Iranian Chill Thread

[LeGenD]

Interesting, what terms have I substituted to British and American when addressing other users?

As for Isra"el", to me as to many others that regime is not a legitimate one. Therefore I will not make use of the name Israel - which includes a Hebrew word for God, when referring to a usurpatory apartheid entity built upon ethnic cleansing (Al-Nakba), which has kept oppressing a Moslem nation to this day by forcibly depriving it of its most basic rights. Quite similar to how I will not be uncritically endorsing the so-called "Islamic" State's self-designation (hence the quotation marks).

If this comes across as unprofessional, I do not lay claim to professionalism. Nor do forum rules require users to act professionally. By that token hardly a user would qualify so this begs the question why am I in particular being enjoined to opt for professional vocabulary, or shall we say vocabulary conforming to norms promoted by western regimes.

On this occasion, we can emphasize that the Pakistani government is not recognizing Isra"el", meaning that in the Pakistani context, legal nomenclature does not apply to the entity in question.

To speak of zionist regime instead of Isra"el" is therefore considerably more appropriate than rehashing as some here do on a near daily basis, cheap slurs such as "mullah regime" and "mullahs" in reference to the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Not least because these nouns have an anti-clerical if not borderline Islamophobic connotation, as opposed to the term zionist which strictly covers a political, not a religious nor a racial reality.

Those who consider the regime in Tel Aviv as a legal and legitimate political entity, are of course free to do so. For my part, I will prefer to take exception with this standpoint.



This is your opinion, which you're entitled to. I would certainly beg to differ.

If the assertion is true however, then I will simply have followed in the footsteps of the bulk of forum users. Singling me out in this regard seems surprisingly selective.



Might I remind that you dismissed various points on grounds that according to you, they are but claims issued by the Iranian government for internal consumption.

Also I did not treat any source as being automatically wrong for originating from a country whose regime I dislike (note: my issue is with certain regimes, not with peoples). When a source ventures into publishing uncorroborated, tendentious claims without offering a shred of evidence, especially when it exhibits political bias to boot, I shall call it out.

Approving claims by anonymous zionist officials who pretend the F-35 has overflown Tehran yet fail to prove the contention, is akin to categorizing the regime in Tel Aviv as a beacon of truth. I will say that prohibiting readers from questioning this sort of report is not how a debate works.

On a side note, the way in which the above quoted question is formulated tends to suggest you are making a wrong assumption about me. Indeed and as indicated above, I avoid as a matter of principle any and all blanket generalizations about peoples (nationalities, ethnicities, religious communities etc). If needed, I will gladly furnish ample proof to this effect, based on my past contribution at this forum. This cannot be said, by the way, of considerable amounts of forumers whose repeated, explicitly sectarianist and/or racist expletives are here for everyone to see. Thus, I wonder why I should be scapegoated in this respect.



No offence, but I am not forced to accept your commentary on Iran or on the situation in Palestine, even if we assume it is valid. There is no regulation (at the level of the forum or of common rules of debate) stipulating that I must.

Moreover I argued against the points in question using logic and established data when available. I never make blanket assertions.

So allow me to object to the above criticism. If the discussion in the other thread is becoming tiring, you can agree to disagree with me. But kindly do not prohibit others from voicing contradicting views.



Then don't. I will be the last person to request that you repeat yourself.

Speaking of child molesters, one Epstein with Mossad links is believed to have collected kompromats from numerous members of western regime establishments by inviting them to the sinister (quasi-)paedocriminal sessions he staged. Unhindered, for decades, operating out of the city of New York. What kind of a regime will engage in such abominable practices, and what kind of a regime will allow the culprit to act freely on its soil for years?



Is this also an "established fact" that we aren't allowed to question?

I'd invite you to address concrete statements of mine in this area, rather than being content with the sweeping contention that I'm allegedly bent on misleading people.

Through its media mouthpieces, the zio-American empire happens to enjoy a near monopoly across the global media landscape. Thus it says a lot when believers in narratives sponsored by the powers to be, display low thresholds of tolerance towards competing views. Practically all media are repeating their line of thought, yet the slightest room made for alternative information feels unbearable to them. And regimes they support are the ones that launch destabilization operations and wars in the name of "free speech", "democracy" and so on.



Depends what you'll subsume under the term United Nations. On occasions, UN institutions have been right in their declarations whilst on others they haven't.

Like you or any registered member of this website, I would think my ideas are right and opposite ones aren't. To my knowledge this does not represent a breach of forum rulers either.



I have not personally addressed Isra"el"i users as zionists in a systematic manner with the aim of looking down on them. This simply does not apply to me, and as underscored I will only take responsibility for my own actions.

You will respect Forum Rules or you will be booted from this forum. Your call.

Iranian Chill Thread

I think pakistan need America support against India so some of admins here don't want comments against America. I can understand them. They haven't many choices @LeGenD is Saddam of this forum. And it is no joke, neither an insult. He openly praises Saddam Hussain لعنت الله علیه

pdf.defence.pk

I will not remind you again and again.

 

[SalarHaqq]

You will respect Forum Rules or you will be booted from this forum. Your call.

I have respected the rules. Kindly point me to concrete statements of mine when you believe them to be in violation of rules (e.g. if I directly address an Isra"el"i user as "zionist" in a condescending way).

 

[SalarHaqq]

I think pakistan need America support against India so some of admins here don't want comments against America.

I can understand them. They haven't many choices

Gerāyeshāte shakhsi ham naqsh ifā mikonan. Hich be rut nayār, dādāsh.

Vaqti dārāye anjomane khodemun shodim, dar khosuse in pāygāh ye chizi didam tu internet ke bā shomā dustān dar miān khāham gozāsht. Injā nemishe, bedune shak gir midan. Injā āzādie bāyāne mā nesbat be shahrvandāne keshvarāye dige hamishe mahdud va mā dochāre estāndārdāye dogāne khāhim bud.

Zemnan sepāsgozār az hemāyāte shomā va bachehāye dige tu bahsā. Kheili lotf dārin. Khodā negahdāre hameye dustān.

 

[Mehdipersian]

Gerāyeshāte shakhsi ham naqsh ifā mikonan. Hich be rut nayār, dādāsh.

Vaqti dārāye anjomane khodemun shodim, dar khosuse in pāygāh ye chizi didam tu internet ke bā shomā dustān dar miān khāham gozāsht. Injā nemishe, bedune shak gir midan. Injā āzādie bāyāne mā nesbat be shahrvandāne keshvarāye dige hamishe mahdud va mā dochāre estāndārdāye dogāne khāhim bud.

Zemnan sepāsgozār az hemāyāte shomā tu bahsā. Kheili lotf dāri. Khodā negahdāre shomā.

اینجا اوضاع بهتر از انجمن های دیگه هست. به هر حال دوستان زیادی ایران در پاکستان دارد که جلوی نوکرهای غرب و وهابی ها را میگیرند.

