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  
Mohammad313Ali

Ayatollah Khomeini “alleged war crimes”

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, Abu Nur said:

So you previously admit that it is possible that in some cases the judgement was wrong for particular ones. So because they are terrorist and murderess, this wrong suddenly is justified for you?

In few cases maybe some mistakes had been unfortunately make. For the vast majority that was a good thing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Moalfas said:

Eitherway, the allegations mentioned the hanging of 13 year old children. No excuse for that in humanity let alone islamically. 

it's a fake report but you highlight it based on your anti Iran agenda & your love toward monafiqeen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

it's a fake report but you highlight it based on your anti Iran agenda & your love toward monafiqeen.

Thank you for the kind words. I hope they don't come haunt you the day when no wealth or children will be of benefit.

يوم لا ينفع مال و لا بنون 

 26/88

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest fire!Monad

Op- What was your motive in bringing up this article ? - what were you doing in your life that made you dig up something from

By Christina Lamb, Diplomatic Correspondent -12:00AM GMT 04 Feb 2001

Anyways - from the users

Iraqis and Arabs - will be against Iran

Iraninas will be for

Indo-Pakistani heritage will be for Iran

Reverts - mixed.

Then eveyone will turn on each other, but generally using religion as an excuse to promote their own self worth. Useless article, none of you study politics or work in positions where you have to make decisions. All pretending to have played but no one has even played.

IF true - Whether true or false whocares? - You think he is the only person to have errored? - I suggest a re-read of history and see how ALL nations have caused tyranny, are doing so now, are planning to do so. Whether intentionally or not. Majority of you have caused tyranny, are and will, for your own motives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Guest fire!Monad said:

Op- What was your motive in bringing up this article ? - what were you doing in your life that made you dig up something from

By Christina Lamb, Diplomatic Correspondent -12:00AM GMT 04 Feb 2001

Anyways - from the users

Iraqis and Arabs - will be against Iran

Iraninas will be for

Indo-Pakistani heritage will be for Iran

Reverts - mixed.

Then eveyone will turn on each other, but generally using religion as an excuse to promote their own self worth. Useless article, none of you study politics or work in positions where you have to make decisions. All pretending to have played but no one has even played.

IF true - Whether true or false whocares? - You think he is the only person to have errored? - I suggest a re-read of history and see how ALL nations have caused tyranny, are doing so now, are planning to do so. Whether intentionally or not. Majority of you have caused tyranny, are and will, for your own motives.

In general Lebanese people who are Arabs are a lot of in favor for Iran. 

It is in particular among Iraqis we see such rejections of Iran. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

In general Lebanese people who are Arabs are a lot of in favor for Iran.

It is in particular among Iraqis we see such rejections of Iran. 

Huh? It depends which Lebanese you are talking about. Certainly alot of the current protesters are not in favour of Iran, nor are the supporters of the March 14 Alliance. 

This is a poll conducted in 2013 regarding the views of Lebanese citzens towards Iran:

Iran-03.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Sumerian said:

Huh? It depends which Lebanese you are talking about. Certainly alot of the current protesters are not in favour of Iran, nor are the supporters of the March 14 Alliance. 

This is a poll conducted in 2013 regarding the views of Lebanese citzens towards Iran:

Iran-03.png

 

When I wrote my comment I realized I forgot to put "Shia" before "Lebanese" but I thought people would naturally understood what I meant. It looks that I was wrong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/25/2019 at 6:46 PM, Guest_313 said:

CHILDREN as young as 13 were hanged from cranes, six at a time, in a barbaric two-month purge of Iran's prisons on the direct orders of Ayatollah Khomeini, according to a new book by his former deputy.

More than 30,000 political prisoners were executed in the 1988 massacre - a far larger number than previously suspected. Secret documents smuggled out of Iran reveal that, because of the large numbers of necks to be broken, prisoners were loaded onto forklift trucks in groups of six and hanged from cranes in half-hourly intervals.

Gruesome details are contained in the memoirs of Grand Ayatollah Hossein-Ali Montazeri, The Memoirs of Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri, one of the founders of the Islamic regime. He was once considered Khomeini's anointed successor, but was deposed for his outspokenness, and is now under house arrest in the holy city of Qom.

Published privately last month after attempts by the regime to suppress it, the revelations have prompted demands from Iranian exiles for those involved to be tried for crimes against humanity. The most damning of the letters and documents published in the book is Khomeini's fatwa decree calling for all Mojahedin (as opponents of the Iranian regime are known) to be killed.

