Are the Islamic Republic of Iran and the so called ISIS the same? That is what the arch deceiver, the Zionist thug the anti-American thief and instigator in chief the war criminal Netanyahu would have you believe. He says that though they are opposed to one another they are “branches of the same poisonous tree,” and “they all want to be king of the same hill” Here is an excerpt from a speech given by the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Khamenei (h.a.) in 1996. The topic is women’s educations. As the criminal, corrupt and devious ISIS leaders print magazines claiming that the sexual enslavement of Yazidi women is justified, their arch foes, the ones that have been fighting them in Syria as America dithers, i.e. Iran and Hizbollah have the following views on Islam and women’s education. Please watch the video below carefully:
Excellent article by Rania Khalek on how today’s so called liberal Zionists are using arguments similar those made by proponents of apartheid South Africa to support the subjugation of the Palestinian people.
Rest in peace sweet soul
Like millions others, we at Muslim Perspectives are aghast at the brutal murder of British aid worker Alan Henning.
Henning, from all accounts, is a beautiful soul, who wanted to help those less fortunate than him. He gave his life helping Muslims. Rest in peace beautiful soul, may you return to your Lord in a happy state.
ISIS is evil personified. The murder of Alan and thousands of Muslims and non-Muslims by ISIS is inexcusable. Period. You can put forth any excuse you wish (The Americans are bombing us, they British are killing our civilians so we can kill there’s etc), but none of them hold any water.
The Holy Prophet (p) instructed his (p) soldiers to avoid uprooting vegetation in enemy territory and to never harass civilians, especially women. He instructed them to never kill fleeing soldiers who were leaving the battlefield. When approached by someone, he famously said that Islam means to never get angry.
These fiends, these satanic perpetrators of evil in the name of Islam number about 30,000 at most. The total population of the Muslim world is at 1.6 billion as of 2010 (http://www.pewforum.org/2011/01/27/the-future-of-the-global-muslim-population/). That’s 0.00003% of the total Muslim population. Of course, Zionists and others are delighted because they have the perfect opportunity to malign Islam. The reality is that the existence of ISIS is proof of how peaceful Islam really is. If 1.7 billion Muslims believed that Islam=ISIS, one can imagine what would happen. The world can barely contain 30,000 of these brain washed ISIS cult members.
The fact is that Muslims have been at the forefront of fighting ISIS and dying in the process. Hizbollah, Iran, the Syrian army, the Iraqi army, Hamas (in Gaza) and many Sunni, Shia and Christian brethren in Syria and Iraq are fighting ISIS as we speak.
Racism in the United States is heavily institutionalized. And this latest incident highlights that fact in the most stark, undeniable terms imaginable. A group of black children were walking through a white neighborhood. An NYPD patrol car pulled up behind them. The officer, utilizing the car megaphone, told the kids to leave because they should not be there. Why? No reason. They were black, and they shouldn’t have been there. A resident who witnessed the event was upset. The story wouldn’t be that remarkable if the NYPD had consequently issued a statement promising to look into the accusation. But, here’s where the story gets unbelievable: when confronted with the incident, commanding Officer Captain Frank DiGiacomo defended his officer’s actions instead of promising to investigate them:
Most of the crimes that happen in our command are from outside people committing the crimes,” DiGiacuomo said, according to DNAinfo. “If [teens] are not playing basketball, you’re not playing soccer, you’re not doing something productive in the neighborhood, I can see [officers] moving them.
So, the question then arises: how did the officer know the kids were “outside” people? Because they were black of course. See? So easy. Unbelievable.
Of course, I can almost hear some Fox News anchor shake her coiffed, blonde hair and roll her eyes in disdain. If America is so racist, she will ask, how come we have a black President? The answer may be simple: Obama was voted into office by minorities and young people, both white and otherwise. Institutions in the country are run predominantly by white men aged 45-60 (Gardiner, 2004). Guess who runs American institutions? Yup. Older white men who voted for Romney and don’t care much for Obama. Thus institutional racism in the U.S. is well entrenched, and will remain around for at least another generation. It can also potentially be extended, because studies (look it up don’t have them at my finger tips) shown that people in general and white men in particular tend to become conservative as they grow older, and in the U.S. that means more racism.
