Mahsa Amini, 22-year old Iranian, dies after morality police arrest

[Ashvazdanghe]

On 12/23/2022 at 5:33 AM, kadhim said:

I’m being completely fair. Sometimes the truth is painful like that.

There was a reasonably well-trained and well-armed Afghani army. We spent 20 years building it up. 

It could have defended the country from the Taliban, but it didn’t even fight. 

Why? 

 

Salam it's same fate of any country which it's army has been trained & armed by westerners specially America which it has happened in Iran during world war II which after invasion of Britain & Russia to Iran so then so called well trained & well armed so called army of Iran withouth fighting has collapsed which in similar fashion it has happened about Iraq because it's army  has been well trained & armed by westerners& easterners specially by cooperation America & soviet union & support of Zionist Israel  for fighting against Iran & it's people which i's army easily has collapsed after attacking coalition of America & european countries which same thing has happened about libya too which also well trained & armed Iranian army by America during Shah has joined to people of Iran for defending it's land & religion because Imam Khomein (رضي الله عنه) & later Imam Khameni have became it's real leaders .

Quote

Because the Taliban made deals with the heads of all the tribes, and the heads of the tribes told the soldiers from their respective tribes to stand down. Hell. Even the Shia tribes made deals, from what I understand. No one put the country over tribe, so that was game over.

It's an accusation against shia people of Afghanistan which surly only few tratitors maybe have made deals with Taliban but on the other hand majority of Shias of Afghanistan couldn't fight with taliban because before Taliban American backed of Ashraf ghani government has arrested some of leaders of Shia fighters & unarmed Shia tribes inside afghanistan also his amercian backed  government has announced any Shia warior specially Fatemiyoun as terrorists by order of Amercia so then gave Afghanistan to Taliban by order of America.

On 12/23/2022 at 5:33 AM, kadhim said:

Honestly. What are outsiders supposed to do to save these women when their own fathers and grandfathers sell them out? 

It’s just a broken culture, unfortunately. 

It has happened due inhuman sanctions of westerners specially America against people of Afghanistan under guise of figting with Taliban although everyone knows that Taliban has been creation of America-KSA-Pakistan which it has conquered Afghanistan by their support for giving totall control of Durand line to Pakistan & filling it with anti shia groups by KSA & Pakistan for using it against Iran by support of America & zionist Isreal.

[Irfani313]

On 12/21/2022 at 4:48 PM, kadhim said:

Oh come on.

Second. You know full well that the west spent 20 years of blood and treasure trying to work with partners to build something in Afghanistan. 20 years. Western people put in a lot of caring into Afghanistan.

Is this sarcasm or is this for real? Can people be this gullible in this day and age of almost grassroots info access? Could some effort be made to get to a bit tangent from the Fox’s line?? 

[Allah Seeker]

20 hours ago, Abu Hadi said:

The ones sentenced to death were the ones who either 

A) Killed Police Officers

B) Did destruction in a way that lead to deaths of innocent people

In the US (if you live in a State that allows the death penalty, which is about 1/2 the US States), the same thing would happen if someone did this. I think in almost all countries in the world a similar penalty would happen for this crime. In Iran, executions are public. In Iran, they execute by hanging. In the US, it is by lethal injection. Both forms of death penalty are about as painful and the person takes about the same amount of time to die. In the US, about 120 years ago, they would execute people by hanging. They switched to lethal injection because of groups like the KKK who would hang innocent black people. So the Govt didn't want to be associated with that. Otherwise, they would be hanging people to this day. In the US, they are public if you are a victim's family member, lawyer, etc. So there isn't much difference. 

The only difference is that the US Media has a much larger microphone to yell from. Iran doesn't. That's the only difference. 

When you have terrorist groups going around a country killing police officers and burning down neighborhood, the govt is going to deal with that by giving harsh penalties. Any Government. 

I just hope no innocents get killed

[Haji 2003]

Change location and the protestors are not so nice any more

worth remembering that those who observe hijab consider it to be a mark of civilisation.

