tyrant - the majority of people do not belong to Assads sect so they have not seen the rewards.

As for Kashmir I agree it's sad the Western media in particular have not shown the same interest as people have been slaughtered there too in the last two decades.

 

[Bewal Express]

Most of the evil done to muslims is by other muslims. Too much emphasis on rubbish conspiracy theories and not enough condemnation of evil by muslims on fellow muslims.

 

[Wasim_Waqar]

Wasim bro it's not any conspiracy. People are being slaughtered because they have had enough of a tyrant - the majority of people do not belong to Assads sect so they have not seen the rewards.

As for Kashmir I agree it's sad the Western media in particular have not shown the same interest as people have been slaughtered there too in the last two decades.

Btw I'm Hassan...

if you destabilise Syria, you then allow links between Syria/Lebanon/Hezbollah to be neutralised...then it's easier to protect Israel if they attack Iran.

Kashmir...is thousands times worse. Not "people have been attacked too" but mass graves, rapes, half-widows, AFSPA, etc. Double standards.

Btw I have finally woken up after years: the BBC is NOT neutral.

 

[Bewal Express]

So all the people fighting the evil of Assad(and family) and his sect are actually fighting to protect Israel. I am sure they appreciate your care and support.

 

[Wasim_Waqar]

If he is doing bad things as people say, I am against it and condemn it.

But a lot of people inflate figures etc.

In all seriousness, for me it's Pakistan and Kashmir that matter most- considering what the Arabs have (not) done for us as regards Kashmir.

 

[Muhammad Waleed]

And news is a draft of whatever proposed by Americans in UN and China and Russia has vetowed. here are the details

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-16890107

 

[Outlaw]

If he is doing bad things as people say, I am against it and condemn it.

But a lot of people inflate figures etc.

In all seriousness, for me it's Pakistan and Kashmir that matter most- considering what the Arabs have (not) done for us as regards Kashmir.

How can you be relying on the Arabs to do something about Kashmir? Why should they when Pakistan itself doesn't give a damn about it.

The Arabs struggled to beat Israel when it was easy to do so, Pakistan is capable enough to fight for Kashmir. The Arabs that did go to help their brothers in Kashmir and other regions are now being persecuted and chased by the Pakistani government. No one cares about what happens to them, nor does any Pakistani (Non-Pashtun) care about the massacre of thousands of innocent Pashtuns, nor do they care about the oppressed Baluchis... People need to forget about their ethnicities and unite under ONE Islam. Unfortunately I don't think it'll happen any time soon..

On the topic of Syria, Allah is their witness. They don't require anyone's help but Allah. Allah is with the oppressed, be it Chechnya, Kashmir, Waziristan, Palestine, Iraq or Afghanistan etc...

Also guys, do not underestimate the power of dua, that is the LEAST we can do for our brothers and sisters in Syria and throughout the entire Ummah...

 

[Wasim_Waqar]

You make good points but we have been so vocal on Palestine and what have the arabs given us back? Support for India in j and k?

Let's just pray bloodshed stops everywhere.

I'm half-pakistani: we care deeply for Kashmir

 

[Fallen King]

May Allaah (SWT) have mercy for Syrian Muslim brothers and sisters, and strengthen Pakistan to be prepared for Kashmir, Ameen!

 

[Alam_dar]

We should consider what Syrian People themselves want.

http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topi...=478192&version=1&template_id=36&parent_id=16

Most Syrians ‘supportive of Assad’

Although the majority of Arabs believe Syria’s President Basher al-Assad should resign in the wake of the regime’s brutal treatment of protesters, fewer Syrians are supportive of an immediate leadership change.
According to the latest opinion poll commissioned by The Doha Debates, Syrians are more supportive of their president with 55% not wanting him to resign. One of the main reasons given by those wanting the president to stay in power was fear for the future of the country.
That level of support is not mirrored elsewhere in the region with 81% of Arabs wanting President Assad to step down.
They believe Syria would be better off if free democratic elections were held under the supervision of a transitional government.
The poll’s finding support the result of November’s Doha Debate in which 91% of the audience called for President Assad to resign.
If President Assad resigns, Syria’s relations with Turkey, Lebanon and the United States are expected to improve while relations with Iran and Israel will worsen, according to the opinion poll findings.
The poll conducted by YouGov Siraj questioned more than 1,000 people in the Arab world between December 14 and 19.

[utube]d7zFUaDOPCE[/utube]!

 

[shaykh1985]

The main aspect of reporting from Syria is it is based on the words of opposition groups...the numbers provided were from opposition groups...the number also changed a couple times...from over 200 to 55...so who is to say who is telling the truth here...

There does seem to exist a civil conflict which even the Arab League's own observers had this to say...

"In some zones, this armed entity reacted by attacking Syrian security forces and citizens, causing the Government to respond with further violence. In the end, innocent citizens pay the price for those actions with life and limb.

"In Homs, Idlib and Hama, the Observer Mission witnessed acts of violence being committed against Government forces and civilians that resulted in several deaths and injuries. Examples of those acts include the bombing of a civilian bus, killing eight persons and injuring others, including women and children, and the bombing of a train carrying diesel oil. In another incident in Homs, a police bus was blown up, killing two police officers. A fuel pipeline and some small bridges were also bombed. "

"Such incidents include the bombing of buildings, trains carrying fuel, vehicles carrying diesel oil and explosions targeting the police, members of the media and fuel pipelines. Some of those attacks have been carried out by the Free Syrian Army and some by other armed opposition groups."

It's not so clearly one sided...

 

[shaykh1985]

Double post...

 

[shaykh1985]

Another conspiracy theory(the default setting for some people). In fact the Israelis are happy with Assad as he is only interested in survival and couldn`t care less about any millitary adventures. They are more worried about what emerge rather than Assad. So out goes your conspiracy theory. It was and still is the same in Egypt where the Israelis were quite happy with Mubarak rather than democracy.

Comparing Egypt and Syria is not valid...Syria is not interested in military adventures of its own but it hosted Hamas and Hezbollah...and to destabilise Syria is to destabilise these groups and also Iran...

Egypt and Mubarak never did a single thing to provoke Israel...even if the MB comes through then its better news for Israel than Assad...the MB in Syria is even milder than the Egyptian version who have been nothing but pragmatic in regards to Israel...the Salafi party in Egypt have been no different...what can be guaranteed is the MB won't be cordial with Iran and wont be hosting Hezbollah...

 

[Alam_dar]

Source: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/NB04Ak01.html

THE ROVING EYE
Exposed: The Arab agenda in Syria
By Pepe Escobar

Here's a crash course on the "democratic" machinations of the Arab League - rather the GCC League, as real power in this pan-Arab organization is wielded by two of the six Persian Gulf monarchies composing the Gulf Cooperation Council, also known as Gulf Counter-revolution Club; Qatar and the House of Saud.

Essentially, the GCC created an Arab League group to monitor what's going on in Syria. The Syrian National Council - based in North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member countries Turkey and France - enthusiastically supported it. It's telling that Syria's neighbor Lebanon did not.

When the over 160 monitors, after one month of enquiries, issued their report ... surprise! The report did not follow the official GCC line - which is that the "evil" Bashar al-Assad government is indiscriminately, and unilaterally, killing its own people, and so regime change is in order.

The Arab League's Ministerial Committee had approved the report, with four votes in favor (Algeria, Egypt, Sudan and GCC member Oman) and only one against; guess who, Qatar - which is now presiding the Arab League because the emirate bought their (rotating) turn from the Palestinian Authority.

So the report was either ignored (by Western corporate media) or mercilessly destroyed - by Arab media, virtually all of it financed by either the House of Saud or Qatar. It was not even discussed - because it was prevented by the GCC from being translated from Arabic into English and published in the Arab League's website.

Until it was leaked. Here it is, in full.

The report is adamant. There was no organized, lethal repression by the Syrian government against peaceful protesters. Instead, the report points to shady armed gangs as responsible for hundreds of deaths among Syrian civilians, and over one thousand among the Syrian army, using lethal tactics such as bombing of civilian buses, bombing of trains carrying diesel oil, bombing of police buses and bombing of bridges and pipelines.

Once again, the official NATOGCC version of Syria is of a popular uprising smashed by bullets and tanks. Instead, BRICS members Russia and China, and large swathes of the developing world see it as the Syrian government fighting heavily armed foreign mercenaries. The report largely confirms these suspicions.

The Syrian National Council is essentially a Muslim Brotherhood outfit affiliated with both the House of Saud and Qatar - with an uneasy Israel quietly supporting it in the background. Legitimacy is not exactly its cup of green tea. As for the Free Syrian Army, it does have its defectors, and well-meaning opponents of the Assad regime, but most of all is infested with these foreign mercenaries weaponized by the GCC, especially Salafist gangs.

Still NATOGCC, blocked from applying in Syria its one-size-fits-all model of promoting "democracy" by bombing a country and getting rid of the proverbial evil dictator, won't be deterred. GCC leaders House of Saud and Qatar bluntly dismissed their own report and went straight to the meat of the matter; impose a NATOGCC regime change via the UN Security Council.

