Aabiss_Shakari

Mourning for ahl e bait (عليه السلام) is a commemoration. It makes us keep it in our mind and make us strengthen our bond to Ahl e bait (عليه السلام). This mourning is actually a fuel for all the resistance in the Muslim world against imperialist and Zionist powers.

Asslamaoalaikum, I am a fan of Agha Jawad Naqvi founder of Jamia Urwatul Wusqa Lahore. But a few days back a scholar from Karachi who claimed to have been leading prayer in a mosque in Karachi said that "Agha Jawad Naqvi has denied Ismat-e-Anbiya ((عليه السلام)) (Infallibility of Prophets (عليه السلام)). He said that this is one of the basic pillar faith of Shia faith and is according to main Shia doctrines. He said that "Agha Jawad Naqvi is polluting the Shia faith by his so called unity among Ummah". I have been defending Agah Jawad Naqvi in different religious groups and have heard his lectures on different subjects but this has disturbed me a lot. There is huge split among the scholars in Pakistan and I am very confused. Please guide me in the following:- 1. What is the importance of belief on Ismat e Anbiya ((عليه السلام)) (Infallibility of Prophets (عليه السلام)) 2. What is consequence of non believing on ismat e Anbiya? 3. What is difference between sinning and Tarq e Owla? 4. What are your views about Allama Agha Jawad Naqvi?

Few days back I asked Imam e Jamat of Imam e Zamana Mosque Haider Road Islampura Lahore about this issue. My exact question was "Is it Allahu Akbar or Allaho Akbar". He said both are correct but "Allahu Akbar" is more appropriate because its Arabic accent while "Allaho Akbar" is Persian accent.

A Pakistani politician had shared an animated clip from Grand Theft Auto 5, a video game, suggesting it was real footage. The internet got its laughs in before the lawmaker could delete his tweet. Khurram Nawaz Gandapur, Secretary General of Pakistan’s Awami Tehreek Party, took to Twitter with what he thought was amazing footage of a jetliner barely missing a tanker truck parked on a runway. He added the caption “Narrow escape of an aircraft which could have ended in a great disaster. Miraculous save by pilot’s presence of mind.” https://twitter.com/saptak__mondal/status/1147815589236264962/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1147815589236264962&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fnews%2F463689-Pakistani-politician-video-game%2F Unfortunately for the lawmaker, there was no such “miraculous save” for his tweet, and commenters soon erupted into mockery. “As if our politicians are super intelligent,” one said, while suggesting in a joke the United States might sell virtual fighter jets to Pakistan instead of F-16s. “These innocuous mistakes are what we live for,” another wrote. “Too funny!” It wasn’t the first time a Pakistani official had the internet in stitches. In June, the provincial government of Pakistan’s Khyber Pakhtunkhwa accidentally livestreamed an entire meeting on Facebook with the ‘cat filter’ enabled. https://twitter.com/Wabbasi007/status/1139599197441855488 https://twitter.com/Wabbasi007/status/1139599197441855488 https://twitter.com/Wabbasi007/status/1139599197441855488 Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan has been caught breaching diplomatic protocol by sitting down without waiting for his fellow heads of state to arrive at the opening ceremony of a major international summit. Khan took a seat while the rest of the room stood to welcome heads of state, including Russian President Vladimir Putin, to the opening ceremony of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) Summit held in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan on Thursday. A video of the faux pas was shared by the official Twitter handle of his own party Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf. https://www.rt.com/news/461883-imran-khan-breaks-diplomatic-protocol/ The prime minister of Pakistan is facing a social media furore for allegedly disrespecting the king of Saudi Arabia when the two leaders met for the Arab nation’s OIC summit in Mecca. Imran Khan was filmed walking the elaborate red carpet to meet King Salman, following a brief handshake and greeting. However, it appeared from the footage that the Pakistani PM spoke directly to the monarch’s translator rather than addressing the royal himself. https://www.rt.com/news/460902-imran-khan-Saudi-king-salman/

Nuclear strike threat? Tehran says US has no other means to ‘obliterate’ Iran Blatantly threatening to launch a nuclear war against another country is not only illegal under international law, Iranian FM explained, but proves that President Trump does not think through the ramifications of his rhetoric. “There is a United Nations charter, and threat of wars is illegal,” Javad Zarif told CNN paraphrasing Article 2.4 of the UN Charter, a day after President Trump spoke menacingly about “obliterating” Iran if the Islamic Republic endangers “anything American.” That statement indicates that US intentions are certainly illegal. The United States is not in a position to obliterate Iran, they do not have the capability other than using prohibited weapons to do this. Zarif did not elaborate on what exactly he meant by prohibited weapons, but he recently pointed out that the US was the only country that ever used nukes, and noted that Iran is ready to defend itself against US aggression in any scenario. https://www.rt.com/news/462776-zarif-Trump-obliteration-illegal/