[kadhim]

7 hours ago, Irfani313 said:

Is this sarcasm or is this for real? Can people be this gullible in this day and age of almost grassroots info access? Could some effort be made to get to a bit tangent from the Fox’s line?? 

Thank you for your contribution.

[Haji 2003]

 

[Eddie Mecca]

@khizarr, George Galloway video in 3, 2, 1...'Belligerent Western Intervention Policy In Iran, Syria & Venezuela' (7 min.)

 

[Haji 2003]

Plus ca change plus c'est la meme chose

The more things change the more they are the same.

The following extract is from a text published in 1983. At the time the challenge to the IRI was from both the Communists and Western powers.

 

[VoidVortex]

Women with inadequate hijab should not be accused of being irreligious & against Revolution - Khamenei.ir

[علوي]

https://www.instagram.com/reel/CnEI3LdKexz/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link

[علوي]

‘Death to’ posts OK for Iran leader, Meta told

Quote

...Facebook...had deleted a cartoon that depicted Khamenei as oppressing women...[T]he cartoon...wished death on the “anti-women Islamic government” and its “filthy leader Khamenei,” according to the Oversight Board.

While Meta initially said the post violated their policy on “Violence and Incitement,” the decision was quickly reversed on grounds of “newsworthiness,” according to the company.
...
“In the context of the post, and the broader social, political and linguistic situation in Iran, ‘marg bar Khamenei’ should be understood as ‘down with’. It is a rhetorical, political slogan, not a credible threat,” the board wrote. 

https://www.rt.com/news/569670-meta-iran-death-speech/

[Zainuu]

This discussion has already gone 26 pages but to no avail. Those who don't have brains will never accept, understand and admit the reality. They will keep on spitting out this jargon like "get out of jail free card" but they won't present evidence to support their claims.

On 12/18/2022 at 8:56 PM, kadhim said:

I would recommend to be a little more skeptical. 

There’s actually a massive amount of research out there about how easy it is to coerce a confession. Even without physical torture to help coax it along. 

https://jaapl.org/content/37/3/332

https://www.apa.org/news/podcasts/speaking-of-psychology/false-confessions

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7937609/

 

They will turn all evidences aside in the name of skepticism because some research papers say that confession can be coerced. I mean literal there is a video footage of the murder, but MAN, we are blind.

In this way, all the jargon can be easily thrown into the dustbin because of the inherent bias that lies behind every post.

On 12/22/2022 at 3:18 AM, kadhim said:

Second. You know full well that the west spent 20 years of blood and treasure trying to work with partners to build something in Afghanistan. 20 years. Western people put in a lot of caring into Afghanistan. But then they watched what was built fold without a fight within days. I feel for the suffering of the people of Afghanistan, but at a certain point it’s hard to care more about a country than that country cares about

And it then becomes sickening how on the other hand, same people who don't spare a chance to attack IRI are seen blatantly defending an invasion as 'help' and blaming the 'failure of a state' on those invaded oppressed civilians of that state. SHAME.

So, was Iraq a fault of Iraqis, Libya a fault of Libyans. Who is US to teach the world manners? 

We're they helping when they created the Afghan resistance that later on turned into Al Qaeda and factions of it rose up as Taliban?

Were they helping by creating concentration camps like Abu Ghureib in Iraq and later creating ISIS?

Were they helping by allowing slave markets in Libya? Is this the democracy they brought?

Iraqi Army was trained by US. It fell within days.

Kurds are trained by the US, they fell within days in front of ISIS.

What else?

Let me share an interesting example:

A man married a woman and later divorced. He called that woman treacherous. Everyone agreed.

He later married another woman and divorced again. He blamed that also on her. Everyone agreed.

He again married and divorced. This time he was unable to hide the faults within him.

 

For US, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria were no places of charity but just a means to expand their sphere of influence in the middle-east and the control the state of affairs in the region. And US CANNOT HIDE IT ANYMORE.

[Ashvazdanghe]

 

Iran warns France over ‘insulting’ ayatollah cartoons in Charlie Hebdo

Iranian foreign minister promises ‘decisive and effective response’ to caricatures of Ali Khamenei.

