What's new

Shiekh Nimr last speech

you have fully lost your mind.

what you wrote confirms that Sh. Nimr was innocent and his killing is just a political assassination ( and this is what most confirm and believe.)

SHEIKH NIMR has openly told in his sermons what he wanted for his community.
You are fake as you say he was hypocrite. while it is monarchs who are hypocrites.

Saudi monarchs tried to buy Sheikh Nimr but he was a honest and Brave man who could not be bought by Monarchs.

Looting and plundering of Shia Oil Wealth and their rights and then blaming the victim is what that you learnt from the following of the Satan Monarchs.

Martyrdom of Shiekh Nimr at the hands of Monarchs has sealed the imminent downfall of the monarchy.
It will not work for long in saudi.

spread your terrorism and go on rampage in all countries.

Political Assassination ?, you do realize that he was shot during his arrest and he was in a gunfire combat with the local police ? If the case truly was about political assassination, then the police patrol would have just killed him at that time rather than rushing him to the hospital and sending him for trial.

The dead bastard was a terrorist and as a terrorist he should be remembered.
 
Political Assassination ?, you do realize that he was shot during his arrest and he was in a gunfire combat with the local police ? If the case truly was about political assassination, then the police patrol would have just killed him at that time rather than rushing him to the hospital and sending him for trial.

The dead bastard was a terrorist and as a terrorist he should be remembered.

seems you lost your senses.

you cannot fool the world anymore.

Innocent blood cried and bite the monarchs and stamped that monarchy will not prevail for long.


If there are 1000 terrorist like Nimr...we should behead 1000 of them...
We dont need any political activism threatening stability here and turn it into a sh1thole like Iran....

The economy is doing great, money is flowing in, people are happy, few bad apples will be crushed..

We should discuss what Shia terroist have done to Iraq, Syria and to Iran itself..from the progressive Shah era..to the hijack by Khomenist...

This is all terrorism what monarchs have been doing during the centuries. soonest or later monarchy will be history.
 
you cannot fool the world anymore.

Innocent blood cried and bite the monarchs and stamped that bastard monarchy will not prevail for long.

Bastard monarchs can continue with the terror campaign. these are their last efforts.

Hmmmm, I do not know exactly how to convey a logical message to you. Let's start by doing it in points and refrain from using the emotional language and talk in logic.

1- He was a terrorist who plotted to kill police officers in his town.
2 - He was called to present himself to the authorities to check the validity of the first claim (As any police would do in its investigations).
3 - He attacked the local police station with his gang.
4 - While he was chased by the police for his arrest, he started shooting at them.
5 - He was shot and injured. Be smart here and view the logical reasoning.
6 - The police officers could have just shot him dead if they wanted to (politically assassinate) him. Rather, they rushed him for treatment.
7 - He was presented with a trial and found to be guilty.
8 - He was sent to hell with all the other 46 terrorists.
 
seems you lost your senses.

you cannot fool the world anymore.

Innocent blood cried and bite the monarchs and stamped that monarchy will not prevail for long.




This is all terrorism what monarchs have been doing during the centuries. soonest or later monarchy will be history.

This Press TV style repetition de infinitude is getting boring...repeating the same line over and over is not going to change anything...life was normal in Saudi on this execution day and the very next..which means there is no following among Saudi for him...he was just an instigator..

8 - He was sent to hell with all the other 46 terrorists.

Some of those 46 Others were Al Qaida men convicted of terrorist attacks in Saudi - some of which targeting Saudi Shia..
But the Shia whine-o-meter needle is stuck on Nimr...!

King Salman politics are more firm fisted unlike late King Abdullah conciliatory push...Nimr and gang simply miscalculated having beein spoiled by softer attitude during late King Abdullah regime..Even after being convicted....he had one last chance..to withdraw from activism and go under house arrest...

Hmmmm, I do not know exactly how to convey a logical message to you. Let's start by doing it in points and refrain from using the emotional language and talk in logic.

1- He was a terrorist who plotted to kill police officers in his town.
2 - He was called to present himself to the authorities to check the validity of the first claim (As any police would do in its investigations).
3 - He attacked the local police station with his gang.
.

Know the law..Killing security personal is a red line...Even the King cannot pardon such person..because by attacking the very pillar of state security...you have committed high treason...
 