Issued shortly after the end of the Iran-Iraq war in July 1988 and an incursion into western Iran by the Iranian resistance, the fatwa reads: "It is decreed that those who are in prisons throughout the country and remain steadfast in their support for the Monafeqin (Mojahedin) are waging war on God and are condemned to execution."

It goes on to entrust the decision to "death committees" - three-member panels consisting of an Islamic judge, a representative of the Ministry of Intelligence, and a state prosecutor. Prisoners were to be asked if they had changed loyalties and, if not, were to be executed.

Montazeri, who states that 3,800 people had been killed by the end of the first fortnight of executions, includes his own correspondence with Khomeini, saying that the killings would be seen as "a vendetta" and would spark opposition to the regime. He wrote: "The execution of several thousand prisoners in a few days will not have positive repercussions and will not be mistake-free."

The massacres, which came just before the Lockerbie bombing, were seen as a sop to the hardliners at a time when Khomeini was already in failing health and the battle for succession had begun between fundamentalists and moderates. He died the following year.

According to testimony from prison officials - including Kamal Afkhami Ardekani, who formerly worked at Evin prison - recently given to United Nations human rights rapporteurs: "They would line up prisoners in a 14-by-five-metre hall in the central office building and then ask simply one question, 'What is your political affiliation?' Those who said the Mojahedin would be hanged from cranes in position in the car park behind the building."

He went on to describe how, every half an hour from 7.30am to 5pm, 33 people were lifted on three forklift trucks to six cranes, each of which had five or six ropes. He said: "The process went on and on without interruption." In two weeks, 8,000 people were hanged. Similar carnage took place across the country.

Many of those in the ruling council at the time of the 1988 massacre are still in power, including President Mohammed Khatami, who was the Director of Ideological and Cultural Affairs.

"The massacre may have happened 12 years ago, but the relevance is that these atrocities are still happening", said Mohammed Mohaddessin, the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Iranian National Council of Resistance (NCRI), the main opposition group, who was in London last week to present evidence to MPs.

The NCRI has prepared files on 21 senior members of the regime whom it alleges were "principal protagonists of the massacre", including Mr... Khatami and Ayatollah Ali Khameini, Iran's "Supreme Leader". Mr... Mohaddessin will travel to New York to present the files to the UN and call for a tribunal to try them for crimes against humanity.

Mr... Mohaddessin said human rights abuses were continuing in Iran despite the election of Mr... Khatami, who "presents himself as a reformist".

(The entire article) 

Interesting remarks, but not true about children and if about 30,000 corrupt individuals than what is wrong in it ? About Ayotullah Montazari his own son-in-law was caught conspiring against Ayotullah Khomeini. So, how much can you rely on his opinion that it was not a political remark. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Soldiers and Saffron said:

Remember guys, calling ayatollah Khomeini(رضي الله عنه), a respected maraja and one of the great Islamic champions of modern time, a war criminal and a child killer based on unproven and loose actusations from a group of kafirs who have all reason to want to deframe him is not considered slander or disrespectful at all. Its just respectful disagreement, thats all.

 

Do you see the difference now that I was mentioning before in the other thread? @Sirius_Bright

Firstly, you should understand that every person has different level of respect for different personalities. Eg. Sunnis love Omar, most Shias hate OR both Sunni and Shia consider Abdullah ibne Abbas trustworthy, etc. Same goes with Sayed Khomeini. 

Secondly, There are people on this thread asking if the given source with respect to Sayed Khomeini is valid and if yes, we should judge him as we would have Judge any other person. I also see there's another group who are trying their best to suppress the discussion since it involves Sayyed Khomeini and less credible source. 

Remember, weak source doesn't mean it is false report. If someone is kafir and enemy doesn't mean they are always lying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Sumerian said:

So stop going back on your words. Either it is possible to be independent or it isn't. If Iran is "independent", why can't Iraq be? 

I am wishing it the best of luck, for the umpteenth time. You are right though. If I secretly do not believe in my heart that it actually will be "independent", does it matter? Why it won't be free is because you do not have a Khomeini nor a nation who will rally to a Khomeini's call even if you did have such a person. Your nation had three incomparably better chances very long ago and we know what happened. But by all means, prove my suspicions wrong. Make a return from Australia, giving up your nahi an il munkar against Mr.. Fisk for a while in order to fix Iraq and go ahead. I will pray for you with all my heart. As for my disbelief in such a thing coming to pass, forgive me, will you? I have a realistic mind and I calculate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now back on topic. Lets suppose bad things did happen during the revolution and your sources are fine (lets try to speed things up here a little).