Quote

Paris chose “the wrong path” in allowing the publication of “insulting” cartoons of Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in French satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo, Iran Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian said Wednesday.

 

Quote

“The insulting and indecent act of a French publication in publishing cartoons against the religious and political authority will not go without a decisive and effective response,” Amir-Abdollahian tweeted.

“We will not allow the French government to go beyond all bounds,” he wrote, adding: “They have definitely chosen the wrong path.”

The drawings were selected as part of a competition launched by the French publication last month, which called on press cartoonists to send their “funniest and meanest caricature of Ali Khamenei.”

Quote

“Caricatures are something that is almost part of a political weapon used by the mullahs, so we used it too, against them,” explained the cartoonist Laurent Sourisseau, who goes by his artist name “Riss.”

 

https://www.politico.eu/article/france-charlie-hebdo-ayatollah-ali-khamenei-insulting-cartoons-iran-foreign-minister-hossein-amir-abdollahian-warns/

French magazine Charlie Hebdo stirs controversy with 'vulgar' cartoons on Iran's leader Ayatollah Khamenei - All you need to know

Quote

Iran on Wednesday condemned the 'offensive' caricatures of the country's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The magazine has been in the limelight before also when it published another controversial, 'vulgar' cartoon 'mocking' Islamists. 

 

Quote

What is controversial about Charlie Hebdo's latest issue?

The January issue of Charlie Hebdo features the winners of a recent cartoon contest, in which participants were asked to create the most offensive caricatures of Khamenei, who has been the leader of Iran since 1989. The contest was organized as a show of support for the anti-government protests occurring in Iran.

 

Quote

Charlie Hebdo, which has previously published offensive cartoons about dead child migrants, virus victims, neo-Nazis, popes, Jewish leaders, and other public figures, claims to be an advocate for democracy and free expression but frequently pushes the boundaries of French hate speech laws with sexually explicit caricatures that target a wide range of groups. The magazine faced backlash for reprinting caricatures of Islam's Prophet Muhammad, originally published by a Danish magazine in 2005, which were seen as sacrilegious and deeply hurtful to Muslims worldwide, although many Muslims still condemned the violent response to the drawings.

https://zeenews.india.com/world/french-magazine-charlie-hebdo-stirs-controversy-with-vulgar-cartoons-on-irans-leader-ayatollah-khamenei-all-you-need-to-know-2558398.html

https://www.al-monitor.com/originals/2023/01/charlie-hebdos-khamenei-cartoons-stir-storm-between-iran-and-france

[Ashvazdanghe]

[kadhim]

8 hours ago, Zainuu said:

This discussion has already gone 26 pages but to no avail. Those who don't have brains will never accept, understand and admit the reality. They will keep on spitting out this jargon like "get out of jail free card" but they won't present evidence to support their claims.

They will turn all evidences aside in the name of skepticism because some research papers say that confession can be coerced. I mean literal there is a video footage of the murder, but MAN, we are blind.

In this way, all the jargon can be easily thrown into the dustbin because of the inherent bias that lies behind every post.

And it then becomes sickening how on the other hand, same people who don't spare a chance to attack IRI are seen blatantly defending an invasion as 'help' and blaming the 'failure of a state' on those invaded oppressed civilians of that state. SHAME.

So, was Iraq a fault of Iraqis, Libya a fault of Libyans. Who is US to teach the world manners? 

We're they helping when they created the Afghan resistance that later on turned into Al Qaeda and factions of it rose up as Taliban?

Were they helping by creating concentration camps like Abu Ghureib in Iraq and later creating ISIS?

Were they helping by allowing slave markets in Libya? Is this the democracy they brought?

Iraqi Army was trained by US. It fell within days.

Kurds are trained by the US, they fell within days in front of ISIS.

What else?

Let me share an interesting example:

A man married a woman and later divorced. He called that woman treacherous. Everyone agreed.

He later married another woman and divorced again. He blamed that also on her. Everyone agreed.