You can read the full story here.
Gardiner, Stephen M. “The Global Warming and the Dangerous Illusion of the Kyoto Protocol.” Ethics & International Affairs. 1. (2004):23-58. Web. 10 September 2014.
Her hand note reads: Try not to call him a NetanYAHOO
“We don’t believe that Prime Minister Netanyahu or anyone else from Israel is suggesting that the United States launch a military campaign against Hamas.” (You can read the full story here).
Thus spoke U.S. State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki, reflecting a spat between the Obama administration and the crazy loon with the appropriate phonetic “yahoo” at the end of his name, Zionist Netanyahu.
Now, before you get all excited about any rifts between the U.S. and Israel that would be game changing in terms of geopolitical realignment, please keep in mind that Presidential spats with crazy Zionists do not alter the basic framework of a decidedly pro Israeli American foreign policy. If you’re wondering why that is, there is plenty of reading material out there, foremost among which is “The Israel Lobby” by John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt and their brave predecessor and author of “They Dare to Speak Out” former Congressman from Abraham Lincoln’s district Paul Findlay. In fact, Obama’s disdain for Netanyahu (he was infamously caught on a hot mic telling Sarkozy how he truly feels) is nothing new in Presidential history. George Bush, (the father not the son) famously said that he lost his Presidential campaign against Bill Clinton for threatening to remove the Israeli parasite from mother America’s teat. Speaking of Clinton, he was recently caught on a mic expressing his true feelings about the mass murderer with the appropriate “yahoo” at the end of his name. Even George Bush, the ardent Evangelical admitted in his book that he was “disappointed” in Israel’s performance against Hizbollah in 2006. Bush, has coincidentally, converted to Catholicism since, if rumors are to be believed.
However, Psaki is wrong in her assertion that Netanyahu or anyone else from Israel does not want the U.S. to attack Hamas. She knows better. It is in fact a fervent desire of every Zionist, a Ziono wet dream that would be the ultimate fulfillment of every Zionist fantasy. It ain’t happening. I predict an increasingly high pitched cry from the crazy Zionists as shifting demographics in the U.S. and Israel’s increasingly fascist society part ways. Thus, though our earlier assertion (backed by ample evidence from Mearsheimer, Walt and Findlay) is true for the short term, long term there is a potentially catastrophic (from a Zionist perspective) rift in the making.
Kamal Al-Labwani, a senior figure in the so called Syrian opposition recently visited Israel and promised to give the Zionist entity the Golan heights in exchange for “aid.” In doing so, Lawbani has done openly what the Syrian opposition and Israel have been doing in secret for over two years. Simultaneously and not coincidentally, the Jerusalem Post, a Zionist newspaper quoted Israeli officials who warned that apartheid state would not stay out of the Syrian civil war, saying that the “Syrian war is not our conflict but day coming when that may change.” Again, the cooperation has been going on behind the scenes, but this openness is an acknowledgment of the Trojan horse of opposition to ISIS as an excuse to attack the Syrian regime. The problem with that of course, is that Russia and Iran have warned that they will not countenance any such action, thus the Israeli posturing and Labwani’s more open approach- Russian-Ira has no problems with the U.S. bombing ISIS, even if it entails indirect cooperation with the Syrian regime to appease the Zionist lobby in the U.S. and other places. However, the minute the Americans start to shift towards eroding the Syrian government’s power, they will have crossed a red line that will be actively enforced. Given all this, it makes sense that Israel is openly touting its possible intervention in Syria. The goal is o provoke Iran. The Holy Grail of Israeli foreign policy is to provoke a clash between Iran-Hizbollah and the United States. By intervening in the midst of US strikes on ISIS, the Zionist regime hopes to provoke a wider war. War, it must be remembered, is in the Zionist regime’s favor- so long as the killing and dying is done by the Americans, Iranians, Syrian, Russians, and others. The Zionist regime knows that it cannot take on Iran-it can barely take on Hamas and was defeated by Hizbollah. Whatever the case maybe, the Syria opposition have been exposed for hypocrites.They