Pro Democracy protests in Bahrain | News & Discussions

[Abii]

Republicans ... prefer Assad.

Weed, ever heard of it? Put down the meth and go with weed instead, it's better for you.

 

[rmi5]

Republicans despise Muslims, all of them prefer Assad. Don't look at the West as your saviors, since nobody wants a Western installed government.
It's about the will of the people, not what a minority prefers.

Republicans do not prefer Assad. I don't know where this mentality for you, comes from. Anyway, so far, this policy of avoiding interfering, has the outcome of 160,000 dead Syrians.

 

[Abii]

FSA can also reach to power if they create a no fly zone in Syria, and by more support for FSA. They still have control of significant parts of Syria in the North-Western parts. Other than that, I see no end for this conflict. most probably, the conflict would finish if we have a republican president in white house in the next elections in the 2016.

What happened with Iraq in 91? Wasn't there a partial no fly zone in the Kurdish regions and a decade of blockades? In the end, only an invasion changed the course of Iraq for the better. In 78, what happened in our Iran? There was a revolution and commies were even more powerful than khomaini's dogs. In the end, who won? Nationalist opposition figures in Syria will be drowned in a matter of weeks, unless there are Western boots on the ground. In Syria they have an extra hard time keeping control, b/c they're not just fighting their own extremists, but extremists from around the muslim world that have flooded the country like rats.

 

[rmi5]

What happened with Iraq in 91? Wasn't there a partial no fly zone in the Kurdish regions and a decade of blockades? In the end, only an invasion changed the course of Iraq for the better. In 78, what happened in our Iran? There was a revolution and commies were even more powerful than khomaini's dogs. In the end, who won? Nationalist opposition figures will be drowned in a matter of weeks, unless there are Western boots on the ground.

there are clear differences in these cases.
1) Syrian opposition has already arms and control of significant part of the country, while it was not the case in Iraq, or Iran.
2) The majority of political groups, including commies, were supporting Khomeini, until they got kicked out of power by khomeini goon cult. That's not the case in Syria. there is only one group, ISIL,(and in some extent kurds) which has some sort of sympathy with regime.

 

[Falcon29]

That's exactly the reason that religion has divided you arabs. How do you know you are right and they are simply wrong?

Because we back everything up with evidence and anybody can notice the obvious.

And that's why they would side against you, so do not be surprised about their position.

They wouldn't, it's been that way for a while. Just respect the law and religion. In private believe what you want.

buddy, Are you sure that you are talking about middle-east?!!!

Yes, there are some people like this. Although largely I'm speaking of what the international world prefers.

Again, why do you think that they should give up their belongings in favor of your opinions? Dude, your thoughts are not peaceful and cannot be implemented, since it has a lot of opponents who will be forced to oppose you. As a result, the conflict in your region will never finishes.

Conflicts over what? It's only the Shia who want to get in our way. Nothing is perfect, we aren't going to have ultimate prosperity either. If anything, the last thing we were promised by God was ultimate prosperity. Only after the final wars will we such a thing.

these systems are inherently making people to be so, if you have not noticed it yet

Yes, because they're failed systems. You haven't seen what works.

Dude, you are using vague words. pious muslims? is it what should guarantee freedom and prosperity of people?

Prosperity won't come anytime soon, I've explained this above and can go indepth if you want.

Dude, you should not be so arrogant, and assume that you are right, and others are wrong, and they should follow you.

I don't want anyone to follow us. Minorities can believe in whatever they believe. When it comes to Muslims, we aren't going to tolerate wrong ideas that go against Islam.

Obviously, the other side, sees themselves right as well, and they will try to do the same to you.

If you mean Shia, they aren't right as we've proved this over and over again. They're also a minority so it doesn't matter.

with this mentality, your conflicts would not have an end. I can guarantee it for you, and local and international powers would take advantage of your bloods to the end of the world.

Nobody said bloodshed won't end.

BTW, secularism, and democracy are not solely western concepts. They are concepts that can be applied for all people, like the physics laws. The point is that western people found this concepts and implemented it sooner, and reached to prosperity, while we , in the middle east, and in the 21st century are still engaged in these non-sense internal fights and killing each other.

You're looking at things from a materialistic POV. Which I'm against, we Muslims may never become the best scientists, etc... This is something decreed by God. If some people don't believe in God then we should discuss this. I feel like you're hesitant to believe in him.

Our secular people will also be nationalist, it doesn't work. Even if we have secular lifestyle nothing will be similar to the West. And I'm not for secular lifestyle for obvious reasons.

Republicans do not prefer Assad. I don't know where this mentality for you, comes from. Anyway, so far, this policy of avoiding interfering, has the outcome of 160,000 dead Syrians.