He again married and divorced. This time he was unable to hide the faults within him.

 

For US, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria were no places of charity but just a means to expand their sphere of influence in the middle-east and the control the state of affairs in the region. And US CANNOT HIDE IT ANYMORE.

Salaama.

[kadhim]

9 hours ago, Zainuu said:

blatantly defending an invasion

Just a little note about your historical revisionism parade here. 

The (second) Iraq war in 2003 was an illegal immoral trainwreck. I was proud to march in the streets (probably before you were even born) along with millions of other people to protest and try to prevent the Iraq invasion. Thank you very much and you’re welcome.

The initial invasion of Afghanistan was a very different beast. Afghanistan’s Taliban government in 2001 gave al-Qaeda free rein to attack the US, causing 3000 Americans to be killed. What do you think they should have done in response? The Americans gave the Taliban every opportunity to hand over the al-Qaeda leaders responsible, and they refused outright.

By all standards of international law, as well as, I might add, any interpretation of Islamic law, the invasion of Afghanistan was 100.00% justified. 

That’s just straight up facts, son. 

[علوي]

3 hours ago, kadhim said:

The initial invasion of Afghanistan was a very different beast. Afghanistan’s Taliban government in 2001 gave al-Qaeda free rein to attack the US, causing 3000 Americans to be killed. What do you think they should have done in response? The Americans gave the Taliban every opportunity to hand over the al-Qaeda leaders responsible, and they refused outright.

By all standards of international law, as well as, I might add, any interpretation of Islamic law, the invasion of Afghanistan was 100.00% justified. 

That’s just straight up facts, son.

I'd hate to jump into someone else's conversation, but I'd hate it more to suppress my impatience upon reading this.

Even if we believe 100% of the narrative about 9/11, (which we shouldn't), the invasion of Afghanistan and the invasion of Iraq were both parts of the so-called "War on Terror." You can't condemn one and celebrate the other. Moreover, to believe that the invasion of Afghanistan was just(ified) is just ludicrous. You think the US really cared about the Taliban? Really? Yet after 20 years of being in the country, they didn't achieve their one and only goal? 

Obviously, it could be the case that the US military is just shocking, (which isn't too hard to believe), but there's another, more logical explanation. The military industrial complex made billions of dollars off Afghanistan. Read more here, here, and here.

Quote

These numbers suggest that it is incorrect to conclude that the Taliban’s immediate takeover of Afghanistan upon the U.S.’s departure means that the Afghanistan War was a failure. On the contrary, from the perspective of some of the most powerful people in the U.S., it may have been an extraordinary success. Notably, the boards of directors of all five defense contractors include retired top-level military officers.

https://theintercept.com/2021/08/16/afghanistan-war-defense-stocks/

A success? Really? So that "one and only goal" I mentioned didn't really exist. Well, it did, but it wasn't what the Americans claimed. The goal was to make money. Just like Iraq, just like the entire war on terror. (And Ukraine is the same).

[VoidVortex]

5 hours ago, kadhim said:

 

By all standards of international law, as well as, I might add, any interpretation of Islamic law, the invasion of Afghanistan was 100.00% justified. 

you should have stuck with international law, trying to justify this with Islam, and saying "any interpretation of Islamic law" is not a wise thing to do.

The Prophet certainly would never endorse the American invasion of Afghanistan. The Imam of the time would not. how would they endorse the actions of their enemies. 

Let's not forget who was arming "mujahideen" in Afghanistan to ward off soviets. 

[kadhim]

39 minutes ago, VoidVortex said:

you should have stuck with international law, trying to justify this with Islam, and saying "any interpretation of Islamic law" is not a wise thing to do.

Really? I think it’s a pretty unambiguous, Islam 101 type take, to be honest. Someone attacks your realm, you have a sharii right to take out the ones who are responsible. The Yanks were even pretty generous to give the Taliban an out to just hand al-Qaeda over. 

In my post above, I included a question for anyone who might want to disagree. I think if you want to claim to respond, it’s on you to answer that question. 

What else could the US have reasonably done in the situation? 