 

[Muhammed45]

Russian flying tank dancing in the air

فیلم/ اجرای حرکات نمایشی توسط بالگرد روسی در روستوف

ویدئویی از اجرای حرکات نمایشی توسط بالگرد تهاجمی Mi-۳۵ نیروی هوافضای روسیه در منطقهٔ روستوف را مشاهده می‌کنید.

www.mashreghnews.ir

 

[tsunset]

Iran thwarts massive ISIS bombing plot in Tehran

Iran thwarts massive ISIS bombing plot in Tehran

ISIS planned to detonate 30 bombs simultaneously in crowded areas to create chaos on the one-year anniversary of the death of Mahsa Amini, Iranian intelligence says

new.thecradle.co

https://twitter.com/x/status/1705928188189127013

 

[WudangMaster]

 

[925boy]

Iran thwarts massive ISIS bombing plot in Tehran

Iran thwarts massive ISIS bombing plot in Tehran

ISIS planned to detonate 30 bombs simultaneously in crowded areas to create chaos on the one-year anniversary of the death of Mahsa Amini, Iranian intelligence says

new.thecradle.co

https://twitter.com/x/status/1705928188189127013

Solid intelligence operation by MOIS. Btw where are those people who says that NATO isnt ISIS's daddy? Smh.

 

[LeGenD]

Interesting, what terms have I substituted to British and American when addressing other users?

As for Isra"el", to me as to many others that regime is not a legitimate one. Therefore I will not make use of the name Israel - which includes a Hebrew word for God, when referring to a usurpatory apartheid entity built upon ethnic cleansing (Al-Nakba), which has kept oppressing a Moslem nation to this day by forcibly depriving it of its most basic rights. Quite similar to how I will not be uncritically endorsing the so-called "Islamic" State's self-designation (hence the quotation marks).

If this comes across as unprofessional, I do not lay claim to professionalism. Nor do forum rules require users to act professionally. By that token hardly a user would qualify so this begs the question why am I in particular being enjoined to opt for professional vocabulary, or shall we say vocabulary conforming to norms promoted by western regimes.

On this occasion, we can emphasize that the Pakistani government is not recognizing Isra"el", meaning that in the Pakistani context, legal nomenclature does not apply to the entity in question.

To speak of zionist regime instead of Isra"el" is therefore considerably more appropriate than rehashing as some here do on a near daily basis, cheap slurs such as "mullah regime" and "mullahs" in reference to the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Not least because these nouns have an anti-clerical if not borderline Islamophobic connotation, as opposed to the term zionist which strictly covers a political, not a religious nor a racial reality.

Those who consider the regime in Tel Aviv as a legal and legitimate political entity, are of course free to do so. For my part, I will prefer to take exception with this standpoint.

British Empire created modern Palestine by splitting Transjordan in 1922 as per the Balfour Declaration. The rationale behind this partition was to create a separate Jewish state (1). This piece of land was a part of the Ottoman Empire in earlier times and its ownership shifted throughout history. This piece of land have historical, religious, and spiritual significance for Jews from the time of the Hebrew Conquest of ancient Palestine - then known as the Philistines having created a conglomeration of city-states in the region. Prophet Musa (Moses) AS secured freedom of Hebrews from the ancient Egyptian Empire with guidance of Allah Almighty. Hebrews initially settled in the Sinai Peninsula but Allah Almighty instructed these people to take their chances with the Philistines to ensure their survival - this was the promised land.

Surah Al-Ma'idah - 21 - Quran.com

O my people! Enter the Holy Land which Allah has destined for you ˹to enter˺. And do not turn back or else you will become losers.”

quran.com

Surah Al-Ma'idah - 22 - Quran.com

They replied, “O Moses! There is an enormously powerful people there, so we will never ˹be able to˺ enter it until they leave. If they do, then we wil...

quran.com

Surah Al-Ma'idah - 23 - Quran.com

Two God-fearing men—who had been blessed by Allah—said, “Surprise them through the gate. If you do, you will certainly prevail. Put your trust in Alla...

quran.com

Surah Al-Ma'idah - 24 - Quran.com

˹Yet˺ they said, “O Moses! ˹Still˺ we will never enter as long as they remain there. So go—both you and your Lord—and fight; we are staying right here...

quran.com

Surah Al-Ma'idah - 25 - Quran.com

Moses pleaded, “My Lord! I have no control over anyone except myself and my brother. So set us apart from the rebellious people.”

quran.com

Surah Al-Ma'idah - 26 - Quran.com

Allah replied, “Then this land is forbidden to them for forty years, during which they will wander through the land. So do not grieve for the rebellio...

quran.com

Jews managed to establish a kingdom on the promised land eventually. But corruption and mischief was the order of the day including distorting scriptures in their misguided beliefs. Allah Almighty warned these people that they will face punishment for being arrogant and corrupt and loose what they hold so dear as was the fate of other corrupt kingdoms throughout history - this punishment came in the form of destructive wars and the kingdom collapsed circa 63 BC. But Allah Almighty have not ruled out the possibility of existence of these people in the promised land.

Surah Al-Isra - 103 - Quran.com

So Pharaoh wanted to scare the Israelites out of the land ˹of Egypt˺, but We drowned him and all of those with him.

quran.com

Surah Al-Isra - 104 - Quran.com

And We said to the Children of Israel after Pharaoh, “Reside in the land, but when the promise of the Hereafter comes to pass, We will bring you all t...

quran.com

Prophet Suleiman (Solomon) AS created a place worship for the believers in the promised land. This place of worship came to be known as the Temple of Solomon (Jewish traditions) and the Farthest Mosque (Holy Quran). This holy site was the first Qibla for the believers. Holy Prophet (PBUH) had a clear view of the ruins of this holy site during Safar-e-Meraj. Allah Almighty highlighted the history of the promised land in Surah al-Isra, but Allah Almighty instructed Holy Prophet (PBUH) to shift Qibla to the other holy site Ka'bah (Kaaba) in Mecca in 624 CE. This shift happened after Safar-e-Meraj but before the Battle of Badr.

This shift was aimed to teach Muslims to give more importance to spirituality than physical objects of worship and vice versa. This world is a temporary abode for all humans and one should be concerned about how he will be judged by the Allah Almighty after resurrection. More on this theme in following post:

Arab journalist asks Imran Khan "If he would use nuclear weapons against Israel if it attacked its neighbors", watch his response

I think balance as a bare minimum. Our laws should be Islamically influenced even if not entirely accurate. I'm not saying go full Taliban mode of course You have 3 alt accounts which you even use to talk to yourself and support your own arguments lmao Hop off and seek medical help 😆 The...

pdf.defence.pk

Zionist movement commenced due to mistreatment of Jews in Russia when Russian Tsarists were in power - related information including visual evidences in here. Zionists convinced the British to help create a Jewish state in the promised land in exchange for financial support as noted in here - refer back to (1) above.