So the current "Arab-led drive to secure a peaceful end to the 10-month crackdown" in Syria at the UN is no less than a crude regime change drive. Usual suspects Washington, London and Paris have been forced to fall over themselves to assure the real international community this is not another mandate for NATO bombing - a la Libya. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton described it as "a path for a political transition that would preserve Syria's unity and institutions".

But BRICS members Russia and China see it for what it is. Another BRICS member - India - alongside Pakistan and South Africa, have all raised serious objections to the NATOGCC-peddled draft UN resolution.

There won't be another Libya-style no fly zone; after all the Assad regime is not exactly deploying Migs against civilians. A UN regime change resolution will be blocked - again - by Russia and China. Even NATOGCC is in disarray, as each block of players - Washington, Ankara, and the House of Saud-Doha duo - has a different long-term geopolitical agenda. Not to mention crucial Syrian neighbor and trading partner Iraq; Baghdad is on the record against any regime change scheme.

So here's a suggestion to the House of Saud and Qatar; since you're so seduced by the prospect of "democracy" in Syria, why don't you use all your American weaponry and invade in the dead of night - like you did to Bahrain - and execute regime change by yourselves?

Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War (Nimble Books, 2007) and Red Zone Blues: a snapshot of Baghdad during the surge. His most recent is Obama does Globalistan (Nimble Books, 2009).

He may be reached at pepeasia@yahoo.com.

 

[Alam_dar]

Source: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/NB04Ak01.html

THE ROVING EYE
Exposed: The Arab agenda in Syria
By Pepe Escobar

Here's a crash course on the "democratic" machinations of the Arab League - rather the GCC League, as real power in this pan-Arab organization is wielded by two of the six Persian Gulf monarchies composing the Gulf Cooperation Council, also known as Gulf Counter-revolution Club; Qatar and the House of Saud.

Essentially, the GCC created an Arab League group to monitor what's going on in Syria. The Syrian National Council - based in North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member countries Turkey and France - enthusiastically supported it. It's telling that Syria's neighbor Lebanon did not.

When the over 160 monitors, after one month of enquiries, issued their report ... surprise! The report did not follow the official GCC line - which is that the "evil" Bashar al-Assad government is indiscriminately, and unilaterally, killing its own people, and so regime change is in order.

The Arab League's Ministerial Committee had approved the report, with four votes in favor (Algeria, Egypt, Sudan and GCC member Oman) and only one against; guess who, Qatar - which is now presiding the Arab League because the emirate bought their (rotating) turn from the Palestinian Authority.

So the report was either ignored (by Western corporate media) or mercilessly destroyed - by Arab media, virtually all of it financed by either the House of Saud or Qatar. It was not even discussed - because it was prevented by the GCC from being translated from Arabic into English and published in the Arab League's website.

Until it was leaked. Here it is, in full.

The report is adamant. There was no organized, lethal repression by the Syrian government against peaceful protesters. Instead, the report points to shady armed gangs as responsible for hundreds of deaths among Syrian civilians, and over one thousand among the Syrian army, using lethal tactics such as bombing of civilian buses, bombing of trains carrying diesel oil, bombing of police buses and bombing of bridges and pipelines.

Once again, the official NATOGCC version of Syria is of a popular uprising smashed by bullets and tanks. Instead, BRICS members Russia and China, and large swathes of the developing world see it as the Syrian government fighting heavily armed foreign mercenaries. The report largely confirms these suspicions.

The Syrian National Council is essentially a Muslim Brotherhood outfit affiliated with both the House of Saud and Qatar - with an uneasy Israel quietly supporting it in the background. Legitimacy is not exactly its cup of green tea. As for the Free Syrian Army, it does have its defectors, and well-meaning opponents of the Assad regime, but most of all is infested with these foreign mercenaries weaponized by the GCC, especially Salafist gangs.

Still NATOGCC, blocked from applying in Syria its one-size-fits-all model of promoting "democracy" by bombing a country and getting rid of the proverbial evil dictator, won't be deterred. GCC leaders House of Saud and Qatar bluntly dismissed their own report and went straight to the meat of the matter; impose a NATOGCC regime change via the UN Security Council.

So the current "Arab-led drive to secure a peaceful end to the 10-month crackdown" in Syria at the UN is no less than a crude regime change drive. Usual suspects Washington, London and Paris have been forced to fall over themselves to assure the real international community this is not another mandate for NATO bombing - a la Libya. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton described it as "a path for a political transition that would preserve Syria's unity and institutions".

But BRICS members Russia and China see it for what it is. Another BRICS member - India - alongside Pakistan and South Africa, have all raised serious objections to the NATOGCC-peddled draft UN resolution.

There won't be another Libya-style no fly zone; after all the Assad regime is not exactly deploying Migs against civilians. A UN regime change resolution will be blocked - again - by Russia and China. Even NATOGCC is in disarray, as each block of players - Washington, Ankara, and the House of Saud-Doha duo - has a different long-term geopolitical agenda. Not to mention crucial Syrian neighbor and trading partner Iraq; Baghdad is on the record against any regime change scheme.

So here's a suggestion to the House of Saud and Qatar; since you're so seduced by the prospect of "democracy" in Syria, why don't you use all your American weaponry and invade in the dead of night - like you did to Bahrain - and execute regime change by yourselves?

Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War (Nimble Books, 2007) and Red Zone Blues: a snapshot of Baghdad during the surge. His most recent is Obama does Globalistan (Nimble Books, 2009).

He may be reached at pepeasia@yahoo.com.

 

[Markhor]

The Russians are against the UN action because of what happened in Libya. The Russians went along with a no-fly zone to protect civilians. Then NATO under the banner of the UN went far beyond that mandate and started providing tactical air support for the rebels, striking at Gaddafi forces that were in no way threatening any civilians at the time. The NATO air campaign did not just protect civilians, they helped to overthrow Gadhafi. The Russians are basically saying they are not falling for that again.

 

[azhar329]

I wonder how many civilians the russians killed when they invaded afghanistan and during the recent chechen genocide (not to mention when they exiled the whole chechen nation). They are not concerned about civilians imo. Their gov and soldiers collectively are blood thirsty killers and war criminals who do not value human life.

 

[Markhor]

I wonder how many civilians the russians killed when they invaded afghanistan and during the recent chechen genocide (not to mention when they exiled the whole chechen nation). They are not concerned about civilians imo. Their gov and soldiers collectively are blood thirsty killers and war criminals who do not value human life.

Russia is one of Syria's biggest arms supplier. The total value of Syrian contracts with the Russian defense industry exceeds $4 billion. Russia also leases a naval facility at the Syrian port of Tartus, giving the Russian navy its only direct access to the Mediterranean.

 

[soton]

Message from Syrian people is quite clear they dont trust arab league nor they want NATO to intervene all they want is freedom from tyranny of Assad family which has suppressed their aspirations for 41 yrs .

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/zkg2RAwwe5Q" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[shaykh1985]

I wonder how many civilians the russians killed when they invaded afghanistan and during the recent chechen genocide (not to mention when they exiled the whole chechen nation). They are not concerned about civilians imo. Their gov and soldiers collectively are blood thirsty killers and war criminals who do not value human life.

They value their interests much like every nation and much like the nations trying to play the morality card in regards to Syria...

Hilary Clinton is on TV again spouting her nonsense about the Syrian people...she doesn't care about the Syrian people...but she does care about regime change...the Russians exactly the same but from the other side...

 

[azhar329]

They value their interests much like every nation and much like the nations trying to play the morality card in regards to Syria...

Hilary Clinton is on TV again spouting her nonsense about the Syrian people...she doesn't care about the Syrian people...but she does care about regime change...the Russians exactly the same but from the other side...

Im no fan of US foriegn policy either; only Allah knows how many innocents theyve killed over the years through wars, sanctions, aiding one group against another etc

If anyone has time I suggest they read the books of Mark Curtis;

 

[observer1]

Will there be demos by my fellow muslims against the massacre of the innocent or is it ok for muslims to kill other muslims.

I know you're trying to be witty and ironic, but unless you've been living under a rock for most of your life, you'd know that majority of the "leaders" of these "Muslim" countries are oppressive rulers our for personal gain, propped up foreign governments for their own personal interests.

Many Muslims have died trying to get rid of these decades old rulers for a long time.

As disgusting as it is that Russia and China have Vetoed the UN Resolution against Syria. The Hypocrisy of the West is again in full circle considering it's the same Western leaders who have funded these puppets.

 

[Tapori]

Is Assad a tyrant? Yes.

Are people being killed for demanding Fredom = Yes.

Does the US have a startegic interest in seeing Assad Go = Yes.

Have the US used pro-democracy groups to instill governments favorable to US interests? = Yes

Do Russia and China want Assad to go = No

Does Iran = No.