[علوي]

2 hours ago, kadhim said:

What else could the US have reasonably done in the situation?

How about, waited a bit longer than four weeks to launch a full-scale invasion of a country which most likely had nothing to do with the attacks? They only set up the 9/11 commission an entire year after the invasion; it was almost 2 years after that when the commission released its report. The US invaded Afghanistan before even knowing that Afghanistan had anything to do with the attacks. So, to answer your question assuming that the American narrative is correct, they could have waited for the report to come out. However, let me elaborate further.

Here's the narrative. The US had a goal; to eliminate the threat that Al-Qaeda posed to its national security. Four weeks after the attacks, an invasion of Afghanistan is announced. The next 18 years is spent looting the country instead of achieving said goal, until the decision is made to withdraw American troops from Afghanistan. The Taliban is still there, just like before 2001; and with a stockpile of American weapons they could have never imagined. These weapons have been left behind by the very people who were claiming to be eliminating the Taliban's threat! Does this make sense to you?! Not only is the Taliban still in control of Afghanistan, but they have all these weapons left behind by the US military! I don't know how to stress this point further. The US wasted 2 decades and 2 trillion dollars only for its goals in Afghanistan to achieve the opposite outcome!

Unless, of course, the desired outcome was not what is publicly professed. Like I mentioned, to the military industrial complex, this war was "an extraordinary success."

4 hours ago, علوي said:

The military industrial complex made billions of dollars off Afghanistan. Read more here, here, and here.

Quote

These numbers suggest that it is incorrect to conclude that the Taliban’s immediate takeover of Afghanistan upon the U.S.’s departure means that the Afghanistan War was a failure. On the contrary, from the perspective of some of the most powerful people in the U.S., it may have been an extraordinary success. Notably, the boards of directors of all five defense contractors include retired top-level military officers.

https://theintercept.com/2021/08/16/afghanistan-war-defense-stocks/

There you have it. The goal was not national security. It was money. 

Therefore, your question holds no weight because the US didn't have to do anything. 

[kadhim]

Cool story, brah. 

[Haji 2003]

 

[Ashvazdanghe]

17 hours ago, kadhim said:

Just a little note about your historical revisionism parade here. 

The (second) Iraq war in 2003 was an illegal immoral trainwreck. I was proud to march in the streets (probably before you were even born) along with millions of other people to protest and try to prevent the Iraq invasion. Thank you very much and you’re welcome.

The initial invasion of Afghanistan was a very different beast. Afghanistan’s Taliban government in 2001 gave al-Qaeda free rein to attack the US, causing 3000 Americans to be killed. What do you think they should have done in response? The Americans gave the Taliban every opportunity to hand over the al-Qaeda leaders responsible, and they refused outright.

By all standards of international law, as well as, I might add, any interpretation of Islamic law, the invasion of Afghanistan was 100.00% justified. 

That’s just straight up facts, son. 

Salam it shows double standars of America & western world which life of white skin blond eye people has more value for them which because people in America & western world have not seen any Iraqi even cursed Saddam as a treat for themselves so therefore common people have opposed invasion to Iraq because ithas been just struggle between  polititians & big weapn industries for war industry & protection of  oil resources of Kuwait but ont he oyher hand America has introduced  9/11 terrorists as Al -qaida & Taliban  members with Afghan origin while CIA & Mossad  have censored presence KSA originated  terrorist for protection of oil fields of KSA which naive people under fake emotional affection which has been made by CIA & Mossad have agreed on invasion  to Afghanistan while they have kept uninformed which Taliban & al-qaida & later Daesh/ISIS have been creation of CIA &Mossad & ikhtibarat (KSA secret service) 

12 hours ago, kadhim said:

Really? I think it’s a pretty unambiguous, Islam 101 type take, to be honest. Someone attacks your realm, you have a sharii right to take out the ones who are responsible. The Yanks were even pretty generous to give the Taliban an out to just hand al-Qaeda over. 

In my post above, I included a question for anyone who might want to disagree. I think if you want to claim to respond, it’s on you to answer that question. 

