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
Sign in to follow this  
Waiting for HIM

Tale Of A Wife Who Is Not Anymore -Shiagenocide

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

This is the tale of a Pakistani mother and a wife who is neither a mother nor a wife anymore due to the Takfiris terrorist attack on a mosque in a systematic genocide committed by the blessing of the Pakistani state.

This is a story of ONE Shia pakistani woman out of 50,000, whose husbands, fathers, and sons have been ripped into lifeless human body remains as suicide bombings have become the favorite mode of keeping Shia population of Pakistan in check and under subjugation.

http://en.shiapost.com/2013/08/18/my-sacrifice-to-god-by-midhat-zaidi/

P.S. This article did deserve a separate space in SC but so far, I'll have to put it in ''General Politics and Current Issues".... Topic like this deserves a new topic called "Shia Genocide in Pakistan".

Edited by Waiting for HIM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys have to find a better word than genocide. Shia are not a genos, not a race, so by definition it's a misuse of terms. I know you're looking for something powerful and memorable in terms of language, but people ultimately turn against you if you deliberately choose the wrong words. Rightly or wrongly, they conclude "if they're exaggerating with the words, what else are they exaggerating?" Which you obviously don't want at all.

I'm not sure what you use as an alternative. Targeted sectarian killings?

Edited by kadhim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys have to find a better word than genocide. Shia are not a genos, not a race, so by definition it's a misuse of terms. I know you're looking for something powerful and memorable in terms of language, but people ultimately turn against you if you deliberately choose the wrong words. Rightly or wrongly, they conclude "if they're exaggerating with the words, what else are they exaggerating?" Which you obviously don't want at all.

Please don' downplay the blood of Shias spilled in Pakistan. Correct your definition, better delete your slightly ignorant post from this thread.

Shia Genocide in Pakistan is not an exaggeration:

Suicide bombing, killers let loose, whole prison gates opened under army protection for hundreds of arrested killers to let go, marked Shia kids in medical and law schools of Pakistan and their head price announced, open threats and day and time of execution announced for Shia professionals and those who run businesses or head instituons, particularly killings of Shia doctors, Shia lawyers, Shia in army, Shia teachers, Shia businessmen... This is called GENOCIDE.

This is how UN defines genocide (following words are from UN charter)

Genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(1)Killing members of the group;

(2) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(3) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(4) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(5) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Edited by Waiting for HIM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Part of the skill set of political advocacy is the ability to intelligently and unemotionally accept constructive criticism. If you're not capable of that, may I suggest leaving the task to those who are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Part of the skill set of political advocacy is the ability to intelligently and unemotionally accept constructive criticism. If you're not capable of that, may I suggest leaving the task to those who are.

That's why I didn't yell at you, just logically showed you what constitutes Genocide in UN charter and how Pakistani Shia sufferings qualify to be defined as a genocide.

Edited by Waiting for HIM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's why I didn't yell at you, just logically showed you what constitutes Genocide in UN charter and how Pakistani Shia sufferings qualify to be defined as a genocide.

That's your interpretation of the wording though. You're seizing on the words "or in part" to argue that the targeting of any fraction of a religious group constitutes a genocide. You can't, unfortunately, do this. There is a whole legal discussion about this point. But it's likely that legal experts would not consider 50 000 (I'll give the benefit of the doubt to you on the figure) out of 30 odd million (20 odd percent of 175 million) to qualify, especially without clear, indisputable state sponsorship.

I'm sorry if that sounds cold and detached to you, but that's legal reality.

Do you guys have any reputable international lawyers lined up to support this choice of words?

Edited by kadhim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bro khadim, please suggest a good alternate.

Targeted Sectarian killings isnt one i believe.

I can guess that u dont have family or some other direct connection with Pakistan so you are not fully aware of the gravity of the situation. Shias are getting killed here daily and by dozens... Like the op said the educated ones are the prime target but they are not sparing the poor and illetrate ones either... In the northern areas they force passengers out of the buses,read the names on their ID cards and shoot the shias rightaway...what would u call it???

U want to wait for the death toll to cross a certain figure(s).. 6figures?? just for the sake of ''legally correct terminology??''

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My family heritage is irrelevant to the question of whether you're using words correctly. It's on the news every day, I'm not unaware of the reality. But genocide is a serious legal term, and it's not up to individuals to throw it around without proper consideration that it's appropriate. Words have meanings, and it's important to respect that. The basis for communication is that people can understand what the other is talking about. Law particularly depends on this. Look at fiqh for example. We don't approve of laymen arbitrarily defining the terms as they feel like, do we?

I again raise the question as to whether anyone has bothered to get a supporting legal opinion from a respected expert in international law. If you have such an opinion, I will be silent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On December 9, 1948, in the shadow of the Holocaust, and due in large part to Lemkin’s efforts, the United Nations approved theConvention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. This convention establishes "genocide” as an international crime, which signatory nations “undertake to prevent and punish.” It says: 

 

  • genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: 
    1. Killing members of the group;
    2. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
    3. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
    4. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
    5. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

 

Source: http://efchr.mcgill.ca/WhatIsGenocide_en.php?menu=2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is how UN defines genocide (following words are from UN charter)

Genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(1)Killing members of the group;

(2) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(3) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(4) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(5) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

 

"acts committed with the intent" I hope it can be proven in the case of Pakistan, to a reasonable degree, that Deobandis/takfiris do aim to make Pakistan a religiously homogeneous nation, as betrayed by their work not only against Shias but also to a degree against other religious minorities such as Hindus and also Barelvis. They work by employing both peaceful (preaching/tableegh) and non-peaceful (harassing communities out of neighborhoods/killing) methods to that effect. It is the non-peaceful acts, of which we're prime victims, that we're talking of when we say ShiaGenocide.

 

 We don't intend to take it to the UN, yet. We do live in fear, but we're not toothless. It is used to garner the sympathy we deserve and to unite the people( both Shia and Sunni) against the killers. Nobody gives a damn about what its legal definition entails as long as it helps paint a realistic picture of what is going on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bro kadhim, throw away your ego.

 

Yes there are lawyers on board in USA who are working to get this genocide declare a genocide.

 

What does my "ego" have to do with anything?

 

You didn't answer my question, by the way. I didn't ask you if there were "lawyers on board." I would hope that would be a given if you're trying to organize. I asked if you had international law specialists that agreed that it met the standard of genocide. Yes or no question. You don't have to be so evasive and defensive.

Edited by kadhim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bro kadhim, the reason i mentioned your family heritage is that things are not being reported in the news accurately, there is a lot more going on than actually reported. Only if u have family in pakistan or are living there yourself , u realize how bad things are....

Dont see any reason for u to get so worked up over this.... but if u dont believe in standing up for followers of Ahle Bayt, then thats another thing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're basically just reposting, word for word, what someone already posted. What do you think that is adding?

So... do you disagree with the UN charter that recognises religious killings as genocide?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...