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

Dhulfiqar

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    8,862
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Dhulfiqar

  1. I was approached by the mosque lead and he told me he was going to extend an invitation to Tawhidi based on Ammar's recommendation. His "joke" could have damned 100s of unexpecting youths and their parents.
  2. Before Ramadhan, he made the suggestion to a local mosque in Connecticut.
  3. I want to add Ammar is promoting his friend Brother Tawhidi, "If you can't afford me, Brother Tawhidi is good alternative." Ammar, Tawhidi, Yasir Habibi are all the same. One less open than the other. That's it.
  4. Ammar also said Palestinians make up most of ISIS. Not true at all. His lecture will only promote more hate, more anti-Shi'a sentiment. In fact Sunnis who are indifferent will have animosity against Shi'a after listening to this flamboyant talk. Utter stupidity on his part. No wonder all ulema from a proper Howza say to avoid this self-promoting orator. In fact with these lectures, SHIA will begin to HATE Sunnis. Imam Husain (as)'s message is completely made irrelavent by his lectures. Muharram lectures aren't about entertaining the audience. It's about enriching people's lives with useful and PRACTICAL information that helps them grow in their iman and spirituality. Ammar has an agenda and that's to entertain folks who fill his pockets. Sad affairs. Wa Salaam, D
  5. The point is -- they are two diverging report based on the same quote. Yet this organization chose to pick the report that is more favorable to their point of view even if it goes against Ayatullah Sistani ®. This is there recommendaton to the US government: http://www.umaamerica.net/article/crisis-iraq
  6. Salaamun 'Alaikum, I have MAJOR issues with this "Rapid Report", in it UMAA says Ayatullah Sistani (may Allah prolong his life) ENDORSES US and French airstrikes in Syria and Iraq. Iraq’s top Shia cleric hails foreign aid against rebels AsaianAge.com Iraq’s most important Shia religious leader Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani endorsed international intervention against ISIS in the country in a Friday sermon delivered by a representative, following US and French airstrikes, but called for strict guidelines. Not only is this a blatant lie but is dangerous act of disinformation. PRESS TV reported this same story differently: Iraq's top Shia cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, has advised the Iraqi government not to rely on foreign powers in fighting the Takfiri ISIL terrorists, one of his close aides says. Sheikh Abdul Mahdi al-Karbalai, who represents the senior cleric, made the remarks during a Friday prayers sermon in the holy city of Karbala. According to Sheikh Karbalai, Iraq is in need of help from brotherly and friendly countries in confronting the Takfiri terrorists. [http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/09/19/379258/iraq-mustnt-depend-on-foreign-powers/] IRIB had a similar story, "Iraq’s top religious authority, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, has recommended the Iraqi government not to rely on foreign powers in fighting the Takfiri ISIL terrorists, one of his close aides says." http://english.irib.ir/radioislam/top-stories/item/196253-iraq-mustn%E2%80%99t-depend-on-west-to-in-anti-isil-fight-grand-ayatollah-sistani Both PRESS TV and IRIB reported the complete OPPOSITE of what UMAA's email said. The "brotherly and friendly countries" referred to by Ayatullah Sistani (may Allah prolong his life) is not US and FRENCH but is IRAN. How do people sit back and watch this mockery without saying a word. Anyone with mental capacity of a peanut would know that Ayatullah Sistani would NEVER endorse the United States, a man who not once in his life met with US coalition forces during the Iraq war. If these sort of outrageous emails and spreading of misinformation does not seize right now, I can assure you brothers and sisters of conscience will take appropriate action. Wa Salaam, D
  7. Had to login after years of not -- This group is founded by the same founding member of UMAA. Agha Shukat Jafri Wa Salaam, D Their latest press release on the Boston Bombings is worth reading. http://t.co/ZP4YEh0Zlj
  8. Brother Zanadine: If your advice was to teach younger brothers on how to be player -- you've done a superb job. A little tacky but well played. However, if your goal was to keep haram way from them -- you've failed miserably. In fact you've committed more haram in order to get to the Halal (the Muta Nikah). This is not the way. In fact, you've been deceitful and you went through all that trouble just to sleep with her. This my friend is an abuse of Mut'a. You've violated the essence of the law. Just to inform you -- since you've already gave probably the worst medical advice ever when suggesting the use of two condoms (the friction caused by two condoms will tear them both) -- a condom cannot protect you against HPV (not HIV) HPV if contracted will be with you for the rest of your life. And when you finally do settle down and marry a wholesome woman, the gift you'll give her is cervical cancer. I'm sure your wife would love you for plenty for destroying her chances of ever having children and receiving pleasure from intimacy. Hey, at least when the doctors remove her cervix, she'll shed a few ounces. Which girl doesn't like to lose weight, right Brother Zanadine? Wa Salaam, Dhulfiqar
  9. Asyeda, You are very mature, disregard the comments about your age. You have been ready for marriage for sometime now. Just remember the nature of marriage is progress and growth in each other's faith. Chose your spouse with that intention. Allah will take care of the rest. Many young girls have put off marriage and are now in their 30s longing for a hand to hold. Don't put yourself in that situation. Wa Salaam, Dhulfiqar
