What's new

Operation 'Decisive Storm' | Saudi lead coalition operations in Yemen - Updates & Discussions.

Saudi-led airstrikes hit civilian convoy, killing 31

SANAA, Yemen -- Saudi-led airstrikes hit a convoy of civilians fleeing the fighting in southern Yemen early Wednesday, killing at least 31 people, medical officials said, making it among the deadliest single attacks since the air campaign against Shiite rebels and their allies began nearly three months ago.

The two airstrikes hit a convoy of vehicles loaded with civilians, including women and children, who were fleeing north from the southern city of Aden, which has seen intense clashes in recent months. The medics described a scene of carnage, with body parts scattered across the highway and smoke billowing from charred vehicles.
 
427804.jpg
 
And then some khaminists on here have the audacity to claim their regime has nothing to do with the Houthis...

As it obvious he says "They have used Iran’s resistance model" ... We are not responsible of people who are eager to use our model .... we didn't force them or bomb them to follow us unlike what Suadi is doing ....
 
And then some khaminists on here have the audacity to claim their regime has nothing to do with the Houthis...
Was it that hard to understand what he said before waste the internet bandwidth ?

Interesting some people had to point gun toward the head of children to made them held those picture.

By the way everyone knew when you say some child participate in a demonstration how popular that is and there is no staging at all.
 
These people are not safavids , that they will point guns to heads in order to have their way.

Proof of what i said

It was Jumah after the day when the Kizilbasi’s had invaded Tabriz. On the day of Jumah, Sah ismael had entered the Jami masjid. He ordered that between two sunnis there must be a kizilbashi standing with a sword in his hand. Then he announced that the Sunni madhab is batil and the sunnis were in shock when they heard this. After that he ordered that the ones who don’t curse Abu Bakr, Omar, Osman and Aisha, are to be hitted on the head. He rose on the minbar and said: “Distance yourselves from the sunnis” – “ Curse Abu Bakr, Omar, Osman”. After that the Kizilbashi men with swords yelled “more cursing, much more cursing!” The people (sunnis) rejected this and a fight begun. The Shah then yelled again with a loud voice:
“Whoever doesn’t say those words (i.e. cursing the Sahaba) will be killed”

Alam Arayi Safawi 64. یْفص یاسآ نلاع 64)
Honestly I can't find the relation .
By the way wasn't it Omar who convert people to Islam by sword and use of financial pressure.wasn't he the one who ordered destruction of libraries and saying Quran is enough for us .

And still I think houthis demonstration attract peoples thousands of time more .
 
Prove with authentic texts what u wrote.
Let us take one by one
Conversion of muslims by sword?


A widespread claim, some being fed with it since childhood (especially by Iranian-Nationalist-Fashists), yet is this fact or at best a disputed matter or even the opposite is true, i.e. the majority of Persians accepted Islam in a later stage.

Persian nationalists (AND IRONICALLY ALONG WITH THEM THE SHIA CLERGY!) cry day and night, how the “arabs” attacked and occupied Iran. They seem to have forgotten that PRIOR to the Islamic conquest of Persia, it was the (the THEN America of the world!) Persian empire that occupied endless lands of non-Persians (up to INDIA!) AND Arab land. EXACTLY, prior to the Islamic conquest of Persia, the Persian Sassanid Empire occupied the entire east of Arabia, parts of Hijaz, Oman AND Yemen (the birthplace of the Arabs).
So the Persian Empire CONQURED half of the world, including the Arab world, yet, they did it for the sake of thee expansion of their empire (like all empires do), whereas the students of Muhammad (SAWS), the noble Sahabah (BTW with the ABSOLUTE OK of Ali Ibn Abi Talib, he even send his sons to fight!) went to conquer the oppressive Sassanid empire to liberate people from the corrupted priests (they were similar to Shia Rafidah priests today) of the Majoos and the Hindu-like caste system of the Persian society:

Rabi’a ibn ‘Amir(radiyallahu ‘anhu) went to the leader of the Persians. The leader asked him, “Why are you coming to our lands? If you are coming for money then we will pay everyone of you a salary so leave us alone.” But Rabi’a said, “That is not why we are here. We are sent to free the creation from being slaves of one another to being slaves of Allah the Creator of the creation and from the oppression of religion to the justice of Islam and we want to deliver people from the narrowness of this world to the vastness of this world and the Afterlife.