What else could the US have reasonably done in the situation? 

 

[Ashvazdanghe]

correction  : istikhbarat (KSA secret service) 

[Abu Hadi]

On 1/14/2023 at 7:11 PM, علوي said:

How about, waited a bit longer than four weeks to launch a full-scale invasion of a country which most likely had nothing to do with the attacks? They only set up the 9/11 commission an entire year after the invasion; it was almost 2 years after that when the commission released its report. The US invaded Afghanistan before even knowing that Afghanistan had anything to do with the attacks. So, to answer your question assuming that the American narrative is correct, they could have waited for the report to come out. However, let me elaborate further.

Here's the narrative. The US had a goal; to eliminate the threat that Al-Qaeda posed to its national security. Four weeks after the attacks, an invasion of Afghanistan is announced. The next 18 years is spent looting the country instead of achieving said goal, until the decision is made to withdraw American troops from Afghanistan. The Taliban is still there, just like before 2001; and with a stockpile of American weapons they could have never imagined. These weapons have been left behind by the very people who were claiming to be eliminating the Taliban's threat! Does this make sense to you?! Not only is the Taliban still in control of Afghanistan, but they have all these weapons left behind by the US military! I don't know how to stress this point further. The US wasted 2 decades and 2 trillion dollars only for its goals in Afghanistan to achieve the opposite outcome!

Unless, of course, the desired outcome was not what is publicly professed. Like I mentioned, to the military industrial complex, this war was "an extraordinary success."

There you have it. The goal was not national security. It was money. 

Therefore, your question holds no weight because the US didn't have to do anything. 

There are probably millions of Americans (including myself) who are educated and informed enough to know that the sole purpose of the Invasion of Afghanistan was for the Military Industrial complex to sell weapons, making trillions of dollars in the process. That was the goal and it was achieved. The fact that maybe hundreds of thousands were killed and millions were displaced and robbed of their livelihood is irrelevant to them. They care about their goal only, which is selling weapons. This is the 'Great Satan' Imam Khomeni(رضي الله عنه) spoke about. 

They have enough politicians in their pockets and enough of the American public manipulated into passivity by the media to continue to accomplish their goals. Many people think it is an accident, but it is no accident that the Internet was created by DARPA, a secret wing of the U.S. Military. The purpose of the Internet is twofold, first to continuously monitor public opinion, social movements, etc, on a very detailed and fine grained level in order to see who needs to be manipulated and who can be left alone. Second is to deploy the propaganda, then measure the outcome of that propaganda so that it can be further adjusted based on the incoming data. This is something that has never been possible to such as detailed extent before. The main tool that is being used now to do this is social media (the big platforms). 

The main goal of this manipulation and monitoring is to keep the general public passive and if they don't support the activities of the military industrial complex at least they don't take concrete actions to oppose it. This is 'Big Brother', what George Orwell talked about in his book 1984. It exists, it is real and much more powerful now than it was at the time he wrote the book. 

The dream or goal of the Military Industrial complex is to attack Iran militarily and topple the government. They could, by doing this, force the US government to buy more trillions of dollars in weapons from them. They have been trying to do this since the early 1980s. None of their  attempts have worked so far. The Mahsa Amini thing is just the latest one. 

If you look at the track record of this entity, going back to the Mexican American War of the early 19th century thru WWI, WWII, Vietnam, etc, they have the same strategy. If you want to target a country for military invasion, first demonize the leadership, then demonize the people of that country generally. Once that is accomplished, then start talking about 'Regime Change'. Then, if a police man smacks someone in the street, blow it up to be 'genocide' or close to that. Do this for a while, then the people will be 'groomed' to support an invasion. The mainstream press and media, and now the spam bots are the willing accomplices and the instruments of the grooming process. 

If you want further information on this, there have been many books written about this process. The most recent one is Howard Zinn's 'Peoples History of the United States'. Another good book is Noam Chomsky's 'Manufacturing Consent'. This has been going on for a long, long time. The first victims of this were the Native Americans. This was the Internal Invasion which originally got the military industrial complex going. It has continued from there up until the present day with Iran. 