  10. For those advocating the preggo-test -- stop thinking like the 1%, 99% of world don't have access to preggo-tests.
  11. Satyaban is correct. Marriage is not the solution to his problem. His parents failed him.
  12. Are you ready to bear the responsibilities of fathering a child?
  13. US, IAEA, and Regime Change Aspirations Abu Mariam http://oppression.org/site/index.php/world/middle-east/209-us-iaea-and-regime-change-aspirations As Israel prepares to launch a military attack on Iran, UN's IAEA conveniently releases a report on the Iranian nuclear program. The report comes out just days ahead of the seasonal meeting of the board of Governors, which is scheduled to be held in Vienna from November 17 to 18. Iran's envoy to the IAEA, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, cited the following problems: The Iranian envoy to the IAEA further said that Amano's latest report was prepared under pressure by the United States, adding that the IAEA chief has violated the Agency's Statute as a result of submission to the US demands. Soltanieh noted that Amano has made several mistakes in his new report, the first of which is violating the agency's principle of confidentiality by publicly distributing unproven documents related to a member state. Amano's second mistake was submitting the documents to five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council one week before they were distributed to IAEA member states, the Iranian envoy added. “This is in contradiction with [iAEA] Statute because all members…have equal weight and a vote,” Soltanieh pointed out. Earlier IAEA reports finds no evidence of Iran producing nuclear weapons Last year, Jason Ditz, reported in US Warned Turkey Not to Publicly Question Allegations on Iran: Though US officials have repeatedly accused Iran of making nuclear weapons they have never provided evidence of this assertion, and the IAEA has continually verified the non-diversion of Iran’s nuclear material. So a year later, IAEA is now all of sudden claiming that Iran may have dual-use capabilities? What changed in a year? IAEA chief sacked and replaced by a loyalist In 2009, IAEA's chief and lead negotiator Mohammad ElBaradei was sacked. His crime, he wasn't partial enough something the US and Israel did not appreciate. Former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has indirectly criticized ElBaradei for "muddying the message" to Iran and has also said that "the IAEA is not in the business of diplomacy. The IAEA is a technical agency that has a board of governors of which the United States is a member." Former prime minister and current president of Israel, Shimon Peres, has said that "there are holes in the (IAEA) apparatus for deterring a culture of nuclear weapons, as in the case with Iran, but the agency certainly has done much in the prevention of nuclear weapons from reaching dangerous hands." In a different reaction, former Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Shaul Mofaz has called for ElBaradei to be impeached. In September 2007, French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, warned about the potential dangers of a nuclear Iran. He stated that "we have to prepare for the worst, and the worst is war." In response to Kouchner, ElBaredei characterized talk of attacking Iran as "hype", and dismissed the notion of a possible attack on Iran. He referred to the war in Iraq, where "70,000 innocent civilians have lost their lives on the suspicion that a country has nuclear weapons." He further added "I do not believe at this stage that we are facing a clear and present danger that requires [that] we go beyond diplomacy." http://en.wikipedia....hamed_ElBaradei In 2009, then Japanese Ambassador, Yukiya Amano, took the reigns of the "wild and dissenting" IAEA. In November 2010, British newspaper The Guardian reported on a U.S. diplomatic cable originating a year earlier in Vienna and supplied to the newspaper byWikiLeaks, detailing a meeting between Amano and an American ambassador. The author of the cable summarized a statement by Amano in which the latter offered that he "was solidly in the U.S. court on every key strategic decision, from high-level personnel appointments to the handling of Iran's alleged nuclear weapons program." (Wikipedia). We don't want a solution, we want regime change Last May, S. M. Asadabadi hinted towards the true nature and objectives of the IAEA: According to the former IAEA president and lead negotiator, Mohamed Mustafa ElBaradei, he was “on the verge of a solution on several occasions” and politics always foiled the efforts. In particular, ElBaradei accused U.S. and European officials of withholding important documents. “They weren’t interested in a compromise with the government in Tehran, but regime change - by any means necessary,” reported ElBaradei. He also noted the difficulty of trying to broker talks under these circumstances. It was never about finding the truth, the imperialists want regime change. --- Related Stories: Israeli Officials: ElBaradei Secretly an Iranian Agent: Insists Speculation in New IAEA Report 'Proof' IAEA’s ‘Soviet Nuclear Scientist’ Never Worked on Weapons