Legitimacy of a state is established with international recognition in United Nations (UN) in modern times - this practice has continued since 1947. Israel received international recognition as a state in UN Resolution 181 in 1948. This is a fact that cannot be denied. But UN decided to split modern Palestine into two states in view of growing tensions between Muslim and Jewish communities on the ground: Palestine and Israel with Jerusalem under UN control. Related information in here.

This development was not rationally handled at the time - a group of Islamic countries attempted to wipe out Israel in 1948 but the war concluded with Israel gaining more lands including access to Jerusalem and defeat of invading sources.

Before that, Hitler attempted to wipe out Jews in Europe but the World War 2 concluded with his defeat and death.

There must be something more at play in these matters - something beyond humans. Allah Almighty is the Lord of mankind, not only Muslims. Allah Almighty have given so many lands and resources to Muslims and even changed Qibla for Muslims to facilitate interfaith harmony, but some are not content.

Perhaps [our] hot-headed approach to address this issue is wrong. Zionist aim is to recreate a kingdom of Jews in the promised land. This is it.

Two state solution would have worked if war had not broken out, but this is no longer the case. Now one-state solution might work. The objective should be to put pressure on both parties to accept each other and declare Masjid Al-Aqsa a World Heritage Site. Jews have pointed out that they can rebuild their Temple next to Masjid Al-Aqsa.

So what is the problem? Nothing remains the same in this world. Everything changes in time.

You and your kin need to discuss this matter in sensible manner - the "usurpatory apartheid entity" narrative is a half-baked hot-headed take on the issue. This is not your personal problem for which you are getting so worked up in your talks. This forum has rules and you need to respect them. There are better ways to discuss this topic.

Ethnic / political / nationalistic hate

Needless to say, PDF wishes to be a productive exchange of ideas and not a place of spreading communal, national, political or religiously motivated hatred. Members found involved in such activities would be severely penalized.

Pakistan not recognizing Israel is not an excuse for members of this forum to violate Forum Rules while discussing this topic and otherwise. I have soft corner for the only Palestinian member of this forum (@Falcon29) due to his nationality, but I have not given OP permission to violate Forum Rules in his talks here. I have a principled stand on these matters in view of established Forum Rules.

WE have given Iranian members much Freedom of Expression here but WE can see what is going on here - a vicious campaign to malign other countries and make excuses for tyrants because they are in good books of Iran. The moral high ground, not.

This is your opinion, which you're entitled to. I would certainly beg to differ.

If the assertion is true however, then I will simply have followed in the footsteps of the bulk of forum users. Singling me out in this regard seems surprisingly selective.

Opinion? I established a number of my positions with evidence but you refuse to see it and keep on repeating same lines again and again. I spent days to collect evidence to address your statements only to see you deny valid points and stick to your positions on nationalistic grounds. I saw a pattern and I felt that my time is better spent on other more pressing matters. This was not a good debating experience.

Might I remind that you dismissed various points on grounds that according to you, they are but claims issued by the Iranian government for internal consumption.

Also I did not treat any source as being automatically wrong for originating from a country whose regime I dislike (note: my issue is with certain regimes, not with peoples). When a source ventures into publishing uncorroborated, tendentious claims without offering a shred of evidence, especially when it exhibits political bias to boot, I shall call it out.

Approving claims by anonymous zionist officials who pretend the F-35 has overflown Tehran yet fail to prove the contention, is akin to categorizing the regime in Tel Aviv as a beacon of truth. I will say that prohibiting readers from questioning this sort of report is not how a debate works.

On a side note, the way in which the above quoted question is formulated tends to suggest you are making a wrong assumption about me. Indeed and as indicated above, I avoid as a matter of principle any and all blanket generalizations about peoples (nationalities, ethnicities, religious communities etc). If needed, I will gladly furnish ample proof to this effect, based on my past contribution at this forum. This cannot be said, by the way, of considerable amounts of forumers whose repeated, explicitly sectarianist and/or racist expletives are here for everyone to see. Thus, I wonder why I should be scapegoated in this respect.

I have a reason to - Iranian leadership is focused on cultivating the image that its defenses are impregnable, which is unrealistic. Sounds familiar in fact. It is expected from other countries to provide information that Iranian leadership will not. Israel has uncovered and disclosed Iranian secrets from time-to-time: see Example 1, Example 2, and Example 3. This is how it is.

American stealth aircraft have proven themselves in all manner of conflict zones, but Iran stronk. You need to see live footage of American stealth aircraft penetrating Iranian defenses? This is unlikely. Operations involving stealth aircraft are not made public at the time of action. You can find books, magazines, papers, and videos that provide scientific explanation of stealthy applications - these will add to your knowledge.

Israel does not discuss its top secret missions - this is openly stated in various sources. But American and Gulf sources have shed light on some of these missions at times. This is how it is.

Your conversation ethic is decent - this is noted and appreciated.
All you need to do is to reflect on the problems that I have highlighted and show improvements.
What I am pointing out to you - is valid for other Iranian members as well. You are not being singled out in this matter.

No offence, but I am not forced to accept your commentary on Iran or on the situation in Palestine, even if we assume it is valid. There is no regulation (at the level of the forum or of common rules of debate) stipulating that I must.

Moreover I argued against the points in question using logic and established data when available. I never make blanket assertions.

So allow me to object to the above criticism. If the discussion in the other thread is becoming tiring, you can agree to disagree with me. But kindly do not prohibit others from voicing contradicting views.

The unspoken rule of a debate is to establish facts. I tend to accept valid points of virtually any member in my conversations. I have accepted your valid points before - have I not? This is important to have productive conversations.

If you are not willing to accept facts and figures that are brought to your attention in a debate then it is impossible to have productive conversations with you. This is one of the concerns that I have raised here. Otherwise, what is your purpose here? Indoctrination?

Indoctrination

Sharing of information garnered at indoctrination of the public are not allowed. That includes political / religious / ethnic indoctrination are not allowed at PDF and would be penalized.

I have brought quiet a bit of information and evidence to your attention in my responses in the now closed thread but you chose to stick with your positions by coming up with less-than-convincing assumptions and such. This was becoming a pattern and obvious in your 4th response to me.

I can absolutely address your 4th response (I can collect more information to do the needful, if necessary), but now is not the right time in view of the problems highlighted here. Maybe later if I feel the need to reopen the locked thread. Depends on the responses that I will get here. This isn't about winning or loosing in a debate - common sense is important.

Then don't. I will be the last person to request that you repeat yourself.

Speaking of child molesters, one Epstein with Mossad links is believed to have collected kompromats from numerous members of western regime establishments by inviting them to the sinister (quasi-)paedocriminal sessions he staged. Unhindered, for decades, operating out of the city of New York. What kind of a regime will engage in such abominable practices, and what kind of a regime will allow the culprit to act freely on its soil for years?

