zainabia

Very well said brother. It is too much. And problem is this sacrifice bringing more harm than any benefit. Any how, I am interested in the reaction of Shia population of Iraq. Do they see US as a saviour or as the backer of ISIS and all this crises?

In Afghanistan, where there are several ethnic groups, America introduced the "Presidential System". But in Iraq, where there are less divisions, US introduced the "Parliamentary System" with lot of other problems. Why these Double Standards? This parliamentary system is making life difficult for the Shia government. Brother, I want to know more about the present government. 1) Who is hoshiyar Zubairi and is he a good person? 2) There were 3 vice presidents including Ayad Allawi. Not this character disturbs me while he has been to Saudi Arabia many times. 3) Also I want to know about the Iraqi People. It is clear to me that US was behind ISIS. But then Maliki requested this same US for help. How the Iraqi people now look at US (especially the Shia population)?

These are still rumors that Iran supplied Kurd Peshmerga with any weapons. Iran is mainly supplying weapons only to the Malitias who have good friendly relationship with Iran. And for sure West want a fight between Iraqi Government and Kurds after ISIS is finished.

I also don't like that either America or Iran or religious leadership of Iraq to interfere in the politics of Iraq. If Iraqi people have chosen Maliki, then he should govern. America is opposing Maliki. Why? This one simple question is enough for me to understand what the truth is.

Yes you are right about Malik Ibn Nuwayra and Khalid bin Walid. But this article is written to attract Sunni brothers too and thus this incident was neglected. There is a difference between Punishment of crime under Islamic State, and beheading the people during war just for fun and mutilating them. This is mutilation:

Note to Mods: I posted this topic earlier, but it was deleted. I request the mods to please at least give the reason for deletion in 1 line so that we could understand our mistake. Thanks. Mutilation of Dead Bodies: Islamic Sharia VS ISIS Sharia It was the custom of Ignorance to mutilate the dead bodies. In battle of Uhad, the wife of Abu Sufyan (leader of Bani Umiyyah) ate the liver of Hazrat Hamza (the Uncle of Prophet Muhmmad (saw)). Islam ended this custom. «نهی النبی عن النهبی والمثلة»(صحیح بخاری) Sahih Bukhari,Volume 3, Book 43, Number 654 : The Prophet forbade robbery, and also forbade mutilation of bodies. «لاتغدرو ا ولاتغلوا ولاتمثلوا»(صحیح مسلم) Sahih Muslim, The Book of Jihad and Expedition: Prophet (saw) said:...do not embezzle the spoils; do not break your pledge; and do not mutilate (the dead) bodies. When 1st Caliph Abu Bakr sent an army towards Syria, he advised them to not to mutilate the dead bodies and to not to kill the old ones, women and children. All the historians and Hadith collectors recorded it. ISIS pose themselves as champions of Islam, but why then they hate Islamic Sharia so much that they have to become god themselves, and make their own Sharia where mutilating the dead bodies is Halal for them? History: Bani Umaiyyah and Mutilation of Dead Bodies First head which was cut in Islamic history, it was of Ammar Yasir. After battle of Siffin, the head of Ammar Yasir was brought to Muawiyyah and 2 persons were fighting each other and every one was claiming that he cut that head. (Ref: Musnad Ahmad bin Hanbal, Tabqaat Ibn Saad) Second head belonged to Sahabi 'Amr bin al-Hamiq. This Sahabi took part in killing of 'Uthman. Ziyad cut of his head and sent it to Muawiyyah in Damascus, where Muawiyyah paraded it in the whole city. (Ref: Tabaqat Ibn Saad, al-Istiaab, al-Badaya, Tehdib-ul-Tehdib) Third head belonged to Muhammad bin Abi Bakr. When Muawiyyah captured Egypt, he was taken as prisoner, then killed and then put in the skin of donkey and finally burnt. (Ref: al-Istiaab, History of Tabari, Ibn Athir and Ibn Khaldoon) Fourth head belonges to Imam Hussain (as) and his companions who were slaughtered in Karbala. Hussain's head was cut and his dead body was mutilated through horses feet. Then all these heads were taken to Kufa and from there to Damascus to Yazeed. (Ref: History of Tabari, Ibn Athir and al-Badaya) Nauman bin Bashir was initially the supporter of Bani Umayyah. But later he supported Ibn Zubair. He was killed and his head was presented to his wife as gift (Ref: Tabaqat Ibn Sa'ad, al-Badaya) Ma'sab bin Zubair's head was paraded in Kufa and Egypt (Ref: Ibn Athir) Head of Sahabi Abdullah Ibn Zubair and his companions Ibn Safwan and Ibn Hazm were cut off and were sent from Mecca to Madina, and then from Madina to Damascus where these heads were paraded in the city and then they were hanged for several days. (Ref: al-Istiaab, History of Tabari, al-Badaya and Ibn Khaldoon).