- Did Khomeini alone want the Iranian revolution? One man? Surely there were a whole lot of people. Then, they are all guilty for the injustices that took place during the revolution.

So why single out Khomeini alone?

Secondly, since he IS partly responsible for the wrongs committed, what do you want to do about it? And this is the most important question. I am squirming with anger against all the unjust and the guilty right now, as you wanted, being a proper, orthodox, enlightened Shia.

But now what? Where should I aim this anger you have stirred up in me? Do tabarra against the dhaalims? Make a model of their graves and take it out on them? Please guide me. I hope something good will come of all this new and increased spite in me.

 

Edit: In the meanwhile, I will be at my shrine, repenting. I fear I have my own crimes and sins to ask forgiveness for. As soon as you guide me about the next step, rest assured I shall join you and forget about my own mountains of sins and avenge this dhulm together with you.

Edited by The Green Knight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, The Green Knight said:

Did Khomeini alone want the Iranian revolution? One man? Surely there were a whole lot of people. Then, they are all guilty for the injustices that took place during the revolution.

Ayatullah Khomeini was of course the leader of the revolution and as such, any praise he may receive from such an astounding revolution, likewise should be the criticism on an equal scale. And of course whomever contributed to the revolution should receive their rightful praise or condemnation based on their contribution. 

However I believe we are constantly referring to his eminence as he is the central motivator and also the face of the revolution. And if such executions were made apparent to him which clearly they have then he must speak against them, but instead his ordering of those executions brings forth a higher question.

5 hours ago, The Green Knight said:

So why single out Khomeini alone?

Because in the end it is his orders irrespective of the opinions of others and what may have caused him to hastily order such executions.

5 hours ago, The Green Knight said:

Secondly, since he IS partly responsible for the wrongs committed, what do you want to do about it?

Well I first started this thread, because I wanted to share what I have found of evidence against his eminence as like I said I revere him greatly, however I will not bat a blind eye in certain areas when they bring forth question. 

In turn we see many of our devout Shia whom adore Ayatullah Khomeini and when confronted with such an allegation or criticism against the Islamic republic of Iran and the revolution of 1979 as well as the massacre of 1988 they either dismiss it dogmatically or are in a state of denial as the individual whom they saw as a divine personality is then subject to trial and question. 

Therefore to ease such tension I was hoping to be able to come to a common and reasonable consensus that is sufficient in the eyes of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) in regards to such phenomena.

5 hours ago, The Green Knight said:

But now what? Where should I aim this anger you have stirred up in me? Do tabarra against the dhaalims? Make a model of their graves and take it out on them? Please guide me. I hope something good will come of all this new and increased spite in me.

Certainly Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has placed the emotion of anger within us and such an emotion instead of blinding our hearts should be used as an inextinguishable fire that is harsh on the disbelievers in regards to their deviated ideologies and discrepancies, as well as a force to motivate you to always seek the truth behind every curtain no matter how daunting and lonely the path may be.

Imam Ali ((عليه السلام)) said telling the truth has left me with no friends

Therefore if you cannot channel your anger in the face of tyranny, oppression, and injustice I would say to refrain from entering such discussions.

- as one philosopher states “Those who cannot understand how to put their thoughts on ice should not enter into the heat of debate”.

As the lovers of Ale-Muhammad are invigorated to always be seekers of the truth no matter how unpleasant or uncomfortable it may be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Guest_313 said:

Therefore if you cannot channel your anger in the face of tyranny, oppression, and injustice I would say to refrain from entering such discussions.

How rude sir. I really do not know where to point my channeled anger. Why do you not give me a hint?

Thought you were not afraid of telling the truth even if that leaves no friends.

Oh well. I had to try and seek guidance.

17 minutes ago, Guest_313 said:

Because in the end it is his orders irrespective of the opinions of others and what may have caused him to hastily order such executions.

So if someone orders you to commit murder the law will not hold you responsible?

 

Edit: I think I have found your answer, where I should aim my channeled anger.