-

Having watched how the US-Russian relationship shifted during the US support for pro-democracy groups in Ukraine and Georgia, This is heading for a tense, tense stand-off, both diplomatically and militarily not to mention intelligence agency-wise.

We as individuals can only begin to imagine just what goes on behind the scenes; We just want people to stop dying and there to be peace and Justice for those affected;

But this is everything to do with Geo-Political strategy from people on many sides who just don't trust each other and are not Syrian!

Throw in Israel and Iran into the mix and the people suffering in Syria are not really represented at all... By anyone in the true power political landscape.

-

It's flipping crazy and it's nothing like Tunisia and Egypt - There is so much more at stake for the big Players in Russia, China, the US and Europe (incl. The UK), Iran and Israel.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Russia and China did the right thing by using their veto. American envoy Rice was very angry but she must have forgotten the many times her nation has used the veto against Israel. Hypocrites!

There are crimes on both sides from the regime and also from the armed uprising. Very sad sitaution which was instigated by outsiders.

 

[Bewal Express]

How do you know its outsiders? Its amazing that the arm chair generals make up stuff as they go along.

 

[KingKhanWC]

How do you know its outsiders? Its amazing that the arm chair generals make up stuff as they go along.

The 'rebels' or the 'free syrian army' have plenty of weapons including sniper rifals to rocket launchers. They initially gathered near the border towns of Turkey while also being supplied by Qatar with Saudi and western backing.

Can you explain how they are so well armed?

Why does America and it's allies are so worried about the Syrian people when they never are about Palestinians? USA veto's any resolutions which criticise Israel. Do you actually take these people at face value?

Millons of Syrians support the regime so why are you supporting one side?

 

[azhar329]

The massacre of sunnis is nothing new in that country, his father did the same in 1982.

These are primarily alawis ruling over the majority sunni population. If, according to what I have read, some alawis consider Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) as God then they are clearly out of the fold of Islam. What is the difference between them and the nation of islam and their saying that God was a black man (audhubillah).

May Allah assist the believers in syria and elsewhere, ameen.

 

[KingKhanWC]

^ So you're backing people just because they are your sect?

If Sunni groups are the aggressors and Shia's are not would you stick back the Sunni's?

 

[Bewal Express]

The 'rebels' or the 'free syrian army' have plenty of weapons including sniper rifals to rocket launchers. They initially gathered near the border towns of Turkey while also being supplied by Qatar with Saudi and western backing.

Can you explain how they are so well armed?

Why does America and it's allies are so worried about the Syrian people when they never are about Palestinians? USA veto's any resolutions which criticise Israel. Do you actually take these people at face value?

Millons of Syrians support the regime so why are you supporting one side?

If so many support the regime why didn`t they just have the elections like any govt that wants to show it has the support of the people. The fact is that too many of my fellow muslims are blinded by their hatred of Israel and USA and will always take the diametrically opposing view whether its just or not. I salute the bravery of all the Arabs the have risen against the evil of these corrupt dictatorships and i just wish the us Pakistanis had half the courage that these people have shown and perhaps we would have a govt that cared for us.

 

[azhar329]

[utube]aPfrDGNTsy0[/utube]

[utube]aT0Fzx8LiGQ&feature=related[/utube]

[utube]KkiBXZCueeY&feature=related[/utube]



May Allah give them what they deserve, ameen.

 

[azhar329]

^ So you're backing people just because they are your sect?

If Sunni groups are the aggressors and Shia's are not would you stick back the Sunni's?

Are you saying that assad should be supported just because the US is against him (and we know the crimes and hypocracy of the US) ?

 

[KingKhanWC]

If so many support the regime why didn`t they just have the elections like any govt that wants to show it has the support of the people.

You think Syria has never had elections? They might not be 'proper' but to suggest they don't have elections is ignorance.

The fact is that too many of fellow muslims are blinded by their hatred of Israel and USA and will always take the diametrically opposing view whether its just or not. I salute the bravery of all the Arabs the have risen against the evil of these corrupt dictatorships and i just wish the us Pakistanis had half the courage that these people have shown and perhaps we would have a govt that cared for us.

So you want Pakistan to fall into civil war like Libya and Syria. What a patriot you are.

Now how about you start to write some intelligent posts instead of jumping from one thing to another?

Why not attempt to anwser these simple questions?

Can you explain how(free syrian army) they are so well armed?

Why does America and it's allies are so worried about the Syrian people when they never are about Palestinians? USA veto's any resolutions which criticise Israel. Do you actually take these people at face value?

Millons of Syrians support the regime so why are you supporting one side?

 

[KingKhanWC]

Are you saying that assad should be supported just because the US is against him (and we know the crimes and hypocracy of the US) ?

No I am not. It's a civil war which was instigated by outside forces for geo-political advantages, one being the attack on Iran easier. People should not interfere with any nation for their own political reasons because we know from Libya they don't care about the innocent civillians who will be caught in the middle. Syrians should sort it out between themselves in a peaceful way not through armed resistance.

Now how about you answer my questions?

 

[azhar329]

No I am not. It's a civil war which was instigated by outside forces for geo-political advantages, one being the attack on Iran easier. People should not interfere with any nation for their own political reasons because we know from Libya they don't care about the innocent civillians who will be caught in the middle. Syrians should sort it out between themselves in a peaceful way not through armed resistance.

Now how about you answer my questions?

1. Its not a civil war imo; its sunnis being massacred by the minority alawis.

2. Iran has meddled in other countries for their own purposes; they are not as innocent as some like to believe (not saying you do).

3. I agree they dont care about civilians and I never said they did. However, Libya is better off without Gaddafi the tyrant imo.

Insha'Allah I support the muslims who are being oppressed, killed and humiliated around the world. This doesnt mean I condone every single action which is undertaken by them.

 

[KingKhanWC]

1. Its not a civil war imo; its sunnis being massacred by the minority alawis.

By that definition if true it is a civil war. What do you think a civil war is? Syria is a complex nation with numerious sects and ethnicities, it's not as simple as Sunni v Shia.

2. Iran has meddled in other countries for their own purposes; they are not as innocent as some like to believe (not saying you do).

Please show me what exactly what are you pointing to so we can discuss this?

3. I agree they dont care about civilians and I never said they did. However, Libya is better off without Gaddafi the tyrant imo.

Is it? Then why is the population scared stiff of armed militia roaming the streets of Tripoli and other cities? Why are thousands of black Libyans imprisoned and tortured? Why is figthing still going on in many towns, villages in cities in Libya?

Insha'Allah I support the muslims who are being oppressed, killed and humiliated around the world. This doesnt mean I condone every single action which is undertaken by them.

I asked you a specific question which you have ignored. Please answer it. Here it is.

"If Sunni groups are the aggressors and Shia's are not would you still back the Sunni's? "

 

[Bewal Express]

You think Syria has never had elections? They might not be 'proper' but to suggest they don't have elections is ignorance.



So you want Pakistan to fall into civil war like Libya and Syria. What a patriot you are.

Now how about you start to write some intelligent posts instead of jumping from one thing to another?

Why not attempt to anwser these simple questions?

Can you explain how(free syrian army) they are so well armed?

Why does America and it's allies are so worried about the Syrian people when they never are about Palestinians? USA veto's any resolutions which criticise Israel. Do you actually take these people at face value?

Millons of Syrians support the regime so why are you supporting one side?

So a few guns make an army well armed? Mate this is not the boer war, they are fighting a professional army with tanks and sophisticated weapons and all the resources of the Syrian and Iranian states.
To answer your second point about America and Israel- the dont give a toss and never will about the people of Syria. They are doing it for the PR so that they dont look like hypocrites in the eyes of their own public and media. I couldn`t monkeys t--- if they support the resolution or not(as without millitary intervention the resolution is a waste of time) but because they have supported it, people like you start to rubbish the bravery of these folks.

Inshallah it is only a matter of time before they make mince meat of Assad and his crooked clan.

PS
Any election which doesn`t reflect the will of the people is a complete waste of time. Its ok for you to live in the uk and have a chance to kick or out in people that you may or may not want but you happy to defend a regime that the Syrian people have never been given a chance(like in most Arab countries) to remove.

 

[azhar329]

By that definition if true it is a civil war. What do you think a civil war is? Syria is a complex nation with numerious sects and ethnicities, it's not as simple as Sunni v Shia.



Please show me what exactly what are you pointing to so we can discuss this?



Is it? Then why is the population scared stiff of armed militia roaming the streets of Tripoli and other cities? Why are thousands of black Libyans imprisoned and tortured? Why is figthing still going on in many towns, villages in cities in Libya?



I asked you a specific question which you have ignored. Please answer it. Here it is.

"If Sunni groups are the aggressors and Shia's are not would you still back the Sunni's? "

1. Civil war; its more to do with definition, they call it civil war but its one side massacring the other.

2. Iran's meddling in iraq and the killings of iraqi sunnis; its backing of the so called uprising etc in bahrain;

3. Libya: I believe its better off; obviously it will take time for things to settle down as his supporters are still there.

I answered the question clearly.