This is a discussion forum where your views will be questioned at some point. When they are, your arguments should have merit to them. Debunked / Fake / Poorly constructed arguments can be questioned to control spread of disinformation. You are not the first member to be notified in this respect.

Spreading fake news

In today’s era, dubious or doubtful sources are being used by interest groups to twist perceptions of people usually for nefarious means. This is not allowed at PDF. Before you post, kindly, check the source yourself, a good practice is to verify the news from multiple sources before posting it on the site. If you are posting your personal opinion or the opinion of another person then clearly state it to be so, credit the original content. Do not masquerade opinions for news.

Scott Ritter is not a reliable commentator - this is established in the now locked thread. Your refusal to see the obvious, is unproductive.

Jeffrey Epstein crimes came to light and he was facing legal troubles but died in 2019. His partner in crime is sentenced for 20 years in prison.

US does not have a regime but elected governments. Understand the difference.

Is this also an "established fact" that we aren't allowed to question?

I'd invite you to address concrete statements of mine in this area, rather than being content with the sweeping contention that I'm allegedly bent on misleading people.

Through its media mouthpieces, the zio-American empire happens to enjoy a near monopoly across the global media landscape. Thus it says a lot when believers in narratives sponsored by the powers to be, display low thresholds of tolerance towards competing views. Practically all media are repeating their line of thought, yet the slightest room made for alternative information feels unbearable to them. And regimes they support are the ones that launch destabilization operations and wars in the name of "free speech", "democracy" and so on.

There it is - the zio-American Empire.

I strive for facts and figures in person. I emphasize the same in my conversations.

From where you will learn about facts? from fringe sources?

Depends what you'll subsume under the term United Nations. On occasions, UN institutions have been right in their declarations whilst on others they haven't.

Like you or any registered member of this website, I would think my ideas are right and opposite ones aren't. To my knowledge this does not represent a breach of forum rulers either.

UN disclosures happen to be professional and well-researched. I have noticed this because I am a researcher myself.

Now members are claiming that Bashar al-Assad is a humanitarian. Absolutely.

I have not personally addressed Isra"el"i users as zionists in a systematic manner with the aim of looking down on them. This simply does not apply to me, and as underscored I will only take responsibility for my own actions.

Let's see.

 

[WudangMaster]

This video reminded me of comments repeated by Azarmehr on the MehrAein podcasts that the merkava is the heaviest tank in the world because of the massive amount of armor used; due to israel's small size, there is no need to drop it out of planes and they are already mostly deployed where they need to be so the emphasis was placed on crew survival above all and also the ability to carry extra troops. He didn't say anything about the engine power but said it seems to be the most survivable as of now. I was curious if anyone heard this or can verify.

 

[Ich]

British Empire created modern Palestine by splitting Transjordan in 1922 as per the Balfour Declaration. The rationale behind this partition was to create a separate Jewish state (1). This piece of land was a part of the Ottoman Empire in earlier times and its ownership shifted throughout history. This piece of land have historical, religious, and spiritual significance for Jews from the time of the Hebrew Conquest of ancient Palestine - then known as the Philistines having created a conglomeration of city-states in the region. Prophet Musa (Moses) AS secured freedom of Hebrews from the ancient Egyptian Empire with guidance of Allah Almighty. Hebrews initially settled in the Sinai Peninsula but Allah Almighty instructed these people to take their chances with the Philistines to ensure their survival - this was the promised land.

Surah Al-Ma'idah - 21 - Quran.com

O my people! Enter the Holy Land which Allah has destined for you ˹to enter˺. And do not turn back or else you will become losers.”

quran.com

Surah Al-Ma'idah - 22 - Quran.com

They replied, “O Moses! There is an enormously powerful people there, so we will never ˹be able to˺ enter it until they leave. If they do, then we wil...

quran.com

Surah Al-Ma'idah - 23 - Quran.com

Two God-fearing men—who had been blessed by Allah—said, “Surprise them through the gate. If you do, you will certainly prevail. Put your trust in Alla...

quran.com

Surah Al-Ma'idah - 24 - Quran.com

˹Yet˺ they said, “O Moses! ˹Still˺ we will never enter as long as they remain there. So go—both you and your Lord—and fight; we are staying right here...

quran.com

Surah Al-Ma'idah - 25 - Quran.com

Moses pleaded, “My Lord! I have no control over anyone except myself and my brother. So set us apart from the rebellious people.”

quran.com

Surah Al-Ma'idah - 26 - Quran.com

Allah replied, “Then this land is forbidden to them for forty years, during which they will wander through the land. So do not grieve for the rebellio...

quran.com

Jews managed to establish a kingdom on the promised land eventually. But corruption and mischief was the order of the day including distorting scriptures in their misguided beliefs. Allah Almighty warned these people that they will face punishment for being arrogant and corrupt and loose what they hold so dear as was the fate of other corrupt kingdoms throughout history - this punishment came in the form of destructive wars and the kingdom collapsed circa 63 BC. But Allah Almighty have not ruled out the possibility of existence of these people in the promised land.

Surah Al-Isra - 103 - Quran.com

So Pharaoh wanted to scare the Israelites out of the land ˹of Egypt˺, but We drowned him and all of those with him.

quran.com

Surah Al-Isra - 104 - Quran.com

And We said to the Children of Israel after Pharaoh, “Reside in the land, but when the promise of the Hereafter comes to pass, We will bring you all t...

quran.com

Prophet Suleiman (Solomon) AS created a place worship for the believers in the promised land. This place of worship came to be known as the Temple of Solomon (Jewish traditions) and the Farthest Mosque (Holy Quran). This holy site was the first Qibla for the believers. Holy Prophet (PBUH) had a clear view of the ruins of this holy site during Safar-e-Meraj. Allah Almighty highlighted the history of the promised land in Surah al-Isra, but Allah Almighty instructed Holy Prophet (PBUH) to shift Qibla to the other holy site Ka'bah (Kaaba) in Mecca in 624 CE. This shift happened after Safar-e-Meraj but before the Battle of Badr.

This shift was aimed to teach Muslims to give more importance to spirituality than physical objects of worship and vice versa. This world is a temporary abode for all humans and one should be concerned about how he will be judged by the Allah Almighty after resurrection. More on this theme in following post:

Arab journalist asks Imran Khan "If he would use nuclear weapons against Israel if it attacked its neighbors", watch his response

I think balance as a bare minimum. Our laws should be Islamically influenced even if not entirely accurate. I'm not saying go full Taliban mode of course You have 3 alt accounts which you even use to talk to yourself and support your own arguments lmao Hop off and seek medical help 😆 The...

pdf.defence.pk

Zionist movement commenced due to mistreatment of Jews in Russia when Russian Tsarists were in power - related information including visual evidences in here. Zionists convinced the British to help create a Jewish state in the promised land in exchange for financial support as noted in here - refer back to (1) above.

