Syrian rebels filmed beheading boy in Syria

OP

Tell me more about these 'moderate' 70,000 Cameron said we would support with air-strikes?

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 2

the bear

that's Mr Cameron to you :h:

Reply 3

Original post by Tawheed

Tell me more about these 'moderate' 60,000 Cameron said we would support with air-strikes?

I'm sure you will paint me with sectarian brush as that is your go to tactic these days.
But I seem to always catch at point when you are openly contradicting yourself.

When reports came of civilians being tortured, abused and killed by militiamen whom you share theological allegiances with, and when the possible involvement of a government who you may again share theological allegiances with were reported and condemned. You went off the rails like a bull in a china shop.
Throwing accusations left right and center.
Saying that one bad apple (even if they exist(according to the tone of your posts)) doesn't make the whole bunch rotten, and that we must investigate, and we mus'ant assume.
Over there you had to be vigilant and not accept the reports:

Hang on a second here. I myself am going to be investigating these reports

Over here? No need right :rolleyes:

Over there the reports and what was said were generalisations we must stop.

wide-scale generalizations you are making

But over here generalisations are the order of the day.
Those involved in the other thread were not representative of the majority

as a pose to deviant bandit groups not representative of the majority

While these 5/10 guys here are representative of all those fighting Assad.

Over there the preps were vicious but you weren't even ready to accept the reports at face value and needed investigation:

and i will investigate this

If the claims are true

Over there the militias themselves are not bad, and just might be (after lengthy investigations by you of course) few rogue elements within them:

The alleged actions of millitia's are not acts which one would consider to be from rouge elements within the militia's

While here every single one that is rebel against assad is guilty

Tell me more about these 'moderate' 60,000

Tell us more tawheed, please do.

Also will you accuse me further of what you already have (even though I'm just pointing out glaring contradictions and double standards)
Will you employ husnuzaan for me?, for those against Assad?
Or is husnuzaan just a one way street ?

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 4

OP

Original post by Al-farhan

x

You have not been following my discussions (or perhaps are not placing this thread in the wider context) of my discussions. Had i stated that this incident was the only one i was using to then make a wide-scale conclusion over al nusra, ahrar asham, (the jaysh al fatah movement) etc, it would be erroneous, a crazy generalisation, and simply double standards. So if what i was claiming was by your understanding, you would be absolutely correct in the manner you reprimanded me.

However, i have made it clear during the years i have conducted my studies into these groups. A group which works hand in hand with the official alqaeda affiliate, (Jabhat Al Nusra) Ahrar asham, jaysh al Islam and the other cooperating groups are not really who i regard as 'moderate'.

I have throughout the course of my time on this particular area of the board, hi-lighted example after example of why i am opposed to a number (not all) of the alqaeda as well as alqaeda cooperating groups.

This is only one more piece of the puzzle. I could show you the putting women in cages, faking mass-scale chemical attacks, praising Osama Bin laden, calling Alqaeda their 'brothers', working under one banner al Alqaeda, the long eulogies by alqaeda members as soon as the founder of ahrar asham passed away.

Sunnis I tell ya...

US funded. You missed that bit. The west started all these right back to the mujahideen and now they like to keep their hands clean.

Reply 7

AlifunArnab

7

Original post by Al-farhan

-

Barak'Allah feek bro, you've pretty much addressed everything. Tawheed's narrative is pretty clear for everyone to see.

As a note, the group responsible (Harakat Nuradin Zinki) have condemned what happened and said the fighter(s) responsible will be punished.

https://twitter.com/NDZankiMotion/status/755453744872058881

This is pretty consistent with the rebels. If they transgress they admit it and punish the fighters responsible for the transgression.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 8

OP

Original post by Al-farhan

I'm sure you will paint me with sectarian brush as that is your go to tactic these days.
But I seem to always catch at point when you are openly contradicting yourself.

When reports came of civilians being tortured, abused and killed by militiamen whom you share theological allegiances with, and when the possible involvement of a government who you may again share theological allegiances with were reported and condemned. You went off the rails like a bull in a china shop.

I made it absolutely clear, that the reason why i absolutely condemned the manner in which it was being spread was not that it was an alleged shia militia carrying out those acts. I stated, if the reports were true, i would examine to what extent they were true, and i invoke the curse of Allah on any shia who went in there and deliberately , and knowingly slaughtered sunni's and innocent civilians. May Allah give them taste in punishment! They are not of me.

However, what went on was more than merely that. It was an immense wide-scale generalisation (the very same which Daesh themselves used), to label the entire Iraqi government as those who are plotting to slaughter and wipe out the sunni's. That's where it really struck a chord in me, and why i was so offended. Why would anyone use the actions of bandits, and then claim, actually, you know, it's the 'shia iraqi government' as well as the majority of the iraqi army who have conspired to slaughter sunni's.

Inciting sectarianism on a wide-country-scale like that is dangerous, and i have already done research on the issue and have seen Daesh spread that sort of lie to devastating effect.

Reply 9

OP

Original post by Al-farhan

Or is husnuzaan just a one way street ?

If you can show me one place where i have personally accused of you of being an online agent, disrespectfully told you (at any time) 'do you even read what you write or do you just write the first thing that pops into your head', and words and phrases like this, you may have a point.