English Version (For Urdu Version, look below) This article is copyrights free and you could share it with your own name. Please propagate it to facebook and all other social media groups. Jazak Allah. Message Even if ISIL and Salafies declare that they don't want to demolish Kaba, you should never believe them, while their Aqeedah will compel them to demolish Kaba the same way they demolish the graves in name of their self made Tawheed.

English Version (For Urdu Version, look below) This article is copyrights free and you could share it with your own name. Please propagate it to facebook and all other social media groups. Jazak Allah. Message Even if ISIL and Salafies declare that they don't want to demolish Kaba, you should never believe them, while their Aqeedah will compel them to demolish Kaba the same way they demolish the graves in name of their self made Tawheed.

Very Important Article. Taken from www.wilayat.net English Translation coming soon. This article is copyrights free and you could share it with your own name. Please propagate it to facebook and all other social media groups. Jazak Allah.

Very Important Article. Taken from www.wilayat.net English Translation coming soon. This article is copyrights free and you could share it with your own name. Please propagate it to facebook and all other social media groups. Jazak Allah.

The White House Is Convinced the Shiite Leader Is Unable to Reconcile With the Nation's Sunni Minority and Stabilize a Volatile Political Landscape. http://live.wsj.com/video/hagel-it-u...D5F1EC906.html The Obama administration is signaling that it wants a new government in Iraq without Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, convinced the Shiite leader is unable to reconcile with the nation's Sunni minority and stabilize a volatile political landscape. The U.S. administration is indicating it wants Iraq's political parties to form a new government without Mr. Maliki as he tries to assemble a ruling coalition following elections this past April, U.S. officials say. Such a new government, U.S., officials say, would include the country's Sunni and Kurdish communities and could help to stem Sunni support for the al Qaeda offshoot, the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, or ISIS, that has seized control of Iraqi cities over the past two weeks. That, the officials argue, would help to unify the country and reverse its slide into sectarian division. On Wednesday, Iraq stepped up efforts on several fronts to blunt the insurgency's progress, deploying counterterrorism units and helicopter gunships to battle them for control of the country's main oil refinery, in Beiji. An image grab taken from Iraqiya channel shows Iraqi Primi Minister Nouri al-Maliki delivering a televised speech in Baghdad on Wednesday. A growing number of U.S. lawmakers and Arab allies, particularly Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, are pressing the White House to pull its support for Mr. Maliki. Some of them are pushing for change in exchange for providing their help in stabilizing Iraq, say U.S. and Arab diplomats. The chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.) told a congressional hearing Wednesday: "The Maliki government, candidly, has got to go if you want any reconciliation." Senior administration officials have become increasingly critical of Mr. Maliki in their public statements and question whether he is committed to mending ties with Sunnis. "There's no question that not enough has been done by the government, including the prime minister, to govern inclusively, and that that has contributed to the situation and the crisis that we have today in Iraq," White House spokesman Jay Carney said Wednesday. "The Iraqi people will have to decide the makeup of the next coalition government and who is the prime minister," he added. "Whether it's the current prime minister or another leader, we will aggressively attempt to impress upon that leader the absolute necessity of rejecting sectarian governance." The Obama administration has for years warned Mr. Maliki's Shiite-dominant government to be more inclusive and less punitive against the minority Sunnis at the risk of further alienating them. Mr. Maliki has largely ignored that advice over the past five years, U.S. and Arab officials say, jailing popular Sunni protest leaders, blocking even other Shiite blocs from sharing power and taking most key cabinet positions in government for himself. This week, as pressure rose from the U.S. and other allies to work toward a representative government for Iraq, Mr. Maliki participated in a unity meeting with top Sunni, Shiite, Kurdish leaders. The result wasn't hopeful, U.S. and Arab officials say. "We believe that Maliki's sectarianism and exclusion of Sunnis has led to the insurgency we are seeing," said a senior Arab official. "He unfortunately managed to unite ISIS with the former Baathists and Saddam supporters." President Barack Obama and his national security aides are in deliberations over the creation of a new strategy for stabilizing Iraq, with a clear roadmap expected in the coming days. Mr. Obama has discussed the possibility of using air power and drone strikes to weaken ISIS, say U.S. officials. But he has been particularly focused on developing a political process to heal the widening rift between Iraq's Shiite and Sunni communities that officials see as feeding the support for ISIS's insurgency in western Iraq. Mr. Obama met Wednesday with the top Republican and Democratic members of the House and Senate to update them on administration plans. Sen. Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.), the chamber's minority leader, issued a statement afterward, criticizing Mr. Obama's past policies on Iraq and saying it was important to apply the experience to the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in two years. Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.), the House Democratic leader, said Mr. Obama didn't need any further legislative authority to pursue options in Iraq. But officials said Mr. Obama told the congressional leaders he would continue to consult with them. Earlier Wednesday, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, cautioned senators at a hearing against expecting quick U.S. military strikes, because of the difficulty of developing targets. "It's not as easy as looking at an iPhone video of a convoy and then immediately striking it," said Gen. Dempsey. To support the administration approach, Secretary of State John Kerry and his aides have consulted with Iraq's neighbors—particularly Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Iran—to find a formula to create a more inclusive government in Baghdad. The State Department's point man on Iraq, Deputy Assistant Secretary Brett McGurk, has concurrently been meeting with Iraqi politicians and religious leaders in Baghdad to promote this political process, say U.S. officials. The State Department wouldn't say if the Obama administration was specifically discussing the issue of removing Mr. Maliki during these talks. But Arab diplomats and policy advisors who have talked with the White House in recent days said it was clear the administration was "casting about for somebody better" than Mr. Maliki. Mr. Kerry was even more pointed in his criticism of Mr. Maliki on Monday, arguing his removal could help stabilize Iraq's sectarian divide. "If there is a clear successor, if the results of the election are respected, if people come together with the cohesiveness necessary to build a legitimate government that puts the reforms in place that people want, that might wind up being very salutatory," he told Yahoo! News. read more at: http://online.wsj.com/articles/u-s-signals-1403137521 Miss Hillary and her Double Standards in Iraq and Bahrain 1) In Iraq 50% MPs are Sunnies ... President, Foreign Minister and Speaker is Sunni. Only problem is this that under US pressure, Iraqi government retained the Bath Party and Saddam supporters in HIGH Positions in the Army and Police. These same Saddam supporters always supported hundreds of terrorist attacks against Shias and give shelter to these terrorists in their cities and never arrest them. These same Saddam Police and Army members conspired recently in Mosul and handed over whole city to ISIS and ordered army to gave up their weapons and then later they were slaughtered. These Saddam supporters, who are at high ranking in Army and Police, they should be driven out from the forces and must be punished. 2) Bahrain On the other hand, we have US allie Bahrain, who even does not let a single Shia enter into Army or Police. Thousands ofmercenaries are imported to control the Shia population. There is no democracy, no rights for Shias. But Miss Hillary is not able to see this ZULM in Bahrain. I wish someone could show these Double Standards to Miss Hillary.