Legitimacy of a state is established with international recognition in United Nations (UN) in modern times - this practice has continued since 1947. Israel received international recognition as a state in UN Resolution 181 in 1948. This is a fact that cannot be denied. But UN decided to split modern Palestine into two states in view of growing tensions between Muslim and Jewish communities on the ground: Palestine and Israel with Jerusalem under UN control. Related information in here.

This development was not rationally handled at the time - a group of Islamic countries attempted to wipe out Israel in 1948 but the war concluded with Israel gaining more lands including access to Jerusalem and defeat of invading sources.

Before that, Hitler attempted to wipe out Jews in Europe but the World War 2 concluded with his defeat and death.

There must be something more at play in these matters - something beyond humans. Allah Almighty is the Lord of mankind, not only Muslims. Allah Almighty have given so many lands and resources to Muslims and even changed Qibla for Muslims to facilitate interfaith harmony, but some are not content.

Perhaps [our] hot-headed approach to address this issue is wrong. Zionist aim is to recreate a kingdom of Jews in the promised land. This is it.

Two state solution would have worked if war had not broken out, but this is no longer the case. Now one-state solution might work. The objective should be to put pressure on both parties to accept each other and declare Masjid Al-Aqsa a World Heritage Site. Jews have pointed out that they can rebuild their Temple next to Masjid Al-Aqsa.

So what is the problem? Nothing remains the same in this world. Everything changes in time.

You and your kin need to discuss this matter in sensible manner - the "usurpatory apartheid entity" narrative is a half-baked hot-headed take on the issue. This is not your personal problem for which you are getting so worked up in your talks. This forum has rules and you need to respect them. There are better ways to discuss this topic.

Ethnic / political / nationalistic hate

Needless to say, PDF wishes to be a productive exchange of ideas and not a place of spreading communal, national, political or religiously motivated hatred. Members found involved in such activities would be severely penalized.

Pakistan not recognizing Israel is not an excuse for members of this forum to violate Forum Rules while discussing this topic and otherwise. I have soft corner for the only Palestinian member of this forum (@Falcon29) due to his nationality, but I have not given OP permission to violate Forum Rules in his talks here. I have a principled stand on these matters in view of established Forum Rules.

WE have given Iranian members much Freedom of Expression here but WE can see what is going on here - a vicious campaign to malign other countries and make excuses for tyrants because they are in good books of Iran. The moral high ground, not.


Opinion? I established a number of my positions with evidence but you refuse to see it and keep on repeating same lines again and again. I spent days to collect evidence to address your statements only to see you deny valid points and stick to your positions on nationalistic grounds. I saw a pattern and I felt that my time is better spent on other more pressing matters. This was not a good debating experience.


I have a reason to - Iranian leadership is focused on cultivating the image that its defenses are impregnable, which is unrealistic. Sounds familiar in fact. It is expected from other countries to provide information that Iranian leadership will not. Israel has uncovered and disclosed Iranian secrets from time-to-time: see Example 1, Example 2, and Example 3. This is how it is.

American stealth aircraft have proven themselves in all manner of conflict zones, but Iran stronk. You need to see live footage of American stealth aircraft penetrating Iranian defenses? This is unlikely. Operations involving stealth aircraft are not made public at the time of action. You can find books, magazines, papers, and videos that provide scientific explanation of stealthy applications - these will add to your knowledge.

Israel does not discuss its top secret missions - this is openly stated in various sources. But American and Gulf sources have shed light on some of these missions at times. This is how it is.

Your conversation ethic is decent - this is noted and appreciated.
All you need to do is to reflect on the problems that I have highlighted and show improvements.
What I am pointing out to you - is valid for other Iranian members as well. You are not being singled out in this matter.


The unspoken rule of a debate is to establish facts. I tend to accept valid points of virtually any member in my conversations. I have accepted your valid points before - have I not? This is important to have productive conversations.

If you are not willing to accept facts and figures that are brought to your attention in a debate then it is impossible to have productive conversations with you. This is one of the concerns that I have raised here. Otherwise, what is your purpose here? Indoctrination?

Indoctrination

Sharing of information garnered at indoctrination of the public are not allowed. That includes political / religious / ethnic indoctrination are not allowed at PDF and would be penalized.

I have brought quiet a bit of information and evidence to your attention in my responses in the now closed thread but you chose to stick with your positions by coming up with less-than-convincing assumptions and such. This was becoming a pattern and obvious in your 4th response to me.

I can absolutely address your 4th response (I can collect more information to do the needful, if necessary), but now is not the right time in view of the problems highlighted here. Maybe later if I feel the need to reopen the locked thread. Depends on the responses that I will get here. This isn't about winning or loosing in a debate - common sense is important.


This is a discussion forum where your views will be questioned at some point. When they are, your arguments should have merit to them. Debunked / Fake / Poorly constructed arguments can be questioned to control spread of disinformation. You are not the first member to be notified in this respect.

Spreading fake news

In today’s era, dubious or doubtful sources are being used by interest groups to twist perceptions of people usually for nefarious means. This is not allowed at PDF. Before you post, kindly, check the source yourself, a good practice is to verify the news from multiple sources before posting it on the site. If you are posting your personal opinion or the opinion of another person then clearly state it to be so, credit the original content. Do not masquerade opinions for news.

Scott Ritter is not a reliable commentator - this is established in the now locked thread. Your refusal to see the obvious, is unproductive.

Jeffrey Epstein crimes came to light and he was facing legal troubles but died in 2019. His partner in crime is sentenced for 20 years in prison.

US does not have a regime but elected governments. Understand the difference.


There it is - the zio-American Empire.

I strive for facts and figures in person. I emphasize the same in my conversations.

From where you will learn about facts? from fringe sources?


UN disclosures happen to be professional and well-researched. I have noticed this because I am a researcher myself.

Now members are claiming that Bashar al-Assad is a humanitarian. Absolutely.


Let's see.

I have to inform you that Moses did not exist and that Jews were not mass-slaves in egypt at that time. Its just a lie. Meanwhile we know that acient egypt has knowledge of iron and use it for building the pyramids with varios technics. And cause of that Egypt did not need that much workers as it is fairy tailed in the jew book "old testament".

 

[Hack-Hook]

Today look at what appeared inside Aseman foker 100 flight from Tehran to shiraz

Yes a crack, well if it was not on emergency exit door it was not that important as there was no pressure loss but the location was really worisom

 

[Hack-Hook]

اندر حکایات وظایف جدید رئیس دانشگاه تهران​

 

[SalarHaqq]

Legitimacy of a state is established with international recognition in United Nations (UN) in modern times - this practice has continued since 1947. Israel received international recognition as a state in UN Resolution 181 in 1948. This is a fact that cannot be denied. But UN decided to split modern Palestine into two states in view of growing tensions between Muslim and Jewish communities on the ground: Palestine and Israel with Jerusalem under UN control. Related information in here.