[Dutchzahra]

On 9/21/2022 at 3:58 PM, GreenTree said:

Freedom for me, but not for others. Western comforts for me, but oppression and discomforts for others. MashAllah

Our shias are so fair 

Salam aleykum sister, I read some of your posts that I want to respond to.

1: Islamic Republic: Many of us live in western countries, but wish to live in an Islamic republic, because the west oppresses Muslims in some way. Double standards are used. Now look, for example, at the rights that one group of people have and the other does not. The holy Quran may be burned or torn up in Western countries that is supposedly expression of opinion, but the Muslims are not allowed to destroy a Zionist or LGBT flag. Women are oppressed in the west. just look at the legal porn industry, modeling world, Hollywood etc. Muslim women are not allowed to wear a headscarf everywhere. They are sometimes even required to take it off. Certain European political parties would like to ban the headscarf or that we should pay taxes for wearing a headscarf. It's going in the worse direction. Racists therefore often shout that we Muslims do not belong here and that we should move to an Islamic country. Which country is ideal for many Muslims? An Islamic republic like Iran, but the dominant west even wants to take that away from the Muslims. The world talks about "Woman Life Freedom" for the women who cannot live in an Islamic republic, but where is the "Woman Life Freedom" for the Muslim women who want to live there? The west feels like a prison and an Islamic republic that feels like freedom. In my opinion it is better that there should be a "Woman Life Freedom" for both groups. The women who cannot live in an Islamic republic must move to Western countries where they can be themselves and practicing Muslims can live in an Islamic republic. Freedom for both. We have lived in Iran for years, but unfortunately we do not have the financial means to live there now. We had to return to the Netherlands. we have 5 children and an Islamic upbringing is really better than in the west. Preserve the Islamic Republic for the Muslims who want it. Although it is not perfect, but it is still better than the western countries.

2: Everywhere in the world there are laws that everyone must abide by. The government's approach is different everywhere. In addition, every police is not the same. we cannot lump them together. We cannot then say that the system in Iran is wrong. I agree that mistreating and torturing people is not always okay, but you need to know the other story as to why it happened. For example, if we look at the protesters. They are not peaceful protesters, but violent rioters. Many people have already been killed by them. women also play a role. they yell for the rioters to kill.

In almost all countries there are laws that we are not allowed to walk naked on the street. We are required to wear clothes. Why then should there not be a law in an Islamic country to also have to wear a headscarf. It is 1 item extra.

[علوي]

"Iran’s unrest triggers explosion of fake news"
- Article on The Grayzone by Setareh Sadeqi and Christopher Weaver -

Setareh Sadeqi discusses the article on Redacted.

[Zainuu]

On 1/15/2023 at 3:38 AM, kadhim said:

What else could the US have reasonably done in the situation? 

Ohhh that's 'sad'. Mazloom US had 'no options' except invading and destroying a country for straight 20 years. WOW. I might never defend my family this much like you are defending US. That's bigotry.

They should have first of all called for an independent critical investigation into the matter to find the real culprits. They could have taken help of the UN agencies like the International Court of Justice if they really cared about International Law. Did they even achieve if they were honestly obeying the law and finding the real trouble makers? Where did they find Laden? Afghanistan or Pakistan?

I am not going into details of that event. But it was used as a political tool and it is not something really complex to understand today.

[kadhim]

2 hours ago, Zainuu said:

They should have first of all called for an independent critical investigation into the matter to find the real culprits. They could have taken help of the UN agencies like the International Court of Justice if they really cared about International Law.

Totally unrealistic nonsense.

I’ll give you a pass though, since you probably weren’t around then, at least not at enough of an age to be conscious. 

[VoidVortex]

3 hours ago, kadhim said:

6 hours ago, Zainuu said:

 

Totally unrealistic nonsense.

why is it unrealistic nonsense?

[kadhim]

50 minutes ago, VoidVortex said:

why is it unrealistic nonsense?

Because that’s not how any of this works.