New Zealand government website erases Israel from map, replaces it with Palestine https://www.rt.com/news/462157-new-zealand-Israel-map/

Jeremy Corbyn has questioned whether the government has "credible evidence" to show Iran is behind the attacks on two oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman. Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt said responsibility "almost certainly" lies with the Iranian regime. But the Labour leader tweeted that the United Kingdom should ease tensions in the region, not fuel a military escalation. The explosions on Thursday came in the Gulf of Oman - a strategic waterway crucial to global energy supplies. It is the second time in the past few weeks that tankers appear to have been attacked in the region and comes amid escalating tension between Iran and the United States. The US military released video footage which it said proved Iran was behind the blasts - something Iran has categorically denied.

Pentagon seeks to build global ‘consensus’ on Iran. Is it time to worry? https://www.rt.com/news/461920-washington-build-consensus-Iran/ The Trump administration is looking to “build international consensus” against Iran following attacks on oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman. But what does that actually mean? And to what end is it used? "The focus for myself and Ambassador Bolton and Secretary Pompeo is to build international consensus to this international problem," acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan told reporters outside the Pentagon on Friday. Shanahan went on to say that the Pentagon would contribute to this effort by sharing intelligence with allies, as it did Friday when it released a video it claims shows Iran’s Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) removing an undetonated mine from the hull of one of two tankers attacked that morning. For National Security Advisor John Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, consensus-building will likely take a different shape. Pompeo has already blamed Iran for the attack, citing non-specific “intelligence” and Tehran’s alleged history of “unprovoked attacks” in the region. The State Secretary has jetted off in search of consensus before; taking a tour of the Middle East at the beginning of the year to unite the US’ Arab allies against Iran. Bolton has been clamoring for war with Iran for over a decade, advocating pre-emptive strikes on the Islamic Republic since 2008. Shaping consensus for him will likely entail more beating of the war drums on the international stage. Rallying allies Why build consensus at all? There are two reasons: moral and material. The US paints itself not as the “world police” but as a moral beacon, an exemplar for “democracies” to aspire to and follow, so the more allies sign on to its cause the more legitimate it looks. On a more practical level, going against Tehran is not an endeavor the US can do alone. Iran has a population of nearly 90 million people, the world’s 14th-most powerful military, a navy and array of land-to-sea missiles capable of inflicting devastating losses on American ships in the Persian Gulf, and the ability to close off the Strait of Hormuz, through which a fifth of the world’s oil transits. Put simply, the US needs allies on its side, believing its story and fighting its fight, either diplomatically or militarily. Demonizing adversaries When Washington-backed opposition leader Juan Guaido declared himself President of Venezuela in January, the US was waiting in the wings to recognize him, having strangled the country with economic sanctions for years in preparation for just this moment, allowing it to declare President Nicolas Maduro had run the country into the ground with his evil corrupt socialist dictatorship, Venezuelans were eating their dogs and zoo animals, and the time had come to recognize this fresh young face whom only a fifth of the country had ever heard of. Additionally, the US had a pre-selected slate of allies on hand in order to give the appearance of massive international support: the Lima Group, consisting of 12 South and Central American governments and Canada, was formed in 2017 with the aim of securing regime change in Venezuela. After they jumped on board the Guaido train, a handful of European nations also offered their recognition, though the EU officially hedged its bets by calling for a ‘fair election’. The UN, notably, did not offer its endorsement of this regime change ‘consensus’. When Syrian leader Bashar Assad was accused of using chemical weapons on the town of Douma last April, the United States reached out to just Britain and France. Though Assad’s guilt had not been ascertained, and remains in doubt, the trio released a joint statement of condemnation and battered Syrian military and scientific targets with airstrikes. The cruise missile stunt did not require support from any other countries – or UN approval, apparently – while the “international consensus” to blame everything on Assad has been established long ago, in the early stages of the war that broke out in 2011. The invasion of Iraq in 2003 was a different story, and Washington spent months beforehand hammering home the line that Saddam Hussein was harboring weapons of mass destruction, and was working with Al-Qaeda terrorists. Neither statement was true, and skepticism abounded, but the message was repeated and 39 allies eventually joined the ‘Coalition of the Willing’ to aid the US war effort. Incidentally, John Bolton was a member of the Bush administration at the time, serving as undersecretary of state for arms control and international security affairs while Bush delivered his “Axis of Evil” speech to the world. If history has one abiding lesson to offer here, it’s to always be wary of any talk of consensus from Washington. With storm clouds gathering over the Gulf of Oman, Shanahan’s statement could possibly be viewed as a rare telegraphing of intent, and a sign to watch out for the next “axis of evil” speech.