Re: if sunni were aggressors; this is a vague question, can you specify an example in today's world pls, thanks.

 

[KingKhanWC]

So a few guns make an army well armed?

A few guns? That's why they have managed to kill hundreds of troops and civillians?

Unmarked NATO warplanes are arriving at Turkish military bases close to Iskenderum on the Syrian border, delivering weapons from the late Muammar Gaddafi’s arsenals as well as volunteers from the Libyan Transitional National Council who are experienced in pitting local volunteers against trained soldiers, a skill they acquired confronting Gaddafi’s army. Iskenderum is also the seat of the Free Syrian Army, the armed wing of the Syrian National Council. French and British special forces trainers are on the ground, assisting the Syrian rebels while the CIA and U.S. Spec Ops are providing communications equipment and intelligence to assist the rebel cause, enabling the fighters to avoid concentrations of Syrian soldiers.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/blog/nato-vs-syria/

To answer your second point about America and Israel- the dont give a toss and never will about the people of Syria. They are doing it for the PR so that they dont look like hypocrites in the eyes of their own public and media. I couldn`t monkeys t--- if they support the resolution or not(as without millitary intervention the resolution is a waste of time) but because they have supported it, people like you start to rubbish the bravery of these folks.

Unlike you I'm not anyones side. There are cowards and brave people on both sides however only one side is getting outside support. The side you support.

Inshallah it is only a matter of time before they make mince meat of Assad and his crooked clan.

Are you daft? If the free Syrian Army was capable of defeating Assad why would the Americans want UN resolutions and why would their allies provide weapons and training for them? Why is there talk of a military intervention like Libya?

 

[Bewal Express]

A few guns? That's why they have managed to kill hundreds of troops and civillians?



http://www.theamericanconservative.com/blog/nato-vs-syria/





Unlike you I'm not anyones side. There are cowards and brave people on both sides however only one side is getting outside support. The side you support.



Are you daft? If the free Syrian Army was capable of defeating Assad why would the Americans want UN resolutions and why would their allies provide weapons and training for them? Why is there talk of a military intervention like Libya?

The people are with the rebels and they will defeat the crooked clan and unlike you i am taking the side of the oppressed not the oppressors.
People can kill with most basic weapons just like at the massacres in Karachi during Ramazan-simple guns and other weapons can also kill and maim.
BTW who are the brave ones on the side of Assad(perhaps the ones to lose most financially). I always thought you as decent poster but on this occasion your judgement has sadly deserted you.

 

[Bewal Express]

Even if the rebels are getting help, the Iranian regime needs the Assad regime and it is very naive of you think that one side is getting help and not the other.

 

[KingKhanWC]

1. Civil war; its more to do with definition, they call it civil war but its one side massacring the other.

Are you sayinng the free syrian army hasn't murdered civllians mainly by using snipers?

2. Iran's meddling in iraq and the killings of iraqi sunnis, who was muqtada sadr backed by ?; its backing of the so called uprising etc in bahrain;

Iraq is next door to Iran. Why shouldn't Iran work for it's interests in a nation which it has a border with when powers from far away lands are? You have no evidence Iran ordered the deaths of Iraqi Sunni's. In Islam aren't you supposed to have some proof before making such accusations?

3. Libya: I believe its better off; obviously it will take time for things to settle down as his supporters are still there.

Well many of the population especially the black libyans don't agree with you.

Re: if sunni were aggressors; this is a vague question, can you specify an example in today's world pls, thanks.

No it's not. It's a simple question IF the Sunnis were the aggressors as we have seen in the past when Saddam attacked Iran.

 

[azhar329]

IMO, if people think that iran doesnt have some sort of agenda in the muslim world then they are being naive; iran is linked to syria, hizb in lebanon, fingers in iraq, bahrain, yemen houthis etc

Its not by complete accident imo; but to some (not saying you kkwc) it might be "poor iranians" just cos they hate the US/israel hypocracy.

 

[KingKhanWC]

The people are with the rebels and they will defeat the crooked clan and unlike you i am taking the side of the oppressed not the oppressors.

Are you? When foriegn nation instigate bloodshed they are not the aggressors according to you?

People can kill with most basic weapons just like at the massacres in Karachi during Ramazan-simple guns and other weapons can also kill and maim.
BTW who are the brave ones on the side of Assad(perhaps the ones to lose most financially). I always thought you as decent poster but on this occasion your judgement has sadly deserted you.

The civillians who have been killed by the free Syrian army are brave, wouldn't you agree?

Even if the rebels are getting help, the Iranian regime needs the Assad regime and it is very naive of you think that one side is getting help and not the other.

Where did I say Assad isn't getting help? Even the Russians have given arms to them inlcuding S300 defence systems. Any regime controls a nation will have access to arms.

 

[shaykh1985]

1. Civil war; its more to do with definition, they call it civil war but its one side massacring the other.

2. Iran's meddling in iraq and the killings of iraqi sunnis; its backing of the so called uprising etc in bahrain;

3. Libya: I believe its better off; obviously it will take time for things to settle down as his supporters are still there.

I answered the question clearly.

Re: if sunni were aggressors; this is a vague question, can you specify an example in today's world pls, thanks.

1. Simple question...are both sides armed?...this isn't a massacre of unarmed protestors...its an insurgency...if you support the insurgency then fine...but don't try and redefine what a combatant is...if your armed then you are a legitimate target...i'm not suggesting that civilians haven't been targeted by both sides but unfortunately in your biased world view only one side is armed...

2. Iran has interests just as any other nation...and it has helped the likes of Hezbollah and Hamas...the US helped Jundullah launch terror attacks in Balochistan not too long back...the idea of support for organisations is not limited to Iran...everyone does this...but I suppose it depends if you want a balance of power or you want the US to have absolute power in the region...

3. Libya you answered nothing clearly...the country is now in civil conflict where all the militias that teamed up to fight other Libyans have now decided to fight each other and anyone they deem a Gaddafi supporter...the country is a mess...the NTC are not recognised by many militias and this country will end up a hell of a lot worse than Iraq...

 

[shaykh1985]

The massacre of sunnis is nothing new in that country, his father did the same in 1982.

These are primarily alawis ruling over the majority sunni population. If, according to what I have read, some alawis consider Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) as God then they are clearly out of the fold of Islam. What is the difference between them and the nation of islam and their saying that God was a black man (audhubillah).

May Allah assist the believers in syria and elsewhere, ameen.

Its a 76% Sunni country...thats a fairly sizable minority that are not...out of interest though since you have decided to speak for every Sunni in the country and also have decided that the 'majority' argument is fine...did you use that same line in Bahrain?...

 

[deviously~fading~away]

1. Civil war; its more to do with definition, they call it civil war but its one side massacring the other.

2. Iran's meddling in iraq and the killings of iraqi sunnis; its backing of the so called uprising etc in bahrain;

3. Libya: I believe its better off; obviously it will take time for things to settle down as his supporters are still there.

I answered the question clearly.

Re: if sunni were aggressors; this is a vague question, can you specify an example in today's world pls, thanks.

1. Both sides are armed.

2. Even Bahrain has now admitted that Iran had no hands in the uprising.

3. Agree with you. Dictators should be removed. Gaddafi deserved what he got.

 

[shaykh1985]

1. Both sides are armed.

2. Even Bahrain has now admitted that Iran had no hands in the uprising.

3. Agree with you. Dictators should be removed. Gaddafi deserved what he got.

On your third point when does the cost outweigh the benefits?...the issue I had with the Libya conflict was to do with the identity of those leading the supposed revolution which was NATO with as per usual proxy soldiers...the means and destruction caused through the repeated NATO bombardment of 'pro Gaddafi' areas of which many innocents were slaughtered...and the actual end result which is essentially a civil conflict where any tribes previously beneficiaries of the regime are now being attacked for being 'Gaddafi supporters'...all that has happened is one group that did not benefit in the previous regime has through foreign intervention replaced one dictatorship with another...Gaddafi is gone but the Libyan suffering continues...even those who sought his removal are killing each other now...was it really worth it...ask non Kurdish Iraqis and Pashtuns if they are happy with their end results...

 

[azhar329]

I cant seem to do the multiquote function so apologies if the following isnt clear.

1.Criteria: from the outset I'd like to state that my position on these conflicts, foreign policy matters etc insha'Allah are with a view as to what is islamically permissable. As a layman I will make errors, however, that is my criteria insha'Allah; what is islamically permissable not the position of antiwar.com, democracy now, fisk, corbyn, pilger, chomsky, galloway etc (with all due respect to them).

2. Libya; insha'Allah things will improve for the black libyans and harming the innocent is incorrect. May Allah unite them upon the truth. Libya is better off now insha'Allah and as I said before it will take time.

3. Sunni aggressors: The Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wassallam) said words to the effect that if your brother is oppressing someone then help him by preventing him from oppressing. That is my position. Re: iran/iraq; why did saddam do it ? was it to fend off a shia uprising in iraq after the iranian revolution or was it merely obeying the US ? or did iran initiate it in any way; I dont know, Only Allah knows best and He will judge him.