The UN is not infallible. As a matter of fact its decision making process has been questioned since its inception by international jurists. One such point of contention is the veto power selectively granted to the victors of WW2 at the UN Security Council.

Furthermore legitimacy is not bestowed by the UN. Legality is - and that only to an extent. What is legal, however, is not necessarily legitimate. The concept of legitimacy rests on the subjective assessment of a state's constituency. Having emerged as a result of ethnic cleansing against non-Jewish inhabitants of the land, the legitimacy of the zionist regime is therefore invalidated.

Also, it's a regime that's being discussed. If this regime is substituted with an authentically democratic one which allows the return of the Palestinian refugees it violently expelled, allows them to benefit from citizenship and treats citizens equally in their fundamental rights, then we'll essentially have no major issues. Pretty much like how a legitimate political system replaced the apartheid regime in South Africa.

This development was not rationally handled at the time - a group of Islamic countries attempted to wipe out Israel in 1948 but the war concluded with Israel gaining more lands including access to Jerusalem and defeat of invading sources.

I find this assessment to be partial, since it leaves out the organized ethnic cleansing, the massacres and subsequent deportation of much of the native Palestinian population at the hands of armed zionist gangs, which began as early as in 1947 - in other terms before Arab governments set out to responding militarily from May 1948.

Also, dramatic terminology such as "wipe out" contrasts with the otherwise formal tone of what I am given to read. It is, usually, a sign of partisanship.

There must be something more at play in these matters - something beyond humans. Allah Almighty is the Lord of mankind, not only Muslims. Allah Almighty have given so many lands and resources to Muslims and even changed Qibla for Muslims to facilitate interfaith harmony, but some are not content.

Nobody in the Resistance Axis objects to interfaith dialogue nor to the recognition of other major world religions.

As a matter of fact, Islamic Iran for instance grants Ahl Al-Kitab, including Jews, complete freedom to practice their beliefs and rituals. There are churches and synagogues in Iran going about their activities with peace of mind, kosher supermarkets catering to the Jewish community, and so on. The Iranian parliament reserves a number of seats for members of traditional religious minorities, Jews and Christians being actually over-represented considering the size of these communities.

Moreover Iranian officials regularly participate in interfaith events. The Islamic Revolution has from the outset drawn a clear distinction between on the one hand Judaism, and on the other hand the political phenomenon that is zionism, which a significant number of Orthodox Jews consider to be in violation of principles proclaimed by the Torah - many of said Jews e.g. movements such as Neturei Karta, maintain good relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran. The attempt to equate zionism with Jewishness and/or Judaism, represents a political stratagem used by zionists with the aim of unjustifiably likening the struggle against zionist colonialism with Judeophobia.

Perhaps [our] hot-headed approach to address this issue is wrong. Zionist aim is to recreate a kingdom of Jews in the promised land. This is it.

It has been doing so at the expense of another people, whom it expelled and continuously mistreated. It is unacceptable.

but this is no longer the case. Now one-state solution might work. The objective should be to put pressure on both parties to accept each other and declare Masjid Al-Aqsa a World Heritage Site. Jews have pointed out that they can rebuild their Temple next to Masjid Al-Aqsa.

Except that the initiative mentioned in the article does not echo the dominant standpoint among zionists. The fact that for a number of years now, the regime in Tel Aviv has kept dispatching its forces on a regular basis to trespass into the Masjed al-Aqsa compound and thus defy its sanctity, has to be read within this context.

You and your kin need to discuss this matter in sensible manner - the "usurpatory apartheid entity" narrative is a half-baked hot-headed take on the issue. This is not your personal problem for which you are getting so worked up in your talks. This forum has rules and you need to respect them. There are better ways to discuss this topic.

Ethnic / political / nationalistic hate

I have furnished adequate, rational rebuttals to your critique of my take. To characterize the latter as half baked and hot headed is therefore to express a subjective opinion.

You won't find me inciting hatred against forum members nor against communities, nationalities, religious groups, and if describing a regime as usurpatory and as a practitioner of apartheid - in keeping with serious studies published on the topic, is to spread hatred, then that will not only stretch the definition of hatred beyond reasonable bounds, but it will generally make discussions near impossible.

https://mondediplo.com/2003/11/04apartheid

Political systems and governments across the board are denounced on this forum and reviled in the most vehement ways all the time, yet it is incomprehensible to me why I am being picked on for categorically rejecting a certain regime, and why that certain regime seems to form an exception in the way it is being shielded.

As for "ethnic / political / nationalistic hate", let me share an actual example of such:

This is a very frequent occurrence around here, incitement against Shia Moslems and/or Iranians. When I come across posts like these, I report them. Perhaps 80%-90% of the time no action is taken.

Pakistan not recognizing Israel is not an excuse for members of this forum to violate Forum Rules while discussing this topic and otherwise.

It offers however reason enough to refrain from imposing a specific nomenclature with regard to the regime in Tel Aviv, seeing how Pakistan is not treating it as a legal person.

WE have given Iranian members much Freedom of Expression here but WE can see what is going on here - a vicious campaign to malign other countries and make excuses for tyrants because they are in good books of Iran. The moral high ground, not.

I do not subscribe to the choice of words ("malign", "tyrants") but this aside, you just described what virtually everyone does: staunchly side with their country of origin and its allies while blasting political adversaries.

With the significant nuance that I for one haven't ever commented negatively on countries as a whole i.e. on summations of people and government. When I voiced reproof, it was systematically directed at specific regimes and not at their subjects.

Now, suffice to catch a cursory glimpse of the what the norm is in terms of how India and Indians for instance are being talked about by Pakistani users, or how Russia (and quite often, the Russian people) is being disparaged on a daily basis by its detractors in the Ukraine war thread, and it becomes more than obvious that Iranian members cannot by any equitable measure be singled out. To do so means to act upon political preference.

On a side note, there is no campaign going on. A campaign presupposes that some organizational structure is behind the effort. Iranian users of this forum however are distinct, anonymous individuals with only virtual contact to each other, and their activity here is not coordinated outside this website.

Opinion? I established a number of my positions with evidence but you refuse to see it and keep on repeating same lines again and again. I spent days to collect evidence to address your statements only to see you deny valid points and stick to your positions on nationalistic grounds.

My replies to you consisted of rational deductions based on documented facts and data. I also consider my points to be fully valid.

Whatever my reasons for sticking to my position (this shouldn't be anyone's prime concern anyway), I substantiated the latter through logic and verifiable elements.

Also you are wrong, I do not adhere to nationalist ideology. Ask Iranian users in the know.

I saw a pattern and I felt that my time is better spent on other more pressing matters. This was not a good debating experience.

You saw me not being convinced by your counters. Can't expect an interlocutor to accept something they not only disagree with, but are able to debunk as well.