Thus the MUSLIMS (not just “arabs” since the companions of the Prophet among them were Arabs AND non-Arabs, like Suhayb Al-Rumi/The European, Bilal Al-Habashi/Ethiopian etc.) did not attack Persia for the sake of wealth and worldly riches, rather they believed that everyone has the choice of chosing his religion, yet the Persian empire that already OCCUPIED Yemen, and practically the ENTIRE Khalij (todays east of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE, Oman etc.) had no right to rule over its people with falsehood and being a threat to the Muslims (remember, Kisra sent his men FROM YEMEN to KILL Prophet Mohammad, merely because the Prophet sent him a letter inviting him to Islam. It is well known how ugly the tyrant Kisra reacted when he torn the letter apart).

Allah has giving the authority of ALL lands to the Believers (Arabs, non-Arabs, whites, brown, red WHATEVER), and thus the Sahaba had given the tyrant Sassanid rulers the choice between IMAAN and Jizyah (SIMILAR to the Persian empire, whenever it ATTACK other nations and lands it offered their Kings and Wazirs to stay in their position, as long as they recognize KISRA as the KING OF KINGS and FINAL AUTHORITY of their lands, whoever REJECTED would have been slaughtered STRAIGHT AWAY, or does anyone want to claim that back in those days the Persian empire would then say: “Ahhhh you don’t wanna be parts of our empire? never mind we try the Island next door….).

And there are many accounts proving that the Sassanid Persian empire was oppressive to its OWN people and that Iranians (not all but MANY) happily embraced ISLAM.

That is why even why historians agree:

According to Bernard Lewis:

“[Muslims conquests] have been variously seen in Iran: by some as a blessing, the advent of the true faith, the end of the age of ignorance and heathenism; by others as a humiliating national defeat, the conquest and subjugation of the country by foreign invaders. Both perceptions are of course valid, depending on one’s angle of vision… Iran was indeed Islamized, but it was not Arabized. Persians remained Persians……the Iranian contribution to this new Islamic civilization is of immense importance. The work of Iranians can be seen in every field of cultural endeavor, including Arabic poetry, to which poets of Iranian origin composing their poems in Arabic made a very significant contribution. In a sense.”

The conversation of the people of the Iranian plateau to Islam was, however, a gradual one, and even 300 years after the downfall of the Sasanians there were sizeable Zoroastrian communities in Iran. the Persians were “forced to convert to Islam and attack by “Omar” is nothing but a lie.
Never were the Iranian people FORCED to convert to Islam. That is why it took the Iranian nation 300 years to have a substantial Muslim population!!!.

The first 100 years of the Islamic invasion their were no Muslims except amongst the Arab populations. The only time Iranians were “forced” to convert to
anything was during the Sassanids where many were forced to convert to Zoroastrianism (or were killed for leaving Zoroastrianism) and again during Safavid times when they were forced to change their sect from Islam (i.e. Sunnah) to 12’er Shi’ism.

Never was any part of the Iranian population “co’erced” or “forced” to convert to Islam. They didn’t even have any incentive toconvert the first 200 years (for taxation was double to become muslim, than to stay your previous religion) So again, if you anyone treis to talk about the “history” of Iran and about Omar (RA), don’t make up lies and propoganda to suit your needs. You will become as low as
the people you are trying to defeat.

And MANY Arabs INSIDE Iran were pagans and opposed the Islamic conquest, thus it was never a “Persian-Arab” war, rather a MUSLIM war against the Sassanid empire of Shirk, it is interesting to notice that there was much cooperation between Sassanids and non-Muslim Arabs during the Muslim conquest period, which shows that those wars were not Arab vs. Persian, rather Muslim vs. non-Muslims. For instance in 633-634, Khaled ibn Walid leader of the Muslim Army, defeated a force of the Sassanids’ Arab auxiliaries from the tribes of “Bakr”, “‘Ejl”, “Taghleb” and “Namer” at “‘Ayn Al-Tamr”.

AMONG the MUSLIM army were arabs, romans, africans and PERSIANS!

Yet we see the Rafidah scholars, repeating the lies of the neo-Majoos, just for the sake of living out their racist arab hatred and Sahabah hatred.

There are many lies spread (Iranian nationalist Islam haters AND Rafidah scholars) repeat the lie like how the Sahabah burned down entire libraries and what not, all (as usual) based on fabricated narrations, true they might be found in Sunni books, but unlike Rafidah and their brothers the Iranian Islamhaters, we do not deem everything authentic in our books, unless its chain of narration are proven etc.