17 minutes ago, Guest_313 said:

In turn we see many of our devout Shia whom adore Ayatullah Khomeini and when confronted with such an allegation or criticism against the Islamic republic of Iran and the revolution of 1979 as well as the massacre of 1988 they either dismiss it dogmatically or are in a state of denial as the individual whom they saw as a divine personality is then subject to trial and question. 

So am I supposed to take it out on the nation of Iran? Surely, they did benefit greatly from the revolution and the murder of all those criminals and damaging elements which they have been enjoying the fruits of freedom from since 1979.

No doubt, it IS a war crime, now I understand. Because Believers murdered the agents of Dajjal during their war of revolution and freedom from the Dajjali Shah. Sooooo, that is why these are rather "war crimes"?

Now it all makes sense.

Alright, from now on I will have nothing but ill wishes for Iran as you have wished of me. If I am wrong then do correct me.

Edited by The Green Knight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Green Knight said:

How rude sir. I really do not know where to point my channeled anger. Why do you not give me a hint?

Thought you were not afraid of telling the truth even if that leaves no friends.

Oh well. I had to try and seek guidance.

So if someone orders you to commit murder the law will not hold you responsible?

 

Edit: I think I have found your answer, where I should aim my channeled anger.

So am I supposed to take it out on the nation of Iran? Surely, they did benefit greatly from the revolution and the murder of all those criminals and damaging elements which they have been enjoying the fruits of freedom from since 1979.

No doubt, it IS a war crime, now I understand. Because Believers murdered the agents of Dajjal during their war of revolution and freedom from the Dajjali Shah. Sooooo, that is why these are rather "war crimes"?

Now it all makes sense.

Alright, from now on I will have nothing but ill wishes for Iran as you have wished of me. If I am wrong then do correct me.

I have nothing against Iran or Ayatullah Khomeini I am simply saying that innocent blood no matter how much is shed and for what a greater cause shouldn't be undermined, as for the rest, I feel like I am having to repeat myself of course the revolution was successful and highly beneficial for the Shia and the Iranian people, but the goal is to generate a common consensus which we can seek to alleviate this burden from the slums of history instead of shoving it down the pit of shame, for unjustifiable murder has a price and that price should be paid in this world before the hereafter. 

believers wouldn't murder pregnant women or execute thirteen-fifteen year old's, the evidence is tantamount and you keep trying to generate an answer from me as to what is the action we should take towards the apparent nature of such transgressions against the innocence of certain war victims, which respected brother I have not the answer for, but through ingenious dialogue we can perhaps generate fruitful discussion in its regard.

We may not have identified the cure for scar the that has been left from innocent blood, but we at least now have removed or are working to remove such a stain from our Shia history, many individuals see the eminence of Ayatullah Khomeini as the embodiment of Shia Islam and that is problematic when it comes to the regard of certain past and even contemporary executions, such as the hanging of homosexuals and what may otherwise pertain. Therefore it is imperative to cling to the narrative that everyone is subject to be held accountable under the Islamic jurisdiction and whomever sets those laws is Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) through the tongue of his holy messenger and his immaculate progeny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Green Knight said:

I am wishing it the best of luck, for the umpteenth time. You are right though. If I secretly do not believe in my heart that it actually will be "independent", does it matter? Why it won't be free is because you do not have a Khomeini nor a nation who will rally to a Khomeini's call even if you did have such a person. Your nation had three incomparably better chances very long ago and we know what happened. But by all means, prove my suspicions wrong. Make a return from Australia, giving up your nahi an il munkar against Mr.... Fisk for a while in order to fix Iraq and go ahead. I will pray for you with all my heart. As for my disbelief in such a thing coming to pass, forgive me, will you? I have a realistic mind and I calculate.

We don't need a Khomeini, we need a strong government. That's all. There are many independent countries out there, none of them have Khomeinis in them, Iraq can and should be one of them. 

I don't know who Mr.. Fisk is. brò ur jokes are lame as hell ngl lool

Edited by Sumerian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sumerian said:

I don't know who Mr... Fisk is. brò ur jokes are lame as hell ngl lool

I agree with the brother the jokes are a bit crude and unnecessary considering the severity and importance of the topic we are discussing at hand, I understand that we will most evidently disagree in certain conjectures however it is imperative that we maintain the mannerisms of dialogue that our holy Prophet and Imams so eloquently personified.