I have a reason to - Iranian leadership is focused on cultivating the image that its defenses are impregnable, which is unrealistic. Sounds familiar in fact. It is expected from other countries to provide information that Iranian leadership will not. Israel has uncovered and disclosed Iranian secrets from time-to-time: see Example 1, Example 2, and Example 3. This is how it is.

I have good reason to do so when it comes to statements issued by the regimes in Washington and Tel Aviv. The American and Isra"el"i leaderships are focused on cultivating the image that their offensive power is uncounterable, which is unrealistic.

Publishing satellite images of an Iranian UAV base and downing an Iranian drone do not imply that Iranian declarations in question are baseless, nor that the considered zionist and American ones aren't. Those items mentioned under the links aren't secrets by the way, since they are not concealed from the most basic means of reconnaissance.

American stealth aircraft have proven themselves in all manner of conflict zones, but Iran stronk. You need to see live footage of American stealth aircraft penetrating Iranian defenses? This is unlikely. Operations involving stealth aircraft are not made public at the time of action.

They never produced any evidence, neither at the time of action nor later on.

You can find books, magazines, papers, and videos that provide scientific explanation of stealthy applications - these will add to your knowledge.

Anti-stealth technology has also been documented and studied in extenso. You can find books, magazines, papers and videos that provide scientific explanation of counter-stealth applications.

Thus, the mere fact that the USA regime has developed low observable fighter jets does not establish the veracity of the claim that F-35's overflew Tehran.

Israel does not discuss its top secret missions - this is openly stated in various sources. But American and Gulf sources have shed light on some of these missions at times. This is how it is.

And I underscored how the story originated in the Al-Jarida paper, and how the latter is not considered authoritative.

Your conversation ethic is decent - this is noted and appreciated.
All you need to do is to reflect on the problems that I have highlighted and show improvements.
What I am pointing out to you - is valid for other Iranian members as well. You are not being singled out in this matter.

See above.

The unspoken rule of a debate is to establish facts. I tend to accept valid points of virtually any member in my conversations. I have accepted your valid points before - have I not? This is important to have productive conversations.

If you are not willing to accept facts and figures that are brought to your attention in a debate then it is impossible to have productive conversations with you. This is one of the concerns that I have raised here. Otherwise, what is your purpose here? Indoctrination?

Indoctrination

Sharing of information garnered at indoctrination of the public are not allowed. That includes political / religious / ethnic indoctrination are not allowed at PDF and would be penalized.

I have brought quiet a bit of information and evidence to your attention in my responses in the now closed thread but you chose to stick with your positions by coming up with less-than-convincing assumptions and such. This was becoming a pattern and obvious in your 4th response to me.

You brought two types of content:

1) In a few instances, unsubstantiated claims from sources that aren't considered dependable in academic circles. Nobody is obliged to take these at face value, and I brought this to readers' attention wherever necessary.

2) Corroborated, objective data in support of a subjective argument. When this was the case, I did not dismiss nor ignore the facts you cited. However, mentioning a series of facts does not necessarily imply that said facts onto themselves prove what one is attempting to deduce from them. One can thus legitimately question and argue against these conclusions, which is what I rightly undertook.

I can absolutely address your 4th response (I can collect more information to do the needful, if necessary), but now is not the right time in view of the problems highlighted here. Maybe later if I feel the need to reopen the locked thread. Depends on the responses that I will get here. This isn't about winning or loosing in a debate - common sense is important.

You deleted my post, which took me hours to compose.

This is a discussion forum where your views will be questioned at some point. When they are, your arguments should have merit to them. Debunked / Fake / Poorly constructed arguments can be questioned to control spread of disinformation. You are not the first member to be notified in this respect.

Beg your pardon, but to me it's the exact opposite. I did not find my arguments to be the debunked / fake / poorly constructed ones. To me it's the other way around.

Spreading fake news

In today’s era, dubious or doubtful sources are being used by interest groups to twist perceptions of people usually for nefarious means. This is not allowed at PDF. Before you post, kindly, check the source yourself, a good practice is to verify the news from multiple sources before posting it on the site. If you are posting your personal opinion or the opinion of another person then clearly state it to be so, credit the original content. Do not masquerade opinions for news.

Another accusation deprived of foundation. Show me what fake news I am supposed to have spread.

You're making numerous allegations, but have so far failed at illustrating them with a concrete example.

Scott Ritter is not a reliable commentator - this is established in the now locked thread. Your refusal to see the obvious, is unproductive.

You might believe it's established as far as that particular paper is concerned, others will differ.

Jeffrey Epstein crimes came to light and he was facing legal troubles but died in 2019. His partner in crime is sentenced for 20 years in prison.

They - which includes countless western establishment figures who attended Epstein's sessions - are guilty of crimes worse than what has been ascribed to Ritter.

US does not have a regime but elected governments. Understand the difference.

Power in the USA does not lie with the electorate but with unelected private interest groups shaping both the outcome of elections as well as state policies. There is a rich collection of works on the topic, and again this is not something a particular view of can be imposed on participants to a discussion - if principles of free speech are to be upheld, that is.

There it is - the zio-American Empire.

I strive for facts and figures in person. I emphasize the same in my conversations.

From where you will learn about facts? from fringe sources?

I do not think that the imperial nature of the USA regime stands to debate, idem the expansionism of the zionist entity. Nor does the close association, coordination and structural linkage between these two actors, which in turn justifies the designation zio-American empire. Here too, a vast body of serious publications exists which demonstrates the cited points.

UN disclosures happen to be professional and well-researched. I have noticed this because I am a researcher myself.

Not every UN report is necessarily beyond criticism. As said, mechanisms at play at the UN are not fool proof and can be prone to influencing from powerful members.

Now members are claiming that Bashar al-Assad is a humanitarian. Absolutely.

It's their opinion, they have the right to speak it out even if to you it may seem outlandish.

Let's see.

One can also browse through my past contributions for confirmation.

 

[shadihassan28]

The UN is not infallible. As a matter of fact its decision making process has been questioned since its inception by international jurists. One such point of contention is the veto power selectively granted to the victors of WW2 at the UN Security Council.

Furthermore legitimacy is not bestowed by the UN. Legality is - and that only to an extent. What is legal, however, is not necessarily legitimate. The concept of legitimacy rests on the subjective assessment of a state's constituency. Having emerged as a result of ethnic cleansing against non-Jewish inhabitants of the land, the legitimacy of the zionist regime is therefore invalidated.

Also, it's a regime that's being discussed. If this regime is substituted with an authentically democratic one which allows the return of the Palestinian refugees it violently expelled, allows them to benefit from citizenship and treats citizens equally in their fundamental rights, then we'll essentially have no major issues. Pretty much like how a legitimate political system replaced the apartheid regime in South Africa.



I find this assessment to be partial, since it leaves out the organized ethnic cleansing, the massacres and subsequent deportation of much of the native Palestinian population at the hands of armed zionist gangs, which began as early as in 1947 - in other terms before Arab governments set out to responding militarily from May 1948.