Yes they do, they're still against Iran, the Palestinians and Hezbollah. Politically they're for Assad. What I'm speaking is their actual movement and not strictly the politicians. They as a peoples largely prefer Assad or have something against the opposition.

 

[rmi5]

Dude, again, as a summary, you don't want a peaceful coexistence, and the result would be an endless blood shed. No one wants to be ruled by others who look down on them. the result is very obvious here. I think that's the bottom line of our discussion, here. Just do not expect others to willingly accept your thoughts and life-style.
About republicans, I have seen their position to be more close to opposition than democrats. Anyway, let's agree to disagree about it.

Because we back everything up with evidence and anybody can notice the obvious.



They wouldn't, it's been that way for a while. Just respect the law and religion. In private believe what you want.



Yes, there are some people like this. Although largely I'm speaking of what the international world prefers.



Conflicts over what? It's only the Shia who want to get in our way. Nothing is perfect, we aren't going to have ultimate prosperity either. If anything, the last thing we were promised by God was ultimate prosperity. Only after the final wars will we such a thing.



Yes, because they're failed systems. You haven't seen what works.



Prosperity won't come anytime soon, I've explained this above and can go indepth if you want.




I don't want anyone to follow us. Minorities can believe in whatever they believe. When it comes to Muslims, we aren't going to tolerate wrong ideas that go against Islam.



If you mean Shia, they aren't right as we've proved this over and over again. They're also a minority so it doesn't matter.



Nobody said bloodshed won't end.


You're looking at things from a materialistic POV. Which I'm against, we Muslims may never become the best scientists, etc... This is something decreed by God. If some people don't believe in God then we should discuss this. I feel like you're hesitant to believe in him.

Our secular people will also be nationalist, it doesn't work. Even if we have secular lifestyle nothing will be similar to the West. And I'm not for secular lifestyle for obvious reasons.



Yes they do, they're still against Iran, the Palestinians and Hezbollah. Politically they're for Assad. What I'm speaking is their actual movement and not strictly the politicians. They as a peoples largely prefer Assad or have something against the opposition.

 

[Falcon29]

Dude, again, as a summary, you don't want a peaceful coexistence, and the result would be an endless blood shed. No one wants to be ruled by others who look down on them. the result is very obvious here. I think that's the bottom line of our discussion, here. Just do not expect others to willingly accept your thoughts and life-style.
About republicans, I have seen their position to be more close to opposition than democrats. Anyway, let's agree to disagree about it.

I'm fine with peaceful coexistence. It's just the majority will prefer religious fervor in their society. You can't wrap your head around that it seems.

We don't have intentions to commit genocide either. The people supporting this crackdown in Syria shouldn't fear us and rather fear God.

Do you believe this will continue going on though?

 

[rmi5]

Do you believe this will continue going on though?

with the mentality that you said, yes, I 100.00% (not even 99.99%) sure that it will continue.
But in reality, most probably, the conflict would end with some sort of foreign intervention, or with a general agreement between different sides, like what happened to Lebanon before.

I'm fine with peaceful coexistence. It's just the majority will prefer religious fervor in their society. You can't wrap your head around that it seems.

We don't have intentions to commit genocide either. The people supporting this crackdown in Syria shouldn't fear us and rather fear God.

No, you're obviously not. otherwise, you would not write your previous comments.

When it comes to Muslims, we aren't going to tolerate wrong ideas that go against Islam.

They're also a minority so it doesn't matter.

Because we back everything up with evidence and anybody can notice the obvious.

....

 

[Falcon29]

with the mentality that you said, yes, I 100.00% (not even 99.99%) sure that it will continue.
But in reality, most probably, the conflict would end with some sort of foreign intervention, or with a general agreement between different sides, like what happened to Lebanon before.

Conflict in the region will remain probably forever. It's more complex than you think.

No, you're obviously not. otherwise, you would not write your previous comments.

What's the issue with what I said? I see nothing wrong with it.

 

[rmi5]

Conflict in the region will remain probably forever. It's more complex than you think.

Not forever, but it can last for a long time. Even the serial british-french wars finished after a century.

What's the issue with what I said? I see nothing wrong with it.

They show not being tolerant and do not pursuing peaceful coexistence.

 

[1000]

This fake Islamist hazzy talks about palestine all day, clearly some palestinian nationalist trying to use 'Islamic groups' like ISIS, Nusra for his own cause, fuc k palestine go fight for it yourself.

We've already gone through many wars for these CUNTS, yet they keep spitting on you.
Would they go to war for us ? they stab you in the back instead. It's time we recognize Israel,let palastinians bark for all I care they never cared about any other state but their own trash.

@Abii

Would you go to war for people when they won't do anything for you and turn against you whenever your in problems ?
Those are the palestinians.