4. Iran's meddling; whether bahrain has admitted that iran had no role to play does not negate the fact that they have been interfering in other parts of the world. In iraq who can deny the influence of iran over the shias of iran. There was a conflict in iraq between the shias and the sunnis. I would be extremely, extremely surprised if iran did not assist them financially, logistically, militarily, morally etc. If I'm wrong then may Allah forgive me. What about the houthis in yemen ? what about in syria ? pls read below:

Home > Web TV
Free Syrian Army shows video of alleged Iranian fighters abducted in Homs
Friday, 27 January 2012


A video grab from the internet shows alleged Iranian fighters abducted by a branch of the Free Syrian Army.


By Al Arabiya


A group of Syria’s opposition “Free Army” has released a video showing what it was said were seven Iranians, including five members of the Revolutionary Guards, captured in the city of Homs.

The video showed travel documents of the captives, some of whom appeared to be speaking Farsi.

“I am Sajjad Amirian, a member the Revolutionary Guards of the Iranian armed forces. I am a member of the team in charge of cracking down on protesters in Syria and we receive our orders directly from the security division of the Syrian air force in Homs,” one of the captives said.

“I urge Mr. Khamenei to work on securing our release and return to our homes,” he added.

The armed Syrian opposition group, which called itself the “al-Farouq brigade of the Free Syrian Army,” also released a statement calling for Iran’s Supreme leader Ali Khamanei to “acknowledge in explicit and unambiguous words the existence of elements of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards in Syria in order to help the Assad’s regime in its crackdown on the Syrian people.”

The group also urged Khamanei to withdraw all Revolutionary Guard fighters from Syria, pledging that that it would then release all captive Iranian fighters.

The group said five of those abducted were military men working with the Syrian air force intelligence and two showed “civilian status” as employees in a power plant in Homs.

It added that all the seven captives entered Syria during the uprising and passports of the five military men did not contain visas, adding that it would soon release the two Iranians with civilian status.

Syrian opposition groups have previously accused Iran and the Lebanese Hezbollah group of assisting forces of President Bashar al-Assad in their bloody crackdown on protesters.

The Syrian Revolutionary Coordination Union reported on Jan. 17 that a group of Hezbollah fighters had hit civilian protesters near Damascus with Russian-origin BM-21Grad rockets.

“The attack was coordinated with the forces of President Bashar Assad,” the Syrian opposition group said.

A source from the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) told Al Arabiya on Jan. 16 that the “Iranian government has not yet interfered in situation in Syria,” but stressed that Tehran was committed to a joint defense treaty with Damascus.

“We and our brethren in Iraq and Lebanon are protecting Syria,” the source explained in a clear reference to Nouri al-Malikil’s government and Hezbollah, both allies of Iran.

Despite reports stating that so far the situation in Syria is “stable,” the IRGC, the source pointed out, is still worried of a division or a coup in the Syrian army.

According to American officials who believe the IRGC is taking part in the fight against Syrian opposition, Maj. Gen. Qassem Suleimani, commander of IRGC al-Quds Force, which specializes in operations outside Iran, was in Damascus this month.

Gen. Suleimani’s visit, they argued proved that Iran’s support for the Syrian regime includes the provision of arms and military equipment.

They added that they are sure Suleimani met with the most senior officials in the Syrian regime, including president Bashar al-Assad.

The joint defense treaty between Syria and Iran was signed in June 2006 by a former Syrian defense minister, Hassan Turkmani, and his Iranian counterpart, Mustafa Mohamed Najjar, in Tehran.


5. Weapons; to make the comparison that they are both armed is not valid imo. Only one party is armed to the teeth with the military assets of the country and can purchase hundreds of millions of dollars worth of military equipment. You may get a zionist saying that its an equal fight in palestine or an indian soldier thug saying the same about kashmir which is nonsense. (Im only talking about weapons not occupation etc)

6. I dont claim to talk for the whole sunni population, I made a dua and thats it. There may be syrians who agree or disagree. Anyway this is not relevant. Next time you state your view will that mean you represent the particular community you're referring to ?

7. US: I dont want the US to interfere in the muslim lands or dominate them. I am critical of their foreign policy. They so happen to back the sunnis in this instance; what would be your position if the US miraculously decided to support the kashmiris against india ?

8. If Iran took over makkah and medina would you have a problem with this ?


If I am wrong islamically to support the believers in syria then please show me proof from the Quran and sunnah; if I'm wrong then insha'Allah I'll apologise and make taubah.

 

[Tapori]

azhar329 = You seem to be rather sectarian. Admitting this is key.

I would encourage you if possible to speak to Syrians.

It isn't just a Sunni-Shia thing: Syria has about 15 key tribes,

If Iran took over makkah and medina would you have a problem with this ?

No, but only compared to what we have now controlling them; because at least there wouldn't be a hypocritical Monarchy which de facto is more Unislamic than any governance structure the Iranians have. In any case your point is a non-sequitur.

KingKhanWC - Kudos for the balance; Rightly schooled a few folk.

Naturally my heart goes out to the oppressed Syrians; But to ignore the wider context of who instigated the uprisings and who's strategic interests are tied to Assad falling, is very complex.

I don't wish to support any outside super power; I just hope and pray that Justice for those killed and those living an oppressed life get the freedom and justice they deserve without massive civil war or masses of bloodshed.

 

[Tapori]

Shaykh1985 - If you're genuinely in Georgia for some time, care to drop a comment or two in the Documentary- Must See thread regarding the Documentary on Putin and the brief Russia-Geiorgia war?

 

[azhar329]

@tapori

1. Sectarian; you can call it what you want; the aim is to please Allah The Most High. Why would I want to side with alawis, rafidah etc The latter can fall into the issue of al wala wal bara imo (Allah knows best). If anything you're the one who is diluting Islam as you cant even get yourself to state that ahmadis are non muslims.

2. You have no problem with the iranian regime and the aqeedah it promotes taking over Makkah/Medina! la hawla wa la quwatta illah billah! No comment needed.

And the above point is relevant in terms of my view of the iranian regime. IMO they have an agenda to support/promote their version of Islam which often means ahle sunnah are on the receiving end.

EDIT: I am NOT saying that every single iranian, syrian alawi is oppressing the sunnis etc some of them may have never ever done anything to anyone. My issue is with the iranian gov and clerics who promote certain types of deviancy eg Ali (may Allah be please with him) is a part of God, cursing the sahaaba (may Allah be pleased with them); audhubillah.

 

[Tapori]

^ azhar329 - The fact you don't see yourself as sectarian or care, is in itself the problem with your attitude IMO.

In your head you are right; fine. As soon as you start to say being a Muslim can only be achieved solely through your favoured interpretation/school/scholar you're being sectarian. When you imply countries should be viewed only in this prism it shows you're own naivety and those that subscribe to it.

Who am I to declare all Ahmmadis as non-Muslim? I can say I disagree with aspects of their faith as being against Islam, the same way I could say the same about some Sunni Sects or some Shia sects.

A consensus of Sunni or any Ulemaa is not synonymous with a valid religious viewpoint unless such Ulemaa state their own bias; Which would actually require some objectivity. Even then everything interpreted or devised by men is open to question.

You have no problem with the iranian regime and the aqeedah it promotes taking over Makkah/Medina! la hawla wa la quwatta illah billah! No comment needed.

You wouldn't know what a nuanced argument was if it appeared in an Istikhaara... Here it is again:

No, but only compared to what we have now controlling them (Mecca, Medina); because at least there wouldn't be a hypocritical Monarchy which de facto is more Unislamic than any governance structure the Iranians have.

And the above point is relevant in terms of my view of the iranian regime. IMO they have an agenda to support/promote their version of Islam which often means ahle sunnah are on the receiving end.

And what is the Saudi Agenda? Or is that ok becuase "They're one of us"

You don't care about the wider politics, only about a percieved threat to the "Ahle-e-Sunnah" - Wow

It's not relevant though;

It's you're insistence on supporting the Saudi Monarchy on account of them being "Sunni's" aswell as supporting the insurgency whole-heartedly, which is the whole point of people here showing you that your opinion is derived from your sectarian viewpoint and has nothing to do with events on the ground or beyond.

I am against Asad, not because he's an alawaite or x, y , z sect, but because he's a brutal dictator first and foremost.

That you can't understand that a sizeable minority still support him, coupled with the larger geo-political interests around Syria plus the fact that the Sunni Majority have key Tribal divisions and have not in unison risen up, makes this a very delicate situation.

If anything Sectarianism on both sides, makes this even harder to stomach...

 

[azhar329]

@tapori


The Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wassallam) said word s to th effect that we should follow him and what his companions were upon. (You may not believe in this hadith but I do). Therefore, we should try to do that to the best of our ability. Speaking out against or disagreeing with people who curse the sahaaba (audhubillah) is NOT sectarianism but a meritorious act. I dont expect you to agree.