  14. When comes to the US constitution--the most sacred document--it was illegal.
  15. I think you were referring to: § 1481. LOSS OF NATIONALITY BY NATIVE-BORN OR NATURALIZED CITIZEN; VOLUNTARY ACTION; BURDEN OF PROOF; PRESUMPTIONS ^ even this requires "if and when he is convicted thereof by a court martial or by a court of competent jurisdiction."
  16. Maybe you meant Russia.... Russia 'gave agents licence to kill' enemies of the state The Russian secret service authorised the “elimination” of individuals living overseas who were judged to be enemies of the state and ordered the creation of special units to conduct such operations, according to a document passed to The Daily Telegraph. http://www.telegraph...s-overseas.html
  17. Being a declared a terrorists doesn't mean you don't have a trial. There are plenty of cases where the local authorities have charged people with being "terrorists" under the patriot acts. They all had trials. Plus, there has been no recorded incidence of Awlaki part taking in terrorist activities. His status was upgraded AFTER his death. And Samir Khan another US citizen who was killed -- was a parody writer not a terrorist.
  18. Can you declare a US Citizen Enemy of the State? And I really don't think there's any such law in books.
  19. Can you show me laws of "Enemy of State"? And also the laws in which one gives up his constitutional right of a innocent until proven guilty? And can also tell how one is official declared Enemy of the State?
  20. ^ Ron Paul disagrees: Ron Paul: US-born al-Qaida cleric 'assassinated' MANCHESTER, N.H. (AP) -- Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul is condemning the Obama administration for killing an American born al-Qaida operative without a trial. Paul, a Texas congressman known for libertarian views, says the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki on Yemeni soil amounts to an "assassination." Paul warned the American people not to casually accept such violence against U.S. citizens, even those with strong ties to terrorism. Anwar al-Awlaki was considered one of the most influential al-Qaida operatives wanted by the United States. U.S. and Yemen officials say he was killed in a U.S. air strike targeting his convoy Friday morning. Paul made the comments to reporters after a campaign stop Friday at Saint Anselm College in New Hampshire. He said America's leaders must think hard about "assassinating American citizens without charges." Source: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CLERIC_KILLED_RON_PAUL?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-09-30-10-34-45 CIA Assassinates Two American Citizens in Yemen Obama Lauds Killings as Proof of America's Reach by Jason Ditz, September 30, 2011 | Print This | Share This | Antiwar Forum A CIA-JSOC coordinated attack against a vehicle convoy in Yemen today left two American citizens dead along with “some companions.” The slain were high profile Sunni cleric Anwar al-Awlaki and magazine editor Samir Khan. This was the latest in a long series of attempted assassinations of Awlaki, who the National Intelligence Director confirmed in April 2010 was the first American citizen ever added to President Obama’s official list of assassination targets for the CIA. The confirmation sparked immediate concern because despite repeatedly railing at Awlaki for his anti-US sermons and implying he had some sort of tie with al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) was not charged with any crimes at all, let alone a capital offense. It also spawned an attempted lawsuit by Awlaki’s father and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), who argued that it was inappropriate for the president to order the execution of American citizens without formal charges and a trial. The Justice Department demanded the case be thrown out on the grounds that the courts have no oversight over who the president can assassinate on the grounds of national security. Eventually the court dismissed the lawsuit, saying it was up to “elected branches of government”to decide if people were to be assassinated. The Obama Administration had been working with Yemen’s Saleh regime to track down Awlaki, but the New Mexico-born cleric’s tribe is vast and powerful in Yemen’s interior, and the government had long been unsuccessful in moving against him. His killing was immediately praised by President Obama, saying it was “further proof” of America’s global reach and that there was “no safe haven anywhere in the world”from potential assassination once marked by a president. Most of the domestic coverage in the US centered around praise for the killings and reiterating the half-formed allegations against Awlaki, while glossing over the fact that the administration’s primary objection to Awlaki, and the one which actually put him in US sights in the first place, was his collection of religious sermons critical of America’s imperial ambitions. This of course explains why there was no trial, because religious sermons critical of a president’s foreign policy are not against the law. Interestingly the closest thing to an allegation of direct AQAP ties was his putative influence on the December 2009 Christmas underbomber. This of course came just days after another failed assassination attempt by US cruise missiles killed a large number of Yemeni civilians. The other American victim of the assassination was the much lower profile Samir