Also, dramatic terminology such as "wipe out" contrasts with the otherwise formal tone of what I am given to read. It is, usually, a sign of partisanship.



Nobody in the Resistance Axis objects to interfaith dialogue nor to the recognition of other major world religions.

As a matter of fact, Islamic Iran for instance grants Ahl Al-Kitab, including Jews, complete freedom to practice their beliefs and rituals. There are churches and synagogues in Iran going about their activities with peace of mind, kosher supermarkets catering to the Jewish community, and so on. The Iranian parliament reserves a number of seats for members of traditional religious minorities, Jews and Christians being actually over-represented considering the size of these communities.

Moreover Iranian officials regularly participate in interfaith events. The Islamic Revolution has from the outset drawn a clear distinction between on the one hand Judaism, and on the other hand the political phenomenon that is zionism, which a significant number of Orthodox Jews consider to be in violation of principles proclaimed by the Torah - many of said Jews e.g. movements such as Neturei Karta, maintain good relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran. The attempt to equate zionism with Jewishness and/or Judaism, represents a political stratagem used by zionists with the aim of unjustifiably likening the struggle against zionist colonialism with Judeophobia.



It has been doing so at the expense of another people, whom it expelled and continuously mistreated. It is unacceptable.



Problem is the initiative mentioned in the article isn't echoing the dominant standpoint among zionists. The fact that for a number of years now, the regime in Tel Aviv has kept dispatching its forces on a regular basis to trespass into the Masjed al-Aqsa compound and thus defy its sanctity, has to be read within this context.



I have offered adequate, rational replies to your critique of my take. To characterize the latter as half baked and hot headed is therefore to express a subjective opinion.

You won't find me inciting hatred against forum members nor against communities, nationalities, religious groups, and if describing a regime as usurpatory and as a practitioner of apartheid - in keeping with serious studies published on the topic, is to spread hatred, then that will not only stretch the definition of the notion beyond reasonable bounds, but it will generally make discussions near impossible.

https://mondediplo.com/2003/11/04apartheid

Political systems and governments across the board are denounced in this forum and reviled in the most vehement ways all the time, yet it is incomprehensible to me why I am being picked on for rejecting a regime in no uncertain terms, and why the zionist regime seems to form an exception in the way it is being shielded.



It offers however reason enough to refrain from the imposition of a specific nomenclature with regard to the regime in Tel Aviv, seeing how Pakistan is not treating it as a legal person.



I do not subscribe to the choice of words ("malign", "tyrants") but this aside, you just described what virtually everyone does: staunchly side with their country of origin and its allies while blasting political adversaries.

With the significant nuance that I for one haven't ever commented negatively on countries as a whole, that is on summations of people and government. When I voiced reproof, it was systematically directed at specific regimes and not at their subjects.

Now, suffice to catch a cursory glimpse of the what the norm is on this forum in terms of how India and Indians for instance are being talked about by Pakistani users, or how Russia (and quite often, the Russian people) is being disparaged on a daily basis by its detractors in the Ukraine war thread, and it becomes more than obvious that Iranian members cannot by any equitable measure be singled out.

To do so means to act upon political preference.

On a side note, there is no campaign going on. A campaign presupposes that some organizational structure is behind the effort. Iranian users of this forum however are distinct, anonymous individuals with only virtual contact to each other, and their activity here is not coordinated outside this website.



My replies to you consisted of rational deductions based on documented facts and data. I also consider my points to be valid.

Whatever my reasons for sticking to my position (this shouldn't be our prime concern anyway), I substantiated the latter through logic and verifiable elements.

Also you are wrong, I do not adhere to nationalist ideology. Ask Iranian users in the know.



You saw me not being convinced by your counters. You expect an interlocutor to accept something they not only disagree with, but are able to argue against.



I have good reason to do so when it comes to statements issued by the regimes in Washington and Tel Aviv. The American and Isra"el"i leaderships are focused on cultivating the image that their offensive power is uncounterable, which is unrealistic.

Publishing satellite images of an Iranian UAV base and downing an Iranian drone do not imply that Iranian declarations in question are baseless, nor that the considered zionist and American ones aren't. Those items mentioned under the links aren't secrets by the way, since they are not concealed from the most basic means of reconnaissance.



They never produced any evidence, neither at the time of action nor later on.



Anti-stealth technology has also been documented and studied in extenso. You can find books, magazines, papers and videos that provide scientific explanation of counter-stealth applications.

Thus, the mere fact that the USA regime has developed low observable fighter jets does not establish the veracity of the claim that F-35's overflew Tehran.



And I underscored how the story originated in the Al-Jarida paper, and how the latter is not considered authoritative.



See above.



You brought two types of content:

1) In a few instances, unsubstantiated claims from sources that aren't considered dependable in academic circles. Nobody is obliged to take these at face value, and I rightly brought this to readers' attention when necessary.

2) Corroborated, objective data in support of a subjective argument. When this was the case, I did not dismiss nor ignore the facts you cited. However, mentioning a series of facts does not necessarily imply that said facts onto themselves prove what one is attempting to deduce from them. One can thus legitimately question and argue against these conclusions, which is what I rightly undertook.



You deleted my post, which took me hours to compose.



Beg your pardon, but to me it's the exact opposite. I did not find my arguments to be the debunked / fake / poorly constructed ones.



Another accusation deprived of foundation. Show me what fake news I am supposed to have spread.

You're making numerous allegations, but have so far failed at illustrating them with a concrete example.



You might believe it's established as far as that particular paper is concerned, others will differ.



They - which includes countless western establishment figures who attended Epstein's sessions - are guilty of crimes worse than what has been ascribed to Ritter.



Power in the USA does not lie with the electorate but with unelected private interest groups shaping the outcome of elections as well as state policies. There is a rich collection of works on the topic, and again this is not something a particular view of can be imposed on people - if principles of free speech are to be upheld, that is.



I do not think that the imperial nature of the USA regime stands to debate, idem the expansionism of the zionist entity. Nor does the close association, coordination and structural linkage between these two actors, which in turn justifies use of zio-American empire. Here too, a vast body of serious publications exists which demonstrates these points.



Not every UN report is necessarily beyond criticism. As said, mechanisms at play at the UN are not fool proof and can be prone to influencing from powerful members.



It's their opinion, they have the right to speak it out.



One can also browse through my past contributions for confirmation.

Now members are claiming that Bashar al-Assad is a humanitarian. Absolutely.

It's their opinion, they have the right to speak it out.
Lol I’m sorry I honestly been staying out of replying to posts or in general staying away from negativity………..but come on dude don’t be such a pretentious idiot it’s like saying Stalin was Ghandi or Adolf was Mandela lol you use big words I get it your smarter than a lot of people lol but doesn’t make you any less delusional. Oh no he didn’t gas civilians that was an isis sponsored nato false flag operation………going back to be silent for a few month