Nimr was under arrest since King Abdullah times. Plus, KSA has no open judicial system. Anyone who oppose the King has to die, simple. Its not Pakistan PTI do dharna infront of Parliament and PML send them home through utilizing political means.
 
This Press TV style repetition de infinitude is getting boring...repeating the same line over and over is not going to change anything...life was normal in Saudi on this execution day and the very next..which means there is no following among Saudi for him...he was just an instigator..

Some of those 46 Others were Al Qaida men convicted of terrorist attacks in Saudi - some of which targeting Saudi Shia.. But the Shia whine-o-meter needle is stuck on Nimr...!

King Salman politics are more firm fisted unlike late King Abdullah conciliatory push...Nimr and gang simply miscalculated having beein spoiled by softer attitude during late King Abdullah regime..Even after being convicted....he had one last chance..to withdraw from activism and go under house arrest...

Know the law..Killing security personal is a red line...Even the King cannot pardon such person..because by attacking the very pillar of state security...you have committed high treason...


Hmmmm, I do not know exactly how to convey a logical message to you. Let's start by doing it in points and refrain from using the emotional language and talk in logic.

1- He was a terrorist who plotted to kill police officers in his town.
2 - He was called to present himself to the authorities to check the validity of the first claim (As any police would do in its investigations).
3 - He attacked the local police station with his gang.
4 - While he was chased by the police for his arrest, he started shooting at them.
5 - He was shot and injured. Be smart here and view the logical reasoning.
6 - The police officers could have just shot him dead if they wanted to (politically assassinate) him. Rather, they rushed him for treatment.
7 - He was presented with a trial and found to be guilty.
8 - He was sent to hell with all the other 46 terrorists.

the problem is that you think others are fool and should not interfere with, since KSA is absolute Monarchy.

Monarchy is an illegal system in the Holy lands and nothing can legitimize it. its survival depends on support from western states like usa, britian, etc.

So why Sheikh or any true Muslim should submit to the Illegal Monarchy ?

His Speeches are proof that he wanted rights for his community.

When did the illegal monarchs address to his cries and demands and stop suppressing his community and started giving the due share of the resources to them?

The world knows Monarchs killed the Sheikh to give lesson to other opponents and not for firing few shots which he actually did not and was framed.

But Allah swt will not let pass this innocent Blood without a backlash. The mighty monarchs cannot sleep with ease now since this Blood has stamped that Monarchy will not prevail in Arabia.

True Muslims in Arabia will definitely struggle against Illegal Monarchs and Allah swt grant victory to the Oppressed when they struggle.
 
Last edited:
This Press TV style repetition de infinitude is getting boring...repeating the same line over and over is not going to change anything...life was normal in Saudi on this execution day and the very next..which means there is no following among Saudi for him...he was just an instigator..

Some of those 46 Others were Al Qaida men convicted of terrorist attacks in Saudi - some of which targeting Saudi Shia..
But the Shia whine-o-meter needle is stuck on Nimr...!

King Salman politics are more firm fisted unlike late King Abdullah conciliatory push...Nimr and gang simply miscalculated having beein spoiled by softer attitude during late King Abdullah regime..Even after being convicted....he had one last chance..to withdraw from activism and go under house arrest...

Know the law..Killing security personal is a red line...Even the King cannot pardon such person..because by attacking the very pillar of state security...you have committed high treason...

you have already proven yourself wrong. see your past posts.

you did not addressed to the demands of the community that is still continuing protests.

The protest against the killing of the Sheikh were Global and definitely will have lasting affects on monarchy. In no way you can justify the monarchy looting the wealth of the community and suppressing it.
 
Let us not worry about whether monarchy is an illegal system or not. Britain is a monarchy but simultaneously birth place of the ‘Magna Carta’ and the parliamentary system. I would let Arab’s decide what they want without any outside interference.

What the world and Saudi neighbours should be concerned about is the interference of Saudis & Iran into affairs of their neighbours. The following article was sent to me by a friend from Washington D.C. My posting it here does not mean that I agree with all of its content nor do I condone attacks on Saudi embassy in Iran. This just makes an interesting read.