If you dont have a problem with not calling ahmadis as non muslims (or alawis) then you shouldnt have a problem with those that do; (or call them sectarian in light of the above).

So a choice with the saudis and iranians and you dont have a prob with iranians taking over; again no comment. (FYI; I'm not going to make mass takfir on the saudi gov like some people; this doesnt mean I agree with everything they do)

My perceived threat to muslims is MY first concern which encompasses aspects such as politics, resources such as oil etc; If its not yours then thats your choice.

Like I said before bring proof from the Quran and sunnah that my support for the believers and oppostion to the oppressive alawis is incorrect.

 

[Tapori]

My perceived threat to ahle sunnah

Well done for admitting this; Nothing to be ashamed of at all - It just helps other posters to see where your opinion is derived from in part - Although if we were to analyse your arguments on their own merits, as many have done, they fall apart to a large degree.

All, the Sahaaba were human; Their recorded sayings were recorded by Humans; they're narrations were passed on over hundreds of years by.... get this... Humans. The Methodology in deciphering what was Sahii and Authentic was a method developed by... Humans.

They should not and will not ever be free of any objective crticism. I might not be best placed to do the latter, but if you can't handle that Quran and thereby Islamic concept then so be it.

But the above is for another thread.

You're not very good at comprehension IMO, in any case this is shown by:

I'm not going to make mass takfir on the saudi gov like some people

but you will on the Iranian Government? Yeah, cos they are one of dem SHia's innit? Genius

 

[Tapori]

Like I said before bring proof from the Quran and sunnah that my support for the believers and oppostion to the oppressive alawis is incorrect.

Again complete non-sequitur - I think no-one has suggested this. What we have said is that it isn't the clear black-and-white sectarian conflict you are making it out to be. T

Don't Ahl-E-Sunnah members regularly decry the US?

Then why would you not be against an uprising supported by the US? it's complex isn't it?

My perceived threat to ahle sunnah/muslims is MY first concern which encompasses aspects such as politics, resources such as oil etc; If its not yours then thats your choice.

Says it all really; Framing everyone that disagrees as interetsted in "Non-Islamic" stuff whilst you are the brave soldier of Islam supporting the righteous.

Even if we agree on your Ahl-e-Sunnat support-at-all-costs angle, by ignoring those aspects in their own right irrespective of the Ahl-E-Sunnat angle, such as "Politics" or "oil" you are at worst being ignorant or at best being naive. If you can't care how that would affect not just Ahl-E-Sunnat but everyone outside that sphere, then that says more about your thinking than anything could.

I'd laugh if it wasn't so utterly depressing; Would you by that definition no longer care if the people being oppressed were Shia and the ruling minority were Sunni?

Forget that, what if the people being killed were not from any Muslim sect or, get this, Were just innocent human beings?

 

[shaykh1985]

Shaykh1985 - If you're genuinely in Georgia for some time, care to drop a comment or two in the Documentary- Must See thread regarding the Documentary on Putin and the brief Russia-Geiorgia war?

Yeah I downloaded the docs so when I've got to watching them I will drop my 2 cents...its an interesting topic of discussion down here...

 

[azhar329]

Well done for admitting this; Nothing to be ashamed of at all - It just helps other posters to see where your opinion is derived from in part - Although if we were to analyse your arguments on their own merits, as many have done, they fall apart to a large degree.

All, the Sahaaba were human; Their recorded sayings were recorded by Humans; they're narrations were passed on over hundreds of years by.... get this... Humans. The Methodology in deciphering what was Sahii and Authentic was a method developed by... Humans.

They should not and will not ever be free of any objective crticism. I might not be best placed to do the latter, but if you can't handle that Quran and thereby Islamic concept then so be it.

But the above is for another thread.

You're not very good at comprehension IMO, in any case this is shown by:



but you will on the Iranian Government? Yeah, cos they are one of dem SHia's innit? Genius

Yes you're right you are not best placed, leave it to the ulema who are known in terms of the sciences of ahadeeth.

How do you practise Islam; you must recite during you're prayer; go to funeral prayer, nikaah etc how did you know what to recite and when, you must have relied upon somebody who relied upon somebody etc.

Based on YOUR thinking then how can you trust ANYTHING, anything at all ??!! Did the Quran intially compiled by the companions contain all the harakaats etc as we know it today ? Guess what, that was also compiled by humans.

No, you have the problem in comprehending what I am saying; re: Iran I will NOT support a regime that is inspired by khomeini and what he stood for (I am NOT calling every single shia a kafir and have not done so; show me the post where I have, you cant as I have not stated this). Insha'Allah I will not support a regime that believes in the 12 imams etc call it what you want.

And you still havent shown me any proof from the Quran and sunnah that my support for the believers and opposition to the oppressive alawis is incorrect.

 

[Tapori]

^ That isn't my point, but nice way of attempt at framing it -

Based on YOUR thinking then how can you trust ANYTHING, anything at all ??!! Did the Quran initially compiled by the companions contain all the harakaats etc as we know it today ? Guess what, that was also compiled by humans.

It's a philosophical question that has troubled the most learned of minds including some esteemed Islamic Imams/Philsophers. What do we know to be truth? I prefer Evidence and Logic and Reason which has been used by Muslims and non-Muslims alike to develop a Scientific Method that allows you to type on this very forum.

Other aspects of life are subjective; One persons "bidaah" is another persons "life"...

Suffice it to say, that we are all free to choose what evidence we regard as valid;

I admit I take a leap of faith in the Quran and much of what life has entailed has supported it's internal logic.
At the very most I have faith in Hazrat Umar who compiled it in it's current form and the 4 witnesses required to pass on the Quran orally. 4-4-4

The leap of faith you and your crew take is blindly believing everything your favoured sects Ulemaa say even when Evidence and logic show otherwise. You take a leap of faith that they got:

The narrations after 100's of years, 100 percent right
1-1-1 is as good as 4-4-4
Everyone in a 1-1-1 chain were 100 percent not influecned by any other culture/tradition/Politics when passing on a narration.
Their Methodology was 100 percent right
Their interpretations were 100 percent free of politics and civil war tensions of the time
That everything such Ulemaa professed was 100 percent in line with the Quran and can never be wrong... ever... any of it...

Much of the pronouncements by many Ulemas are derived from other sources and their pronouncements at times are at odds with not only the Quran but Science and objective evidence itself. Which is a paradox such Ulemaa fail to deal with.

I'm saying anyone can be questioned when it comes to source, method and interpretation and that if the science of the hadith was truly scientific the Ulemaa would allow non-sectarian/unbiased analysis or admit when they are or have been wrong.

The Shia/Sunni split is indicative of this unscientific approach on both sides.

A Scientist will always state that his interpretation/opinion, no matter how learned, is open to be disproven - The Ulemaa on both sectarian divides will never ever countenance this as they feel a valid criticism of them is an attack on their entire sect, thus clouding their objectivity.

So you are welcome to your de facto closed Priesthood; Either play by their closed rules of evidence or Science otherwise it's "Invalid/Bidaah/Against Islam" -
Even when it's a universal scientific point!

For another thread though...

-

And you still havent shown me any proof from the Quran and sunnah that my support for the believers and opposition to the oppressive alawis is incorrect.

This is cricfan4ever proportions of delusion:

Again complete non-sequitur - I think no-one has suggested this. What we have said is that it isn't the clear black-and-white sectarian conflict you are making it out to be.

Insha'Allah I will not support a regime that believes in the 12 imams etc call it what you want.

Good for you. Now how about not supporting a regime because of the people being killed irregardless of Religious Philosophy?

No, you have the problem in comprehending what I am saying; re: Iran I will NOT support a regime that is inspired by khomeini and what he stood for (I am NOT calling every single shia a kafir and have not done so; show me the post where I have, you cant as I have not stated this). Insha'Allah I will not support a regime that believes in the 12 imams etc call it what you want.

Well I'm glad you aren't condemning all Shia's. Good.

I hear you and so do others,loud and clear.

Ahl-E-Sunnat blood is worth more than Shia blood.

I will NOT support a regime that is inspired by khomeini

Which Iranian Shia Government would you be happy with?

 

[azhar329]

Again complete non-sequitur - I think no-one has suggested this. What we have said is that it isn't the clear black-and-white sectarian conflict you are making it out to be. T

Don't Ahl-E-Sunnah members regularly decry the US?

Then why would you not be against an uprising supported by the US? it's complex isn't it?



Says it all really; Framing everyone that disagrees as interetsted in "Non-Islamic" stuff whilst you are the brave soldier of Islam supporting the righteous.

Even if we agree on your Ahl-e-Sunnat support-at-all-costs angle, by ignoring those aspects in their own right irrespective of the Ahl-E-Sunnat angle, such as "Politics" or "oil" you are at worst being ignorant or at best being naive. If you can't care how that would affect not just Ahl-E-Sunnat but everyone outside that sphere, then that says more about your thinking than anything could.