1) Takfiries are Jahils and they themselves could not even make a sew. 2) US and Saudia give them a lot of ammunition .... but there is weak point of US i.e. US could not provide high tech weapons to the Takfiries, while US fears that one day it could be used against the West and Israel. We must exploit this weakness of US. 3) Against Takfiries, we don't need huge army units, nor do we need small abush units, but we need Technological Superior weapons, which will work best in the present civil war against Takfiries. 4) We need Drones, which could fly 25000 ft. altitude or higher. No manpads could ever touch the Drones at this height. (Iran even has the ablility to manufacture even 50000 ft and 64000 ft. altitude Drones, as has been said by Iranian officials ). Secondly, we need Precision Guided Ammunition (Iran is already producing it). Precision Guided Ammunition could be fired through tanks and artillery and in form of Rockets. It could be guided either by Drones (laser guidance) or by ground laser equipment. Tanks should not directly enter the cities, but trained units in camouflage should infiltrate the cities and enemies ranks, and they guide the artillery fire through lasers. With Precision Guided Ammunition and ground guidance equipment, we could win this war even without the Drones. This is what high tech weapons could do in fight against the Jahil Takfiries https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=779646365413142

But BBC Urdu gave the news that Tal Afar has been captured by ISIL http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/world/2014/06/140616_iraq_conflict_us_iran_consider_cooperation_mb.shtml

Do Sunnies want separate State for them? There are many many Sunnies who don't want to be part of northern Sunni State with NO oil and with ISIL as their leaders. There are big numbers of Sunnies who want to be part of Shia Iraq and they are loyal to Iraq and not to Saddam. Therefore, 2 state solution is NO solution. Only choice left is to expel all the SENIOR leadership of Saddam loyalists in Army and Police, which was forgiven due to US pressure.

Yes Qardhawi, these ISIL are so peaceful that they abducted only dozens of Turkish Consulate people.