Since joining the Trump administration in April of last year, Bolton has taken the hardest line possible on every geopolitical flare-up. From advocating “humanitarian intervention” in Venezuela, to briefing journalists about a plan to deploy 100,000 troops to the Middle East, to rumors of him “sabotaging” Trump’s summit with North Korea’s Kim Jong-un last year, Bolton has trumpeted escalation and confrontation as a panacea to all of America’s foreign policy ills. Now, former CIA agent Kiriakou writes, Bolton is falling out of President Trump’s favor. In the happy-hour bars of Washington DC, Kiriakou’s contacts within the Trump administration tell him a reckoning is coming, and Bolton’s head is next on the chopping block. Bolton’s departure is “definitely not a done deal,” Kiriakou stressed, when contacted by RT. But in conversations with “mid-level” national security officials, he has learned that Bolton’s firing is being talked about. Concerned for his legacy, Trump is apparently willing to fire Bolton rather than get dragged into a reputation-tarnishing war, just over a year out from the 2020 election. Trump himself has signaled in public that he sometimes disagrees with Bolton’s hawkish tendencies. With military confrontation with Iran and Venezuela on the cards last month, Trump described himself as “the one who tempers him, which is okay.” Days beforehand, Trump had expressed frustration that Bolton was trying to get him “into a war,” according to the Washington Post’s sources, at least. The dissonance between Trump and Bolton’s world views can be seen in their response to the recent tension with Iran. According to Kiriakou: We can't allow ourselves to believe that Donald Trump is in some way ‘pro-Iran.’ But John Bolton is actively seeking war with Iran. And this is something that Trump has been very clear about not wanting. Just a week ago, Trump stated that he was open to a sit-down with Iran’s leadership “without preconditions,” directly contradicting Bolton’s long history of advocating pre-emptive strikes on the Islamic Republic. A flow of leaks to the press indicate an unease in the White House too, with an anonymous Pentagon official telling the New Yorker that Trump is “souring” on Bolton, and another telling the Washington Post that Trump is angry with Bolton and “not comfortable with all this regime-change talk.” However, whether Trump will remain cool towards Iran in light of Thursday’s oil tanker attacks remains to be seen. Trump has also recently contradicted Bolton on North Korea, telling reporters that Kim Jong-un has “kept his word” on halting nuclear and missile testing. Hours earlier, Bolton had argued the exact opposite. Of course, Bolton is far from the only hardliner in the Trump administration. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has pushed an equally hard line on Iran, and was quick to blame Tehran for Thursday’s attacks, reading out a litany of accusations against Iran at a press conference that day. “Mike Pompeo is at least as much of a hawk, especially on Iran,” said Kiriakou. “But Bolton’s departure would isolate Pompeo. And one of the things that most observers are not paying attention to is the fact that most Republicans in Congress do NOT want to go to war with Iran.” Nor do Americans have the appetite for further foreign wars. Withdrawing from the decades-long conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan were key campaign promises of Trump, and another foreign misadventure “would be a disaster that the US can ill afford,” the CIA whistleblower believes If the whispers are true, Kiriakou has heard several names mentioned as potential replacements, among them “several retired military officers and former intelligence officials.” None of them, he added, are “household names.” Those expecting a complete reversal in the Trump administration’s foreign policy with Bolton out of the scene might want to keep holding their breath, however. “I don't think we would see major changes in Trump's foreign policy if Bolton leaves,” Kiriakou concluded. “Other than the fact that we would be far less likely to seek a fight against Iran.”

Anaya_Fatima She is so cute and loving. Just two years and eight months old now. Yesterday I went back to home and suddenly she surprised me and the whole family asking "Baba aap kae liyae Pani Laon?" (Father! should I bring a glass of water for you)

The people in America for the sake of their sons, should make foolish Trump understand "War is not a Joke especially war with Iran is signature on America's death warrant" The Americans may begin the war but its end will not be in their control.

I hope you will understand. I made this thread for purely news and not to create any rift or fight. However, as you have put forwarded a point therefore, I need to address this. Have you heard the view of Ayatullah Ali Akbar Khaminai (Hz) on Kashmir Issue? I hope following links will help you understanding the matter. 1. 2. http://english.Khamenei.ir/news/3653/The-issue-of-Kashmir-is-an-issue-of-humanity-Ayatollah-Khamenei The issue of Kashmir Is issue of Humanity.