I'd laugh if it wasn't so utterly depressing; Would you by that definition no longer care if the people being oppressed were Shia and the ruling minority were Sunni?

Forget that, what if the people being killed were not from any Muslim sect or, get this, Were just innocent human beings?

1. It is a relevant statement as I previously stated that my position re: conflict, foreign policy etc is what is islamically permissible. Your criteria may be different, thats your choice. Thats why I said, and ask again show where in the Quran and sunnah I am wrong in supporting the believers against the oppressive alawis. Dont duck this question show me where in the Quran and sunnah.

2. I am simply stating that I support the believers against the oppressive alawis; to you that may be complex, to me it isnt. That is the main concern, any other complex issues should be dealt with in accordance with this imo.

3. Re brave soldier: no need to be facetious; Im no brave soldier of anything; according to the hadith (words to the effect of) the ummah is like a body when one parts hurts.....; and there are other hadith re brotherhood. Insha'Allah may Allah put it in my heart to feel for them, simple as that.

4. Just because I am primarily concerned with the well being of muslims means that I dont care about other innocent people around the world ? That question alone shows you have failed to understand my perspective.

 

[Tapori]

Thats why I said, and ask again show where in the Quran and sunnah I am wrong in supporting the believers against the oppressive alawis.

No-one has suggested you are against Islam per se in backing the "believers"

What you are against are facts on the ground in as much as we can gauge at this time.

Because you aren't using your brain to look at evidence and use your Aql; Which is what the Quran tells you to use to derive truth... it worked for Al-Kindi to a large extent, but what did he do apart from apply such principles to give Islam the proud Scientific achievements we collectively take pride in...

It is a relevant statement as I previously stated that my position re: conflict, foreign policy etc is what is islamically permissible

What KingKhanWC and Shaykh1985, have tried to get you to see, is that it isn't a conflict to be framed in your simplistic terms. I disagree with them in part, but their view isn't solely based on a sectarian standpoint as they are commenting on facts and evidence and have a modicum of what nuanced argument is - You seem to be content in viewing it through Sectarian eyes - Fine.

As:

1) Your views are coloured by who you deem to be non-Muslim (The Alwaites, and the Iranian Regime) rather than the people on the ground whose suffering is due to factors beyond Sectarianism and the Ahl-e-Sunnat

It isn't primarily about the Ahl-e-Sunnat, it's about the Syrians and the people suffering irregardless of whether they're Muslim or not.

Just because I am primarily concerned with the well being of muslims means that I dont care about other innocent people around the world

Well if you don't then good for you.

I am simply stating that I support the believers against the oppressive alawis;

Again, if the Alawites were being brutally oppressed by a Sunni Majority, would you support the victims or your sectarian brethren irregardless of facts on the ground?

 

[90MPH]

For me this is nothing to do with Sunni or Shia. If it had been the other way round I would be just as disgusted and outraged (like Shias have been targeted in the recent past by radical groups in Pak).
This is about a power hungry set of people (Assad and his cronies) who have a disgusting human rights record (1982 Hama massacre) as well as being very corrupt. After 40 years the people have had enough. They dont believe anything that comes out of his mouth. They want change - and above all they are not scared anymore of his vicious thugs.

Lets remember there is no comparison between Assads army and free Syrian army rebels. The Syrian Millitary army is firing Tank shells into civilian population centres.

 

[azhar329]

The facts on the ground are that a number of muslims are being killed; it just so happens that the US wants assad out as well; so should the afghans not have been supported by the muslims worldwide against the soviets because there was support by the US (finance and money) (Im only talking about US support here).

Most people are aware of the different interests/allies countries have. Iran is trying to spread its influence imo; like I said before gov claiming to be muslim and is upon what khomeini was upon and wishes to spread its influence within the muslim world, will not be supported by me insha'Allah.

I didnt give the ruling that alawis/Shiah are not muslims so pls be accurate (and I didnt say all shiah are kafir):

Question: We are in urgent need of information about the differences between the Sunnis and the Shi'is. We hope that you can explain something about their beliefs ?

ANSWER:

Praise be to Allaah.

The Shi’ah have many sects. Some of them are kaafirs who worship ‘Ali and call upon him, and they worship Faatimah, al-Husayn and others. Some of them say that Jibreel (peace be upon him) betrayed the trust and the Prophethood belonged to ‘Ali, not to Muhammad. There are also others among them, such as the Imamiyyah – the Raafidi Ithna ‘Ashari – who worship ‘Ali and say that their imams are better than the angels and Prophets.

There are many groups among them; some are kaafirs and some are not kaafirs. The mildest among them are those who say that ‘Ali was better than the three (Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan). The one who says this is not a kaafir but he is mistaken, because ‘Ali was the fourth, and Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq, ‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan were better than him. If a person prefers him over them then he is erring and is going against the consensus of the Sahaabah, but he is not a kaafir. The Shi’ah are of different levels and types. The one who wants to know more about that may refer to the books of the scholars, such as al-Khutoot al-‘Areedah by Muhibb al-Deen al-Khateeb [available in English under the same title, translated by Abu Ameenah Bilaal Philips], Manhaaj al-Sunnah by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah, and other books that have been written on this topic, such as al-Shi’ah wa’l-Sunnah by Ihsaan Ilaahi Zaheer [also available in English translation] and many other books which explain their errors and evils – we ask Allaah to keep us safe and sound.

Among the most evil of them are the Imamis, Ithna ‘Asharis and Nusayris, who are called al-Raafidah because they rejected (rafadu) Zayd ibn ‘Ali when he refused to disavow the two Shaykhs Abu Bakr and ‘Umar, so they went against him and rejected him. Not everyone who claims to be a Muslim can be accepted as such. If a person claims to be a Muslim, his claim should be examined. The one who worships Allaah alone and believes in His Messenger, and follows that which he brought, is a real Muslim. If a person claims to be a Muslim but he worships Faatimah or al-Badawi or al-‘Aydaroos or anyone else, then he is not a Muslim. We ask Allaah to keep us safe and sound. Similarly, anyone who reviles the faith, or does not pray, even if he says that he is a Muslim, is not a Muslim. The same applies to anyone who mocks the faith or mocks the prayer or zakaah or fasting or Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), or who disbelieves in him, or says that he was ignorant or that he did not convey the message in full or convey the message clearly. All such people are kaafirs. We ask Allaah to keep us safe and sound.



Majmoo’ Fataawa al-Shaykh Ibn Baaz (28/257).

ISLAMQA


See also the works of Ibn Taymiyyah re: the alawis (nusayriyyah)

 

[Tapori]

^ What bias does the author of the above piece have and how objective is he?

 

[azhar329]

^ What bias does the author of the above piece have and how objective is he?

lol; lets move on

 

[Tapori]

lol; lets move on

Orthdox Ulemaa response when asked a rational valid question...

Don't worry, just do as we say, don't use your brain... It will lead you away from Iman and towards the K's...

 

[azhar329]

Orthdox Ulemaa response when asked a rational valid question...

Don't worry, just do as we say, don't use your brain... It will lead you away from Iman and towards the K's...

lol; people will often make judgements on what they have read, learnt, researched etc (what they deem to be the correct position)

Sheikh bin baaz (may Allah have mercy on him) was a scholar from ahle sunnah; he was not infallible. There is a hadith words to the effect of scholars receiving 2 rewards if they are correct and 1 reward if they are not.

Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) as above, scholar of ahle sunnah etc; known as Sheikhul Islam.

 

[shaykh1985]

I cant seem to do the multiquote function so apologies if the following isnt clear.

1.Criteria: from the outset I'd like to state that my position on these conflicts, foreign policy matters etc insha'Allah are with a view as to what is islamically permissable. As a layman I will make errors, however, that is my criteria insha'Allah; what is islamically permissable not the position of antiwar.com, democracy now, fisk, corbyn, pilger, chomsky, galloway etc (with all due respect to them).

2. Libya; insha'Allah things will improve for the black libyans and harming the innocent is incorrect. May Allah unite them upon the truth. Libya is better off now insha'Allah and as I said before it will take time.

3. Sunni aggressors: The Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wassallam) said words to the effect that if your brother is oppressing someone then help him by preventing him from oppressing. That is my position. Re: iran/iraq; why did saddam do it ? was it to fend off a shia uprising in iraq after the iranian revolution or was it merely obeying the US ? or did iran initiate it in any way; I dont know, Only Allah knows best and He will judge him.

4. Iran's meddling; whether bahrain has admitted that iran had no role to play does not negate the fact that they have been interfering in other parts of the world. In iraq who can deny the influence of iran over the shias of iran. There was a conflict in iraq between the shias and the sunnis. I would be extremely, extremely surprised if iran did not assist them financially, logistically, militarily, morally etc. If I'm wrong then may Allah forgive me. What about the houthis in yemen ? what about in syria ? pls read below:

Home > Web TV
Free Syrian Army shows video of alleged Iranian fighters abducted in Homs
Friday, 27 January 2012


A video grab from the internet shows alleged Iranian fighters abducted by a branch of the Free Syrian Army.