Saudi Arabia Is the George W. Bush of the Middle East | Foreign Policy
Saudi Arabia Is the George W. Bush of the Middle East
0


Even for the Middle East, the last few days qualify as a rough patch. Let’s recap: The Saudi government executed a prominent political dissident and religious minority, despite knowing in advance that it would spark domestic and international backlash. In doing so, it made a growing sectarian problem in the region even worse; goaded Iranian hard-liners into storming the Saudi Embassy in Tehran; and severed diplomatic ties with Iran — all while refusing for the past two-and-a-half years to meet directly with Iran to de-escalate tensions. Now decision-makers in Riyadh are claiming to be the victim.

This raises the question: What the hell is Saudi Arabia doing? Unfortunately, the most plausible answers aren’t very reassuring.

Since the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, Saudi Arabia’s top geopolitical goal has been to maximize its power at Iran’s expense. The nuclear deal between the P5+1 and Iran has kicked Saudi Arabia’s fear of Iran’s geopolitical rise into overdrive. Riyadh sees Tehran’s reintegration into global political and economic structures as a threat to its own regional power.

But Saudi Arabia’s paranoia is not solely reserved for Washington’s Iran policy. The Saudi government has viewed most U.S. regional preferences since 2003 as threats to Saudi power, including but not limited to: support for the post-Saddam Hussein government in Iraq; Hosni Mubarak’s overthrow in Egypt (and support for the Arab Spring in general); ending Riyadh’s disastrous military adventure in Yemen; and preferring a political solution over Saddam-style regime change in Syria. American and Saudi interests are diverging on multiple fronts. Riyadh’s latest escalation will exacerbate tensions with Iran in ways that make U.S. diplomatic objectives for Syria and Yemen difficult, if not impossible.

What’s worse is that Saudi Arabia chooses to address its geopolitical fears by promoting anti-Shiite and anti-Iran sectarianism. The Saudi government’s analyses of the situations in Bahrain, Syria, and Yemen have been identical and disturbingly unsophisticated: Shiite Muslims are the bad guys, and Shiite Iran is interfering in Sunni Arab affairs. This message empowers the Middle East’s worst ideologues — the kind who think the Islamic State is admirable and the 9/11 attacks might not have been such a bad thing.

While this may help temporarily deflect domestic Saudi attention from a growing number of self-inflicted wounds — domestic austerity measures, and the wars in Syria and Yemen, to name a few — it also increases the likelihood that a generation of Saudi citizens will come of age identifying with an entitled, militarized, anti-Shiite, anti-Iran view of the region. The possibility of Saudi nationalism resembling a combination of Donald Trump and Osama bin Laden is a terrifying prospect — and not just for Iran.

Yet Saudi Arabia says it doesn’t want to destroy its alliance with the United States, and it doesn’t want war with Iran. So why is it destabilizing the region in ways that make both outcomes more likely?

Simply put, they do it because they know they can get away with it. Saudi leaders, by promoting their extremist Sunni ideology, have already helped produce some of the worst anti-American terrorists with no cost to their alliance with the West. Rather than seek peaceful solutions to the conflicts in Syria and Yemen, Riyadh has thus far refused to settle for anything less than overthrowing Assad and eliminating the Houthis. As it tries to achieve outright victory, Saudi Arabia allies with or turns a blind eye to U.S.-designated terrorist organizations, thereby further destabilizing the region — and Washington does nothing to hold its ally accountable.

Let’s be honest: Unless short-term stability is your only concern, the Saudis have rarely been a force for good in the Middle East. Their regional policies of 2016 are simply more violent versions of policies they’ve pursued for decades. Current and former U.S. officials who have seen the 28 redacted pages of the 9/11 report on Saudi government links to the hijackers seem to agree.

The spin machine that Saudi Arabia is buying in Washington cannot distort the truth: It murdered a political dissident, poured gasoline on fiery sectarianism, incited a diplomatic crisis, and now claims to be the victim. Saudi Arabia has cut its ties to Iran while plunging neck deep into two reckless wars of choice. You could say that Saudi Arabia has become the George W. Bush of the Middle East.

FAYEZ NURELDINE/AFP/Getty Image
 
Last edited:
If there are 1000 Sheikh Nimr..they should all be sentenced to death as well...Nimr supporters should find asylum in Iran!
 
I am not going to go into the rights and wrongs but my inference is that he was a political dissident talking against the state and if left unchecked would have probably caused a lot of unrest in not only KSA but the region, the state dealt with him the way anyone calling for civil unrest and state defiance should be dealt with.
 