In October last year, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu issued a statement on Syrian "Golan Mountains" and said that "Golan Mountains" have strategic significance for Israel. Therefore, the said heights should be considered as integral part of Israel instead of being considered as an occupied part of Israel. In December 2018 a draft resolution was presented in the US Senate and it is now going to be held in the beginning of the year 2019. It has been said that Israel's autonomy should be acknowledged on the "Golan Heights". Bill is presented in the Senate by Ted Cruise. He tried to become the Republican party candidate in presidential elections in 2016, but he lost in the initial phase compared to the Donald Trump, but his name still remains in the US presidential election in 2020 and is included in the list of potential candidates in the Republican Party. If the Donald Trump's difference in the popularity and this is possible, then the prospects of becoming Ted Cruise's presidential candidate are bright. Another senator also wrote a letter to the proposed resolution, while the other public representatives of the Republican Party and the Democratic Party are also trying to sign it so that it can be proposed national bills, gaining a broad consensus. Can the majority of the opinions be accepted by the opinion as "the guarantee of Israel's security can only be given to the "Golan Heights". This draft resolution also states that " Israel's security is part of the national security of the US". It should also be auspicious that after the statement of the US government official Benjamin Netanyahu already has indicated that America can recognize Israel's sovereignty on the "Golan Heights". In this context, we face a very dangerous situation in Syria's case. In future, any dialogue should be comprehensive and in all aspects of protection of regional autonomy and regional integrity. Iran and Turkey are demanding respite from the evening and its independence, but the plans and steps of separating shells from Golan are being quieted. It is not only a political mistake that will be harmful for the dispute of any dispute resolution, but it will also create a great political chaos and athletes in Syria, region and especially in the Arab world. In fact, the Arab "Jacobs What is the attitude of '' because they are of different ideas related to the future of the Arab world, but in my opinion, such people are in minority and politically it will not be wise to bring them even for it. That is why I expect that the arguments of the proposed resolution will be based on the belief that any countries will not be affected or disturbed because "Arab world suffers" and that they It has been ensured that there will be no more protests from here or from there or no diplomatic measures will be taken, but statements will be issued only to the vacant house only. The time now is my opinion that someone should be lubricated or at least a solid basis. The doctor has already left behind this matter and we have completely forgotten the justification. First of all, I want to say the Syrian government in its difficult circumstances that it should not be afraid of trying to protect its regional integrity and sovereignty, despite this serious challenge. He should immediately approach the United Nations Security Council and request his support for the Golan peaks being a occupied territory. It also stressed that Israel did not demand a withdrawal from the tops of Israel. It is being said that the current legal status of being a occupied area, and the security council's earlier claims are said to have been said about it. I demand from the Arab states that they support Syria, but encourage them to cooperate with the United Arab Emirates on a joint consolidation council. In this context, any move to Syria is more important than the return of its Arab League. But rather it will be a strong introduction to its return. I demand from all Arab countries to speed up the efforts of their collective responsibilities, to stimulate the efforts of all Arab countries. High-level embassies in all Arab countries of Washington are present. He talks with Senate members and its experts and establish a strong lobby for the defense of regional integrity. This will also help restore the reputation of political influence in the Arab countries of their host countries. The American move is absolutely illegal, and its acceptable justification is not that we should remain silent on it. In Arab countries, there are lobby agencies in Washington, I also demand them to protect their interests and help the Arab embassies. Keeping the peak peaks with them is in the strategic interests of the Arab world. If we succeed, then our reputation and credibility will be restored and will benefit from it. We face an open injustice and wrong attitude, we must correct it before we can take it to reality. We have to rise, otherwise we will have to repeat and its worth

15-02-2019 1. 'Poles collaborated with the Nazis': Netanyahu reignites Holocaust spat with Poland in Warsaw Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has sparked a fresh diplomatic row with Poland after he defied the controversial Holocaust law, which criminalizes blaming the Polish state for the extermination of Jews. https://www.rt.com/news/451512-netanyahu-poland-collaboration-nazis/ 2. US-led anti-Iran circus in Warsaw unravels as farce A worth reading editorial by Finian Cunningham (born 1963) https://www.rt.com/op-ed/451478-Iran-conference-warsaw-us/ 3. Russia, Iran & Turkey talk long-term Syrian peace in Sochi as US and allies beat war drums in Warsaw Leaders from Russia, Turkey and Iran have descended on the Black Sea city of Sochi to discuss ways of ending Syria’s near-eight-year civil war. Meanwhile, hostile talk is emerging from a meeting of the US and its allies in Warsaw. https://www.rt.com/news/451451-putin-erdogan-rouhani-Syria-summit/ 4. ‘Dead on arrival’: US kicks off Iran summit in Poland, but where are those key European allies? Attended by over sixty countries but widely neglected by key EU nations, a controversial US-led meeting on Iran opens up in Warsaw, raising doubts that European allies will play to Washington’s tune when dealing with Tehran. https://www.rt.com/news/451444-poland-failed-summit-Iran/