But i have never done anything like that with you. I have only spoken to you respectfully, and i guess a lot of that has to do with the fact i class you as a muslim, i want shia-sunni unity, and i respect your madhab.

Reply 10

OP

Original post by AlifunArnab

x

Have a look at my reply to brother Al-Farhan on the thread.

The purpose of creating the thread was:

1. To hi-light the atrocity

2. It was not to generalise, but rather, to show the lawlessness that exists when you have dozens of armed groups, and one of the most complex battle zones i can ever remember.

My oppositing to jaysh al fatah, and you must be honest as well brother alifanularnab, has not been because of isolated events, but because among jaysh al fatah is al nusra, who are alqaeda. Ahrar asham, founded by an alqaeda member, among other groups who have shown vitriol, sectarianism, and extremism.

Reply 11

OP

Original post by Al-farhan

While these 5/10 guys here are representative of all those fighting Assad.

I never explicitly said they were either. However, i will say that Jaysh al Fatah, which is one of the strongest 'rebel' movements, is comprised of the official Alqaeda affiliate, jabhat al nusra, a group founded by an alqaeda member, ahrar asham among other groups with close links and ties with alqaeda groups, all fighting under one banner.

That to me, is far more devastating than isolated events like this.

Again , the main purpose of my thread was to hi-light an atrocity. That's all. I hope you will allow the thread to be devoted to doing just that.

You don't have to justify anything.

Reply 12

OP

Original post by fksociety

US funded. You missed that bit. The west started all these right back to the mujahideen and now they like to keep their hands clean.

US and arab gulf-dictatorship funded, indeed.

We don't give a damn about syria. Our aim is to balkanise syria for our own geopolitical goals.

A number of users who have replied here support jaysh al fatah, and want an islamic caliphate, ruled by the leaders of these groups, often more than not, are not only founded by alqaeda, but have very close ties to them.

No wonder David Cameron couldn't even name the 'moderates'.

Reply 13

OP

Original post by Al-farhan

I'm sure you will paint me with sectarian brush as that is your go to tactic these days.

If you decide to call me the abusive name Rafidha , as ideasforLife has chosen to, gloat about it after i say how offensive i find it, call me a deviant, refuse to reply to my salams on the basis that you do not deem be to be a brother in Islam, spread rumours about me, make temporary accounts to even attack me over neutral and non-political issues, then yes, i will call you secterian.

I don't just paint people with a brush.

Reply 14

AlifunArnab

7

Original post by Tawheed

Have a look at my reply to brother Al-Farhan on the thread.

The purpose of creating the thread was:

1. To hi-light the atrocity

2. It was not to generalise, but rather, to show the lawlessness that exists when you have dozens of armed groups, and one of the most complex battle zones i can ever remember.

My oppositing to jaysh al fatah, and you must be honest as well brother alifanularnab, has not been because of isolated events, but because among jaysh al fatah is al nusra, who are alqaeda. Ahrar asham, founded by an alqaeda member, among other groups who have shown vitriol, sectarianism, and extremism.

Why did you not quote the full article?

I don't think anyone has said your opposition to Jaysh al fath are based on isolated events.

Original post by Tawheed

'moderates'.

I don't believe you've answered my questions on a previous thread.

If you do not want a state ruled by what Allah has revealed, what do you want?

Reply 15

Original post by Tawheed

Again , the main purpose of my thread was to hi-light an atrocity. That's all. I hope you will allow the thread to be devoted to doing just that.

You are the one who deviated (would this count as a sectarian word? should I use changed instead?) the thread away from original purpose by using generalisations outside the scope of this incident. Hence my involvement in pointing out what I pointed out.

Reply 16

username945663

18

Original post by Tawheed

If you decide to call me the abusive name Rafidha , as ideasforLife has chosen to, gloat about it after i say how offensive i find it, call me a deviant, refuse to reply to my salams on the basis that you do not deem be to be a brother in Islam, spread rumours about me, make temporary accounts to even attack me over neutral and non-political issues, then yes, i will call you secterian.

I don't just paint people with a brush.

I'm not sure what you intend to achieve with bringing me up in every conversation. I'm answered some of your accusations before and some are not true.

You find offense in people using words like rafidi, rawafid etc... However, you find no problem with using words that other groups consider derogatory (like calling salafis najdis).

Original post by Tawheed

2. Ahlus-sunnah wal jmaah sheikh, Asrar discusses salafi islam (he calles them 'najdi's', so you don't get confused. Najd is where he believes they were founded):

Kindly don't bring me up in random threads again. You yourself said:

Original post by Tawheed

I

Again , the main purpose of my thread was to hi-light an atrocity. That's all. I hope you will allow the thread to be devoted to doing just that.

I don't think ideasforlife is the topic, so let's not go into this.

Reply 17

Original post by AlifunArnab

If you do not want a state ruled by what Allah has revealed, what do you want?

A state that satisfies the Iranian agendas even if headed by a butcher.
A naughty butcher at that.

*Expect a copy past of the: ''Iran initiated some sort of elections in 2012. Since Iran is well known for fair and free elections. And they want what is best for Syrians (despite their glaring open support of the regime)''

Reply 18