Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله


Advanced Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Learned

  • Rank
    Level 5 Member

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Religion
    Shia Islam

Previous Fields

  • Gender
  1. Salaam,

    Bro, is that a self portrait? oO (Your profile picture)

  2. The icon things and emoticons work for me when I am on internet explorer, but not on mozilla firefox. Is there a way to make it work on mozilla firefox again? Wa Salaam.

  3. Salaam. None of the icon things work for me. When I click the emoticons symbol it doesn't work. I do not see the emoticons to my right. Also none of the icon things above work except for Twitter, the drop down box that says Other Styles, and the question mark that says help when you hover with the cursor over it.

  4. Theres way too much to be said in any substantive manner in one post ... and I don't have time to think and write right now. But I promise I'll start a thread later explaining my perspective on things. Right now, I'll leave you with this to chew on: Think about what Imam Khomeini established in the Islamic Republic, and how remarkable and significant it was ... from a Shi'a historical perspective. Think about the real political capital that Imam Khomeini weilded in Iran, verses that of Ayatollah Khamenei today, and the systemic need for such a person to weild that type of political capital and
  5. 1. Mousavi is not a central player in any of this. He is the face of something much bigger than him. 2. The only thing any of the parties in this want ... is power. Either to gain more or retain what they have. 3. None of this is really about a contested election or Ahmadinejad's power. Ahmadinejad is nothing more than a face and figurehead, and is relatively powerless in Iran. Mousavi would be just as powerless in his place as President. 4. Most Muslims actually have no clue or understanding of what is actually going on.
  6. This is quite simply a false perversion of history. Lebanon was never a "fantastic" country, and the romanticized versions of it that you referring to are fabricated myths, completely detached from reality. The pre-civil war Lebanon was Lebanon of the elite. Lebanon of the ruling class Maronites. It was a deeply sectarian and elitist country, that neglected its people both on the basis of class and sect. The majority of people lived in poverty and ignorance; none more so than Shi'as. The only area that say prosperity was a portion of Beirut. Why do you think civil war broke out, and when it di
  7. Totally untrue. The US, Saudis, and Egyptians have been interfering openly and blatantly. The US embassador to Lebanon literally dictated to March 14, on tv, what they should and shouldn't do. Hariri spent more time in Saudi Arabia taking orders from the monarchy than he did in Lebanon doing anything useful. And Egypt had a direct hand in a lot of the political stages during the past 4 years, and its "mediators" were widely reported on and covered in the media. This is massively different than supporting a party. If all the Americans, Saudis, and Egyptians did was throw money at March 14 and n
  8. Lebanon was neither prosperous nor peaceful before 2005. Israel committed over 12,000 violations of Lebanese sovereignty between 2000 and 2005, including cross-border raids, kidnapping of citizens, and bombings. As for prosperous, during the Rafik Hariri era, between 1992 and 2004, Lebanon's national debt went from 4 billion to 40 billion. Lebanon was never the Geneva or Paris of the Middle East. What people refer to, when they use this false and inaccurate expression, is an era when Lebanon was in the hands of an elite sector of society dominated by a portion of the Maronite sect, and the go
  9. Fyst, perhaps it is time that you develop a less confrontational and more amiable method of discourse; one that isn't grounded in asserting your intellectual prowess over others, partly by resorting to only responding when you can absolutely prove someone else wrong (or yourself right), and partly by abasing others with terms such as "fool", "idiot", and "thick-skulled". Perhaps it would be just as smart, and much more wise for you to engage in discourse that has context and substance; discourse that is qualitative in its intellectual value and representative of your thoughtfulness and whit; d
  10. I understand that emotions are high and that these are tense times for the Islamic Republic and all those who want to see it thrive, but allow me to assert that one shouldn't be depressed over the situation. I don't want to explain in detail (yet) but what is happening right now is, in a way, quite overdue and quite inevitable, and will probably be for the better. What we are witnessing is history taking its course and catching up with Islamic Republic; a course that is convoluted in the helical clash of dialectic discourse, and just like any good part of history, it is necessarily turbulent.
  11. The someone else is Ayatollah Khamenei. The elements here are the military leadership of the IRGC, AN, and the clerical elements that usually back AN, and the IRCG's considerable presence in Parliament. It really isn't a 'takeover' or a proper coup. Its more like the eventual culmination of what has been a gradual process. Ayatollah Khamenei has been steadily in decline and the IRGC has been steadily on the rise, but the scales have always been tipped in Ayatollah Khamenei's favor up until the elections which tipped them the other way.
  12. Did that conversation ever take place between the IRGC and Mousavi? No, that is obviously false. I will refrain from answering what you were really asking though..
  13. ^The article's tone approaches that of reality, but in some of its evaluations and conclusions of what transpired and what may transpire, it is not accurate. Small example: That the IRGC implemented a coup against Rafsanjani. This is a half-accurate evaluation. It is true that the IRGC has grown immensely powerful and increasingly independent lately, and that it implemented a coup. However, the coup wasn't against Rafsanjani (or Mousavi). It was against someone else. Someone who represented the establishment ... not someone in relative opposition.
  14. No comment. Untrue. Iran is and has been an oligarchy comprised primarily from the post-revolution clerical ranks (non-dissidents). The supreme leader is still the most powerful single person in Iran, but his power is in decline and his status is greatly diminished from that of Ayatollah Khomeini; the most powerful non-clerical body in the country are the revolutionary guards. Ahmadinejad, as President of Iran, has almost no influence in Iran and makes no real decisions. The only thing he effects as President is the budget, and he as an individual is nothing more than a small part of a much
  • Create New...