I am not going to go into the rights and wrongs but my inference is that he was a political dissident talking against the state and if left unchecked would have probably caused a lot of unrest in not only KSA but the region, the state dealt with him the way anyone calling for civil unrest and state defiance should be dealt with.

Like I have always said ...KSA set a example for Pakistan to follow..when are we executing Mullah Burqa and Mumtaz Qadri??
 
1/8/2016 U.S. in a Bind as Saudi Actions Test a Durable Alliance The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/05/us/politics/usstrugglestoexplainalliancewithsaudis.html 1/5 http://nyti.ms/1kGXk8F POLITICS | NEWS ANALYSIS U.S. in a Bind as Saudi Actions Test a Durable Alliance By DAVID E. SANGER JAN. 4, 2016 WASHINGTON — The Obama administration on Monday confronted the fundamental contradiction in its increasingly tense relationship with Saudi Arabia. It could not bring itself, at least in public, to condemn the execution of a dissident cleric who challenged the royal family, for fear of undermining the fragile Saudi leadership that it desperately needs in fighting the Islamic State and ending the conflict in Syria. The United States has usually looked the other way or issued carefully calibrated warnings in human rights reports as the Saudi royal family cracked down on dissent and free speech and allowed its elite to fund Islamic extremists. In return, Saudi Arabia became America’s most dependable filling station, a regular supplier of intelligence, and a valuable counterweight to Iran. For years it was oil that provided the glue for a relationship between two nations that share few common values. Today, with American oil production surging and the Saudi leadership fractured, the mutual dependency that goes back to the early 1930s, with the first American investment in the kingdom’s oil fields, no longer binds 1/8/2016 U.S. in a Bind as Saudi Actions Test a Durable Alliance The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/05/us/politics/usstrugglestoexplainalliancewithsaudis.html 2/5 the nations as it once did. But the political upheaval in the Middle East and the American perception that the Saudis are critical to stability in the region continue to hold together an increasingly fractious marriage. So when Saudi Arabia executed 47 people, including Sheikh Nimr alNimr, the dissident cleric, on Saturday, beheading many of them in a style that most Americans associate with the Islamic State rather than a close American partner, the administration’s efforts to explain the relationship became more strained than ever. In fact, the executions were the culmination of a series of events in the past few years that have led to clashes between the two nations. “We haven’t been on the same page with the Saudis for a long time,” said Martin S. Indyk, the executive vice president of the Brookings Institution and a former top aide to Secretary of State John Kerry. “And it starts with Mubarak.” In 2011, Saudi leaders berated President Obama and his aides for failing to support President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt during the Arab Spring, fearing Mr. Obama might do the same thing if the uprisings spread to the kingdom. The nuclear deal with Iran only fueled the Saudi sense that the United States was rethinking the fundamental relationship — and Saudi officials, on visits to Washington, openly questioned whether they could rely on their American ally. It was King Abdullah who was quoted in a 2008 State Department cable, released two years later by WikiLeaks, exhorting the United States to “cut off the head of the snake” — Iran — by launching military strikes. He died before last summer’s deal, but Saudi leaders, who still see Iran’s hand behind every destabilizing act in the Middle East, argued that the administration was naïve to think that Iran would abide by any negotiated accord. So ever since that accord was reached in July, the Obama 1/8/2016 U.S. in a Bind as Saudi Actions Test a Durable Alliance The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/05/us/politics/usstrugglestoexplainalliancewithsaudis.html 3/5 administration has been offering reassurance. Mr. Obama invited the Saudis to join a meeting at Camp David to reassure Arab allies that the United States was not abandoning them — and would sell them larger weapons packages than ever before. But the administration has also been sharply critical of the Saudi intervention in Yemen, seeing it as a huge distraction from the bigger battle against the Islamic State. To hear the Americans tell it, the new Saudi leadership struggling for influence under King Salman is headstrong, “more interested in action than deliberation,” in Mr. Indyk’s words. When Mr. Kerry warned the Saudis against executing Sheikh Nimr, a Saudiborn Shiite cleric who directly challenged the royal family, he was ignored. “This is a concern that we raised with the Saudis in advance,” Josh Earnest, the White House press secretary, acknowledged Monday. He said the execution has “precipitated the kinds of consequences