@The Green Knight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Sumerian said:

Huh? It depends which Lebanese you are talking about. Certainly alot of the current protesters are not in favour of Iran, nor are the supporters of the March 14 Alliance. 

This is a poll conducted in 2013 regarding the views of Lebanese citzens towards Iran:

Iran-03.png

 

There are more Shia in Lebanon than any other group. Christians don’t make 50% anymore. Which simply means the majority of Lebanon favors Iran.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ibn Al-Shahid said:

There are more Shia in Lebanon than any other group. Christians don’t make 50% anymore. Which simply means the majority of Lebanon favors Iran.

There are apolitical people, non-sectarian people, and people from other sects, like Druze. Also, Hezbollah as a group has more favourability in Lebanon than Iran, so it isn't the case that loving Hezbollah = loving Iran. 

What we are seeing now in Lebanon is the tide is turning against the political establishment anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ibn Al-Shahid said:

There are more Shia in Lebanon than any other group. Christians don’t make 50% anymore. Which simply means the majority of Lebanon favors Iran.

There are 54% Muslims in Lebanon out of which 27% are Shia (as per statistics available at wikipedia).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Guest_313 said:

Please feel free to consider "Islamic Revolution" as "Revolution", if you think that out of 100's of Mujtahideen & Jurists, there is just one person who stood against oppression & crimes against humanity. 

You know what would that mean? The majority of scholars in Iran, whom people used to select for taqleed, were unjust & criminals. 

Do you want to come to this conclusion?

Edited by Cool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Cool said:

Do you want to come to this conclusion?

Or do you want to say that majority of assembly of experts remained silent & have watched the crimes and continued to obey Ayatullah Khomeini by ignoring this clear command of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى):

وَلَا تُطِعْ مَنْ أَغْفَلْنَا قَلْبَهُ عَن ذِكْرِنَا وَاتَّبَعَ هَوَاهُ وَكَانَ أَمْرُهُ فُرُطًا

18:28 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Guest_313 said:

however I do have questions which I posed.

Ok, with these questions in mind, where you want to take us? 

Should we quit following scholars and assume them as unjust, criminals, cowards who cannot stand against oppression & crimes against humanity, yet teach the people same things?

All of them (even today's scholars), who are involved in hiding the alleged crimes of late Ayatullah and prefer to remain silent on this issue, are supposed to be involved in his alleged crimes. 

See where you're taking us. 

Edited by Cool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Cool said:

Ok, with these questions in mind, where you want to take us? 

Should we quit following scholars and assume them as unjust, criminals, cowards who cannot stand against oppression & crimes against humanity, yet teach the people same things?

All of them (even today's scholars), who are involved in hiding the alleged crimes of late Ayatullah and prefer to remain silent on this issue, are supposed to be involved in his alleged crimes. 

See where you're taking us. 

I don't understand the issue here. You want people to stop discussing the topic because you're scared of the potential conclusions? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Mahdavist said:

I don't understand the issue here. You want people to stop discussing the topic because you're scared of the potential conclusions? 

 

I am neither stopping anyone nor am I scared of anything.

Fact of the matter is that "Islamic Revolution" is still popular and Ayatullah Khomeini is still popular and seen as role model in Iran. Majority of people don't even consider these sort of reports neither do I.

Isn't it important to view the "potential conclusion"? Whether it is leading us to the truth or not? If potential conclusion is truth, we have no option but to accept it. If the potential conclusion leads us to falsehood, or if there are chances that it may leads us to falsehood, what would be those factors & what we are ignoring in such case? 

Perhaps the potential conclusion which I have drawn suits more to those who have made this thread. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Guest_313 said:

I don’t have a conclusion,

Then you have wasted everyone's time. Stirred anger and hatred against a dead person holding him responsible singling him out. Condemned a whole nation's historical effort to secure freedom from tyranny and western puppeteering. Perhaps you are telling Iraq not to bother? In a revolution, people will die but you expect fallible masses to either do it like Fatah Mecca, a perfect conflict, or live on their knees under the west. Quite obviously. But you have no conclusions. Other than the ones you have given anyway. Or you are unable to share them. Now you can complain more about criticism.

Now man up and share your "potential conclusions". Or make an apology for wasting our time and criticizing an individual incomparably better than yourselves. If you have "no conclusion" then what the heck is it other than your problems with the Iranian revolution and your love for Shah and Imperialism?

Don't leave us without a direction like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...