have no problems helping the Zionist state that mercilessly slaughters the children of Gaza to secure political power, political power that they would have gotten through Iranian-Russian sponsored negotiations with Assad once the uprising started, especially when he felt vulnerable and the Syrian oppositions position was apparently stronger. However, Saudi Arabia in tandem with the United States made sure that opposition leaders who were willing to negotiate with Assad to avoid the further bloodshed of innocent Syrian children were ousted. Ahmed Moaz Al-Khatib, the former President of the Syrian opposition alliance had complained of foreign influence that sought to stymie any cooperation between the opposition and Bashar Al Assad. The Syrian opposition has exposed itself. If it cared even one bit for the sovereignty of Syria, for the dignity of Syria or the Syrian people, its senior members would not be slinking off to the apartheid Zionist regime that brutalizes the people of Palestine and offering pieces of sovereign Syrian territory in exchange for crumbs. The Syrian opposition are probably justifying their actions as expeditious- the way they see it, the enemy of my enemy is my friend, even if that friend is the devil himself. They, should, however, come to their senses and study history. Such partnerships exact a heavy price. They will come to regret their treason against the Syrian people, but by then it will be too late.
According to a press release by Press TV (there is very little information apart from the surgery being successful alhamdulillah) Imam Khamenei (h.a.) has undergone successful prostate surgery. You can read the story here.
Henry Kissinger, a man who should by all rational accounts be convicted as a war criminal (you can read why here) is at it again. He recently gave an interview to NPR in which he argued that Iran is a bigger threat than ISIS:
There has come into being a kind of a Shia belt from Tehran through Baghdad to Beirut. And this gives Iran the opportunity to reconstruct the ancient Persian Empire — this time under the Shia label — in the rebuilding of the Middle East that will inevitably have to take place when the new international borders [are] drawn. Because the borders of the settlement of 1919-’20 are essentially collapsing.
That gives Iran a very powerful level from a strategic point of view. I consider Iran a bigger problem than ISIS. ISIS is a group of adventurers with a very aggressive ideology. But they have to conquer more and more territory before they can became a strategic, permanent reality. I think a conflict with ISIS — important as it is — is more manageable than a confrontation with Iran.
What an absolutely idiotic statement. Let’s first address the most obvious: Iran’s defense budget is slightly ahead of Sweden’s. Iran has never attacked another country in the past 214 years. Iran’s only crime is that it has dared to support both Shia (Hizbollah) and Sunni (Hamas, Islamic Jihad) Muslims against Zionist aggression. What is this empire that Kissinger talks about? And if it is a “Shia empire,” then how does he explain the dichotomy in the Muslim world as described by Alastair Crooke that transcends sectarianism (shia-sunni) and is more about ideology (absolutist (salafi) v. rationalist (shia, sunni))? Iran is, as we speak is helping the people of Gaza (Sunni) fight Zionist aggression. It has condemned the treatment of the Muslims of Burma (Sunni) and it has stood up for oppressed people of Pakistan (Sunni) and against American drone attacks. It has encouraged Shia and Sunni cooperation against the Zionists (Hizbollah and Hamas/Islamic Jihad). Iran’s foreign policy line has been clear from day one of the revolution: all nations, irrespective of religion, sect or creed should have the right to inviolable sovereignty and the right to not be invaded, bombed and have their resources plundered. Ayatollah Khamenei (h.a.) the Leader of Iran put it very succinctly when he said the enmity of people like Kissinger to Iran has nothing to do with “empires” or “nuclear” programs. If Iran declared that it recognizes the usurping, criminal Zionist state and stopped funding and arming the resistance movements that dare stand up to Zionist aggression, all would be forgotten.
The reality is that Kissinger is as usual looking out for Israel’s interests. His talking points are a reflection of that other nut job and war criminal: Netanyahu. Kissinger and his other nut job buddies such as Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz etc. are a bigger threat to American national security than Iran could ever be.