that we were concerned about.” But that was about as strongly as the administration was willing to criticize the Saudis. Pressed to condemn Sheikh Nimr’s execution, officials urged calm on all sides. The State Department spokesman, John Kirby, urged the entire region to move on to the business of confronting the Islamic State and dealing with the Syria crisis. “If you are asking whether we are trying to become a mediator in all this, the answer is no,” Mr. Kirby told reporters. “Real, longterm solutions aren’t going to be mandated by Washington, D.C.” Privately, several American officials expressed anger at the Saudis for picking this moment to conduct the executions. They noted that Mr. Obama and Mr. Kerry have been in regular contact with members of the Saudi leadership. Mr. Obama called to urge the Saudis to join the Syrian peace process talks — across the table from the Iranians. Mr. Kerry traveled to Riyadh, the Saudi capital, and later asked the Saudis to organize the Syrian rebels into a single group to negotiate a ceasefire 1/8/2016 U.S. in a Bind as Saudi Actions Test a Durable Alliance The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/05/us/politics/usstrugglestoexplainalliancewithsaudis.html 4/5 with President Bashar alAssad. But the Saudis were reluctant partners, telling their Western counterparts that they would go along, but predicting that Mr. Kerry’s effort would collapse because Iran would never agree to any process that led to Mr. Assad’s removal. Meanwhile, the Saudis’ early participation in airstrikes against the Islamic State petered out as they moved military assets to their campaign against the Iranianbacked Houthi rebels in Yemen. Others who deal with the Saudis say there is a degree of stress on the leadership in Riyadh they have rarely seen before. “The kingdom faces a potentially perfect storm of low oil income, openended war in Yemen, terrorist threats from multiple directions and an intensifying regional rivalry with its nemesis, Iran,” Bruce Riedel, a former senior C.I.A. officer with long experience in the region, wrote Monday. Patrick Clawson, of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, saw a desire to send a pointed message to Washington. The Saudis were saying, Mr. Clawson wrote, that “if the United States will not stand up to Iran, Riyadh will do so on its own.” The Saudi concern that the Obama administration is about to embrace Iran is almost certainly overblown. Since the nuclear agreement, the Iranians have tested ballistic missiles twice, and the administration — after some delays — appears to be readying sanctions in return. And last week, Iranian naval ships fired rockets within 1,500 yards of a United States aircraft carrier group. The supreme leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has ruled out cooperation with the United States — though the Iranians have shown up at the Syria talks. On occasion, American officials muse about whether the United States and Iran might, one day, constitute more natural allies than the United States and Saudi Arabia. But that seems far off. “It’s not as if you have an Iranian alternative,” a senior gulf Arab official 1/8/2016 U.S. in a Bind as Saudi Actions Test a Durable Alliance The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/05/us/politics/usstrugglestoexplainalliancewithsaudis.html 5/5 said recently. “And if you have no alternative, your best choice is to stop complaining about the Saudis.” Eric Schmitt and Julie Hirschfeld Davis contributed reporting. A version of this article appears in print on January 5, 2016, on page A1 of the New York edition with the headline: U.S. Finds Itself in Bind . © 2016 The New York Times Company

Well you arent islamic care taker of everyone..we should sort our country rather than poking nose..mentality like this is what evolves into ISIS terrorism in future! If we go by your thesis of deciding then US is also justifed invading around the world because they think the governments re illegal and need a change! funny stuff!

the problem is that you think others are fool and should not interfere with, since KSA is absolute Monarchy.

Monarchy is an illegal system in the Holy lands and nothing can legitimize it. its survival depends on support from western states like usa, britian, etc.

So why Sheikh or any true Muslim should submit to the Illegal Monarchy ?

His Speeches are proof that he wanted rights for his community.

When did the illegal monarchs address to his cries and demands and stop suppressing his community and started giving the due share of the resources to them?

The world knows Monarchs killed the Sheikh to give lesson to other opponents and not for firing few shots which he actually did not and was framed.

But Allah swt will not let pass this innocent Blood without a backlash. The mighty monarchs cannot sleep with ease now since this Blood has stamped that Monarchy will not prevail in Arabia.

True Muslims in Arabia will definitely struggle against Illegal Monarchs and Allah swt grant victory to the Oppressed when they struggle.
 
Back
Top Bottom