By Al Arabiya


A group of Syria’s opposition “Free Army” has released a video showing what it was said were seven Iranians, including five members of the Revolutionary Guards, captured in the city of Homs.

The video showed travel documents of the captives, some of whom appeared to be speaking Farsi.

“I am Sajjad Amirian, a member the Revolutionary Guards of the Iranian armed forces. I am a member of the team in charge of cracking down on protesters in Syria and we receive our orders directly from the security division of the Syrian air force in Homs,” one of the captives said.

“I urge Mr. Khamenei to work on securing our release and return to our homes,” he added.

The armed Syrian opposition group, which called itself the “al-Farouq brigade of the Free Syrian Army,” also released a statement calling for Iran’s Supreme leader Ali Khamanei to “acknowledge in explicit and unambiguous words the existence of elements of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards in Syria in order to help the Assad’s regime in its crackdown on the Syrian people.”

The group also urged Khamanei to withdraw all Revolutionary Guard fighters from Syria, pledging that that it would then release all captive Iranian fighters.

The group said five of those abducted were military men working with the Syrian air force intelligence and two showed “civilian status” as employees in a power plant in Homs.

It added that all the seven captives entered Syria during the uprising and passports of the five military men did not contain visas, adding that it would soon release the two Iranians with civilian status.

Syrian opposition groups have previously accused Iran and the Lebanese Hezbollah group of assisting forces of President Bashar al-Assad in their bloody crackdown on protesters.

The Syrian Revolutionary Coordination Union reported on Jan. 17 that a group of Hezbollah fighters had hit civilian protesters near Damascus with Russian-origin BM-21Grad rockets.

“The attack was coordinated with the forces of President Bashar Assad,” the Syrian opposition group said.

A source from the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) told Al Arabiya on Jan. 16 that the “Iranian government has not yet interfered in situation in Syria,” but stressed that Tehran was committed to a joint defense treaty with Damascus.

“We and our brethren in Iraq and Lebanon are protecting Syria,” the source explained in a clear reference to Nouri al-Malikil’s government and Hezbollah, both allies of Iran.

Despite reports stating that so far the situation in Syria is “stable,” the IRGC, the source pointed out, is still worried of a division or a coup in the Syrian army.

According to American officials who believe the IRGC is taking part in the fight against Syrian opposition, Maj. Gen. Qassem Suleimani, commander of IRGC al-Quds Force, which specializes in operations outside Iran, was in Damascus this month.

Gen. Suleimani’s visit, they argued proved that Iran’s support for the Syrian regime includes the provision of arms and military equipment.

They added that they are sure Suleimani met with the most senior officials in the Syrian regime, including president Bashar al-Assad.

The joint defense treaty between Syria and Iran was signed in June 2006 by a former Syrian defense minister, Hassan Turkmani, and his Iranian counterpart, Mustafa Mohamed Najjar, in Tehran.


5. Weapons; to make the comparison that they are both armed is not valid imo. Only one party is armed to the teeth with the military assets of the country and can purchase hundreds of millions of dollars worth of military equipment. You may get a zionist saying that its an equal fight in palestine or an indian soldier thug saying the same about kashmir which is nonsense. (Im only talking about weapons not occupation etc)

6. I dont claim to talk for the whole sunni population, I made a dua and thats it. There may be syrians who agree or disagree. Anyway this is not relevant. Next time you state your view will that mean you represent the particular community you're referring to ?

7. US: I dont want the US to interfere in the muslim lands or dominate them. I am critical of their foreign policy. They so happen to back the sunnis in this instance; what would be your position if the US miraculously decided to support the kashmiris against india ?

8. If Iran took over makkah and medina would you have a problem with this ?


If I am wrong islamically to support the believers in syria then please show me proof from the Quran and sunnah; if I'm wrong then insha'Allah I'll apologise and make taubah.

1. Lol you and the HT'ers have a habit of doing this...any time there is an uprising then it must be all Islamic...there were just as many secularists marching against Mubarak as there were those calling for something Islamic if not more...there were homosexuals marching against Mubarak...there were those marching due to the poverty they had been left in...but in the HT Islamic goggles scheme of things the only time anyone can oppose a tyrant is when it is Islamic...

Anyhow what do you make of the fact that the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria joined an alliance with a known secularist Baathist Abdel Halim Khaddam who worked for Bashar's father during the Hama massacre...they broke ranks because Bayanouni chose the Muslim Brotherhood to not oppose Bashar because Bashar was supporting Hamas...this same man Bayanouni also said his solution was a 'democratic' one not an 'Islamic Republic'...so where does Islam fit into your criteria when those your supporting were ditched by Baathists and don't even call for an Islamic state....

And if you read a little further there are plenty of pieces on opposition towards Bashar from people who are not opposing him from an Islamic basis...there are plenty of secularists and even Christians who are prominent in their criticism of Assad...but of course you want to make it a simple black and white scenario...I remember when I mentioned Libya was fractious and I was told by the Islamist that Muslims were fighting against the oppressor...still think its not fractious now?...

2. You clearly know nothing of the conflict...Black Libyans have been cleansed from areas and many like the Touaregs have been driven out of Libya...but forget that for a minute....who has power in Libya exactly?...according to most Islamists the Muslims overthrew the tyrant...obviously the part of having NATO launch a tirade of bombs on Muslims was of no matter...the NTC who boast the likes of Henry Levy as their supporters are your Islamic solution?...or is the militias who are launching ethnic cleansing campaigns?...its not simplistic even if you try and make it out to be...you also presume everyone who opposed the NTC was a Gaddafi supporter which is ludicrous considering most human beings are not fond of invasions...

3. Lol just lol at using Saddam as an Islamic point of reference...

4. Source the link for the Houthis...the Houthis aren't twelvers...but I do like how you have decided that the Houthis fight against a dictator is of no interest to you...your Wahabi bias is showing...Yemen of course has a wonderful ruler I suppose who has treated the Houthis and other factions as benignly as possible right?...

5. Your example is invalid...if you are armed then you are a combatant...it is simple really...your not a protester if you are throwing around bombs...even the Palestinian with a bomb is classed as a combatant...if you see a guy with a gun you shoot him...your not a civilian when you take up arms...its a very simple concept really...

6. You painted the colour to be black and white and argued that all Sunnis wanted to be rid of Assad...you presume everyone wants what you want...life isnt that simple...

7. Not a good example again...its laughable to compare the situation of Kashmiris to that of Syrians...absolutely ridiculous...

8. What does it matter...the Saudis rule over it...they are hardly the benchmark for Islam now are they...both are as illegitimate as each other...

 

[KingKhanWC]

azhar, in todays world the Shia's of Iran and other areas are the ones who are free while the sect you adhere to mainly the Saudi scholars are just slaves of puppets, the puppets of the biggest enemies of Islam and Muslims today.

I'm sorry to say but it's because there are people of your mindset the western nations can use and divide Muslims while laughing all the way to the blood bank.

 

[azhar329]

@shaykh

1. re criteria; it may be a "lol" to you but its not to many people. There is a famous hadith "actions are by intentions..." I'd rather any action action by me be for the sake of Allah than for democracy etc The criteria for judging any conflict should come from an islamic perspective in my opinion. People can march for whatever they want to, its their life, Im talking about ME; what is MY criteria. The muslim brotherhood will be judged by Allah for all the good and bad. Im talking about THIS issue which is the killing of muslims by oppressive alawis.

2. Re:libya; For millions of muslims its better that gaddafi has gone whether you like it or not. And its a valid point to say it'll take time etc

3. Re: saddam; what are you on about islamic reference point ???; it was in response to kkwc.

4. Im talking about the houthis who laid a siege on damaaj; an institute of learning which had nothing to do wth any conflict. Innocent people were killed by the houthis.

5. My point is still valid imo.

6. As above.

7. As above. Read the context.

8. IMO, there is an agenda by the iran gov to have more influence in the muslim world and if you're not bothered by the hypothetical scenario of them having control of the Haramayn subhan'Allah.

@kkwc; brother insha'Allah I take from scholars of any origin who are from ahle sunnah eg Sheikh badiuddin shah sindhi, sheikh zubair ali zaee (from pakistan) and others; they dont have to be saudi specific and Im not saying that they are infallible.

Is every saudi scholar a "slave" of the gov ? Was sheikh ibn jibrin a slave of the gov ?

As Ive stated before I will not make mass takfir of the saudi gov as I will have to answer for it; the muslims are being oppressed around the world and may Allah help them all, ameen.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Those in the council are imo. They are there to uphold the Al-Saud rule over Arabia not to uphold Islam or Islamic law.

You miss my point Azhar. Secterianism is the biggest disease of the Muslims. If you take sides from a secterian point of view then you will sometimes be taking sides of the oppessors. You will also be making it easier for those who want to divide and rule.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Back to the topic.

Here is Rice on the veto by Russia.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/QIFv_WwVFRQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>


Here she is on the veto by her nation.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Fucpus065C4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>