There was no real confusion over who was responsible and where the responsible parties were. From days after it was quite clear. 

No country would have submitted itself to such a pointless process given that. And especially not a superpower like the US. 

It’s an obtuse suggestion with no connection to the world that exists now or that existed in the days after 9-11. 

[Ashvazdanghe]

10 hours ago, kadhim said:

Because that’s not how any of this works.

There was no real confusion over who was responsible and where the responsible parties were. From days after it was quite clear. 

Salam in opposition to your claim nobody has knew who has done 9-11 which majority of people only knew that terrorists have had Arabian origin until America & Bush have pointed to Afghanistan & Pakistan & Al-qaeda just based on few videos from a group of  people with specific custome of al-qeda members with Pakistani customes  who have celebrated attack which American propganda system has used it for justifying starting attacks to Afghanistan & Pakistan & Iraq but on the other hand it has totally censored presence of KSA originated  of terrorists .

11 hours ago, kadhim said:

No country would have submitted itself to such a pointless process given that. And especially not a superpower like the US. 

LOL ,You sill believe to this joke of "US superpower" & it's military might which only a tyranical regime likewise government of America skips from this pointless process because ironically America & european countries have created this pointless process in order to stop oppressed countries to do anything against them but onth e other hand America & European countries always have  violated such process when they have attacked by a minority group by attacking to whole of people a  country likewise Afghanistan .

11 hours ago, kadhim said:

It’s an obtuse suggestion with no connection to the world that exists now or that existed in the days after 9-11.

America government always compares world with days before & after 9-11 which it has been clearly a catalyst for America to initiate it's preplanned procedure for zionist project of new middle east for supporting zionist Israel under guise of fighting with terrorism & so called Axis of Evil after famous speech of mr. Bush .

[VoidVortex]

19 hours ago, kadhim said:

Because that’s not how any of this works.

There was no real confusion over who was responsible and where the responsible parties were. From days after it was quite clear. 

No country would have submitted itself to such a pointless process given that. And especially not a superpower like the US. 

It’s an obtuse suggestion with no connection to the world that exists now or that existed in the days after 9-11. 

even if this is the case, invading an entire country because of the actions of terrorists is nonsensical. There's no justification for it. It took them 10 years to find Bin Laden and another 10 to pull out. During this time, the military industrial complex was booming from the war that American taxpayer money was funding. 

Afghanistan is one of the many examples of the US government bowing down to its military industrial complex and corporations instead of its people. Eisenhower didn't warn the people of the military industrial complex for nothing!

A waste of 20 years. A waste of many lives. A waste of trillions. 

[kadhim]

20 minutes ago, VoidVortex said:

even if this is the case, invading an entire country because of the actions of terrorists is nonsensical. There's no justification for it. It took them 10 years to find Bin Laden and another 10 to pull out. During this time, the military industrial complex was booming from the war that American taxpayer money was funding. 

Afghanistan is one of the many examples of the US government bowing down to its military industrial complex and corporations instead of its people. Eisenhower didn't warn the people of the military industrial complex for nothing!

A waste of 20 years. A waste of many lives. A waste of trillions. 

It is the case, yes.

The Taliban government of the time had every opportunity to cooperate by turning over the al-Qaeda leadership that they were hosting on their territory. They chose not to, and what happened happened. This is history. 

[Ashvazdanghe]

16 hours ago, kadhim said:

It is the case, yes.

The Taliban government of the time had every opportunity to cooperate by turning over the al-Qaeda leadership that they were hosting on their territory. They chose not to, and what happened happened. This is history. 

Salam thisi is not totally black & white as you have said which me & other users don't support Taliban but it's about culture of  hospitality in Afghanistan which Taliban has been seeing Alqaeda as it's guest in Afghanistan which any host in culture of Afghanistan supports their guests even if that guest be their enemy until their guest is in their house which after 9-11 leaders of Taliban have criticized Al-Qaeda leaders for causing trouble for them while they have been their guests anyway leaders of Taliban have prefferd to not betray to their guests when they have this oppurtunity.