And the Sahabah breaking the crown of the Kisra of that time (Yazdgerd) is similar to the Iranians breaking the MASSIVE statues of the Shah AND the Iraqis breaking the statues of Saddam. Yazdgerds crown was reported to be so MASSIVE AND HEAVY that it had to be connected to CHAINS over his thrown! This behaviour is the behavior of all BAD and opressive kings, it is nothing but a waste of resources AND a symbol of arrogance.

The one who studies history will never fall in the trap of the Rafidah and those anti-Islamic Iranian sons of Kisra, for go and do your own research and look up for ONE notable person in PRE-ISLAMIC Persia. No doubt, there were some achievements, but which one of the PRE-ISLAMIC Persian personalities can be compared to the Islamic Persian personalities like:

Imam Muslim
Abu Hanifa
Al GHazali
Al Farabi
Ibn Maajah
Al Nasaa’i

and MANY more of the SALAF!

and not just in terms of religious science, rather in wordly science as well, like the likes of:

Sibawayh (a persian who is considered THE master of the arabic language)
Al-Farabi
Omar Khayyam
Ferdowsi
Saadi Shirazi

Here is an entire LIST of Islamic (almost all Sunni) and worldly scientists.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of…s_and_scholars

It is a well known fact that most of them studied AND written their works in arabic language (though Iran was gov. by arabs only for a short time, compared to its Islamic history), so the claim of those who say that Islam destroyed Persia and the “arabs” destroyed and vanished the empire is nothing but a lie to turn people away from the religion of SAADI SHIRAZI, IMAM MUSLIM etc. for there is no man on earth who can write endless poems about the Sahaba (ALL major Persian poets were Persian and wrote astonishing poems about the Sahabah, some are even forbidden to be recited in Iran, and some are tampered in the books!), praise Islam, teach the language of Arabic, refute the heretics of his time (shias and atheists), WITHOUT being proud to be what he is i.e. a Muslim.

So don’t take any attention to the fabrication and lies of the Majoos.

May Allah bring that day when way of the Sunnah dominates over the Persians again, and that they again be the active propagators, guardians and soldiers of this Millah of Ibraheem as they were before. May Rafdhism (Twelver Shia) be expunged from its roots and may it face an erosion , extinction and decline the same way as Zoroastrianism, and Sabianism is experiencing today AMEEN!
I don't have your flowery language or your skill in copy and paste but I have some question .
Who ordered the destruction of library of Alexandria for the last time and according to ibn khaldoon the libraries of Persia ?

And this is some light reading for you
Persecution of Zoroastrians - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The conversion of majority happened 2-3 hundreds of years later but the persecution happened from day one.
When the Persian capital of Ctesiphon in province of Khvârvarân (today known as Iraq) fell to the Muslims during the Islamic conquest of Persia in 637 under the military command of Sa'ad ibn Abi Waqqas during the caliphate of Umar, the palaces and their archives were burned. According to an account in Tarikh al-Tabari by Al-Tabari, the Arab Commander Sa'ad ibn Abi Waqqas wrote to Caliph Umar ibn al-Khatta-b asking what should be done with the books at Ctesiphon. Umar wrote back: "If the books contradict the Qur'an, they are blasphemous. On the other hand, if they are in agreement, they are not needed, as for us Qur'an is sufficient."[28] Thus, the huge library was destroyed and the books, the product of the generations of Persian scientists and scholars were thrown into fire or the Euphrates.[29] Nearly 40,000 captured Persian noblemen were taken as slaves and sold in Arabia.[30] The Arabs called the Persians 'Ajam' meaning mute. The first voice of protest came from Piruz Nahavandi, an enslaved Persian artisan, who assassinated Umar.[31]

Muslim chronicles state that, in the Battle of Ullais seeing no opening, no weakening of the Persian resistance, the Arab commander in chief Khalid ibn al-Walid, tired, angry, and frustrated prayed to Allah: "O Lord! If You give us victory, I shall see that no enemy warrior is left alive until their river runs with their blood!". After the battle, Khalid ibn al-Walid ordered all the prisoners of war to be decapitated.[32] In the river Khaseef the blood was still not flowing, as Khalid had pledged, until on the advice of Qa'qa ibn Amr one of the commanders of the Muslim army, Khalid ordered the dam on the river to be opened. The river then flowed with blood, and it became known as the River of Blood.[33] When the city of Estakhr in the south, a Zoroastrian religious center,[34][35] put up stiff resistance against the Arab invaders, 40,000 residents were slaughtered or hanged.[36]

How brave of her to do so against some unarmed people who can't retaliate the question is how much she get for that ?
And another question is she Yemeni at all?
 