Khan, a North Carolina-born would-be jihadist whose primary claim to fame was his role in the publication of Inspire Magazine, the embarrassingly over-the-top English language webzine. Inspire Magazine was known for its wacky and ridiculously implausible ideas for terrorist attacks, which almost always spawned media scare pieces treating them as a legitimate threat. Among those was the infamous “Fords With Swords” piece, in which they proposed strapping a bunch of scimitars to a Ford truck and driving it into a crowd of conveniently located infidels. Needless to say, the “plot” was never attempted. Though Khan was at the very least a self-professed member of AQAP, he too was not actually charged with any crimes, and most of his press centered either around the magazine itself, or his faux-gangsta Internet releases, including “Jihad 4 Eva” graffiti and his “Cold Diss of Hosni Mubarak.” The sheer goofiness of Khan’s AQAP role and the entirely speculative nature of Anwar Awlaki’s must inevitably raise further questions about the legality of the US government simply assassinating them, and what it might mean for others who run afoul of the administration for one reason or another. It seems trials are simply not a part of the president’s strategy when he is criticized, and assassinating a critical cleric appears to rank among his proudest moments since taking office. The assassination was mostly cheered by Obama’s potential opponents in 2012 as well, with both Rick Perry cheering it as “an important victory” and Mitt Romney terming the extralegal assassination “proper justice.” Rep. Ron Paul (R – TX) was predictably the lone critic, saying that he was concerned with “ assassinating American citizens without charges.” Ron Paul Condemns U.S. 'Assassination' of al-Awlaki; Perry, Romney Praise Obama Republican presidential candidates differ on the killing of the American-born radical cleric in Yemen Updated 1:33 p.m. Libertarian Texas Rep. Ron Paul condemned the Obama administration for killing an American-born al-Qaeda leader in Yemen, while Texas Governor Rick Perry had some rare kind words for the commander in chief following the successful drone strike Friday morning that killed radical Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki and several others. "The death of Awlaki is a major blow to al-Qaeda's most active operational affiliate," Obama said in remarks at Fort Myer in Virginia Friday morning. But Paul, who has urged the U.S. to leave Iraq and Afghanistan, this morning in New Hampshire blasted the killing as an "assassination," the Associated Press reports, and warned American leaders against "assassinating American citizens without charges." Awlaki was born in New Mexico and was a joint U.S.-Yemeni citizen. Also killed in the attack was Samir Khan, co-editor of al-Qaeda's jihadi magazine Inspire, The Washington Post reports. "Nobody knows if he ever killed anybody," Paul said, according to the Wall Street Journal. "If the American people accept this blindly and casually...I think that's sad." Perry had a different view, and one more in sync with the rest of the GOP field's stance on the targeted killings of terrorists, even ones who are American citizens. "I want to congratulate the United States military and intelligence communities -- and President Obama for sticking with the government's longstanding and aggressive anti-terror policies -- for getting another key international terrorist," he said in a statement. "The death of American-raised al Qaida leader Anwar al-Awlaki is an important victory in the war on terror," he added. Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney had similar sentiments, calling the killing of al-Awlaki "a major victory in our fight against Islamist terrorism and proper justice for the numerous attacks and plots he inspired or planned against America." "I commend the President, the members of the intelligence community, our service members, and our allies for their continued efforts to keep Americans safe," he said. But libertarian GOP presidential candidate Gary Johnson, the former governor of al-Awlaki's birth state, also raised doubt about the killing. "I understand that laws may allow these decisions by the President and other officials in regard to al-Awlaki, and I do not in any way want to diminish the skill and dedication of our CIA and military. But, at the same time, it must not be overlooked -- and thoughtfully examined -- that our government targeted a U.S. citizen for death, and carried out that sentence on foreign soil. To my knowledge, that is a first, and a precedent that raises serious questions," he said in a statement. "If we allow our fervor to eliminate terrorist threats to cause us to cut corners with the Constitution and the fundamental rights of American citizens, whether it be invasions of privacy or the killing of someone born on U.S. soil, I could argue that the terrorists will have ultimately won. "The world is very likely a better place without al-Awlaki in it, but let us not neglect to ask the tough questions this attack raises and about the laws that allowed it to be carried out," he said. It's a debate that seems certain to continue at the next GOP presidential primary debate, to be held in Hanover, N.H., on Oct. 11.
  21. ^ still a violation of the US Constitution. You to prove him guilty.
  22. US officials give Anwar al-Awlaki new, elevated title after killing him...
×
×
  • Create New...