According to Daniel Pipes from America with a Ph.D. in medieval Middle East history who now heads a current-affairs think tank, the Middle East Forum

"The story about conquering Muslims burning the ancient Library of Alexandria is apocryphal"
As regards to u quoting Wikipedia , that sums up the great intellect u possess as anyone can write in wikipedia and that is well known.

For any further clarifications do visit the blog site
Just So We're Clear...



Thursday, January 19, 2006
Burning the Alexandria Library

And this myth of burning will completely evaporate from ur memory if u are sincere in ur search for truth.
yeah the library just decided to vanish at the time of conquest of Egypt for the fun of it.
and according to him it was not burned ,because there was exaggeration in the story . how powerful of an argument.
 
A stooge to who? To his country and Arabs? You're a ticket honey..

A stooge of Saudis.That coward is hiding in Riyadh and can't even enter Yemen, hence he has nothing to do with Yemen. He is basically a Saudi stooge. :)
 
A stooge of Saudis.That coward is hiding in Riyadh and can't even enter Yemen, hence he has nothing to do with Yemen. He is basically a Saudi stooge. :)
Well, this is angry talk. Since he's the legitimate president of Yemen, elected by his own people, recognized by Arab Muslim and world countries as such he can exist anywhere and manage his country, especially when he is in an Arab brotherly country which stepped in to free Yemeni people from Iranian stooges.

You know why he is in Riyadh? Simply because terrorists tried to murder him many times. He will return to his palace only on a ground full of Huthis skulls.
 
Well, this is angry talk. Since he's the legitimate president of Yemen, elected by his own people, recognized by Arab Muslim and world countries as such he can exist anywhere and manage his country, especially when he is in an Arab brotherly country which stepped in to free Yemeni people from Iranian stooges.

You know why he is in Riyadh? Simply because terrorists tried to murder him many times. He will return to his palace only on a ground full of Huthis skulls.

Yep, in Arab style democracy, he won in a single candidate election with 99.7 of votes. Anyways, if you say only the rulers who are elected are legitimate, then none of your countries have a legitimate leader, including your British king and Saudi Arabia. That's the irony here.

And yes, he is a stooge, from every angle you look at it, he is a pure stooge. Nothing more. There is no reason to be angry when calling someone a stooge. :)

Let's see when he'll get back to Yemen.
 
Yep, in Arab style democracy, he won in a single candidate election with 99.7 of votes. Anyways, if you say only the rulers who are elected are legitimate, then none of your countries have a legitimate leader, including your British king and Saudi Arabia. That's the irony here.

And yes, he is a stooge, from every angle you look at it, he is a pure stooge. Nothing more. There is no reason to be angry when calling someone a stooge. :)

Let's see when he'll get back to Yemen.

Well, any Middle Eastern system including absolute monarchies is more logical than "Welayat Faqih". In "Welayat Faqih", the Supreme Leader assumes his powers from being the legitimate deputy of Imam Mahdi, who will somehow manage to show up later in time. "Welayat Faqih" is not really different than absolute monarchy, except that it claims power from a mysterious source. I imagine Imam Mahdi (at the end of time) standing up in front of crowds in Tehran making an apology for not knowing Farsi. He will then get a decent interpreter to link between zaban tazi and the crowds of Ajams :).
 
Well, any Middle Eastern system including absolute monarchies is more logical than "Welayat Faqih". In "Welayat Faqih", the Supreme Leader assumes his powers from being the legitimate deputy of Imam Mahdi, who will somehow manage to show up later in time. "Welayat Faqih" is not really different than absolute monarchy, except that it claims power from a mysterious source. I imagine Imam Mahdi (at the end of time) standing up in front of crowds in Tehran making an apology for not knowing Farsi. He will then get a decent interpreter to link between zaban tazi and the crowds of Ajams :).

My friend, your usual nonsense (with flavor of some Farsi words to make it even cooler) was good only for a limited time, that does not get my attention.

I wasn't the one who was talking about getting elected and being legitimate and this has nothing to do with Iran. Hadi is a stooge, whether Iran is a democracy or a theocracy or a communist state. I hope you get it now.
 
Back
Top Bottom