Kuwait, Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, Syria, Iraq. They've all kicked them out since they're all politically active backstabbers.

lol in 1979 Arafat supported the new Islamic republic of Iran that took down the Shah, at the same time they support Saddam. Saddam should not have attacked Israel, he should have annexed West bank. Hopefully in the future like the great Nebuchadnezzar we will take 'Palestine/Israel' and enslave hazzy, INSALLAH

 

[Falcon29]

This fake Islamist hazzy talks about palestine all day, clearly some palestinian nationalist trying to use 'Islamic groups' like ISIS, Nusra for his own cause, fuc k palestine go fight for it yourself.

We've already gone through many wars for these CUNTS, yet they keep spitting on you.
Would they go to war for us ? they stab you in the back instead. It's time we recognize Israel,let palastinians bark for all I care they never cared about any other state but their own trash.

@Abii

Would you go to war for people when they won't do anything for you and turn against you whenever your in problems ?
Those are the palestinians.

Kuwait, Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, Syria, Iraq. They've all kicked them out since they're all politically active backstabbers.

lol in 1979 Arafat supported the new Islamic republic of Iran that took down the Shah, at the same time they support Saddam. Saddam should not have attacked Israel, he should have annexed West bank. Hopefully in the future like the great Nebuchadnezzar we will take 'Palestine/Israel' and enslave hazzy, INSALLAH

LOL....

 

[iranigirl2]

Bahrain: A System of Injustice

(London) – Bahrain’s criminal justice system fails to deliver basic accountability and impartial justice, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today.

The 64-page report, “Criminalizing Dissent, Entrenching Impunity: Persistent Failures of the Bahraini Justice System Since the BICI Report,” found that more than two years after King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa accepted recommendations of the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry (BICI) to free peaceful dissenters and hold abusive officials accountable, Bahrain’s courts play a key role in maintaining the country’s highly repressive political order, routinely sentencing peaceful protesters to long prison terms. But members of security forces are rarely prosecuted for unlawful killings, including in detention, and the few convictions have carried extremely light sentences.

“A police officer in Bahrain who kills a protester in cold blood or beats a detainee to death might face a sentence of six months or maybe two years, while peacefully calling for the country to become a republic will get you life in prison,” said Joe Stork, deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. “Bahrain’s problem is not a dysfunctional justice system, but rather a highly functional injustice system.”

The report, based on written verdicts and other court documents, reveals the stark contrast between prosecutions of serious human rights violations by security personnel on the one hand and prosecutions for “crimes” based on speech and peaceful assembly-related activities on the other.

The report sharply contests UK Foreign Office claims that Bahrain has implemented the Commission of Inquiry’s key recommendations and is moving forward on judicial reform.

The Commission of Inquiry report, the work of five respected international jurists, found that security forces were responsible for more than a dozen unlawful killings and routine excessive use of force in suppressing pro-democracy demonstrations in February through April 2011. It also found that detainees were subjected to “a deliberate practice of mistreatment” that led to at least five deaths in detention.

The report recommended that the government release from prison and void the convictions of “all persons charged with offences involving political expression, not consisting of advocacy of violence.” The report also recommended criminal investigations into the wrongful deaths of at least 18 demonstrators and detainees with a view to holding senior officials accountable for rights violations.

Two years after the report was issued, however, leaders of the 2011 protests remain in prison, some sentenced for life, and judges are convicting new defendants of “crimes” based solely on the expression of dissenting political views or the exercise of the right to peaceful assembly, Human Rights Watch said. To justify its decision upholding the terrorism convictions of the protest leaders, the Supreme Appellate Court held in September 2012 that terrorism need not involve the use or threat of violence but can be the result of “moral pressure.”

In another case, the Court of Cassation upheld a conviction of one protester for “inciting hatred and contempt for a certain class of people,” a charge Bahraini authorities regularly use to prosecute peaceful political speech. The Court of Cassation concluded in yet another case that advocating “changing the state’s political system” constitutes “the commission of a crime.” In a third case the Court of Cassation upheld a “destroying public property” conviction for a protester who had stepped on the prime minister’s photograph.

The few prosecutions of security personnel implicated in serious abuses have focused almost exclusively on low-ranking officers, and even those have resulted in acquittals or disproportionately light sentences. The officers responsible for beating suspected protester Ali Saqer to death were convicted of the lesser charge of assault rather than murder although a medical report submitted at the trial stated that Saqer had “blunt-force contusions” all over his body. An appeals court subsequently reduced the ten-year prison terms to two years, finding somewhat incredibly that the defendants deserved “clemency” on the ground that they had been “preserving the life of detainees, among them the victim.”

In another case, a trial court concluded that a police officer had shot Hani Abd al-Aziz Juma from a meter away, leaving him fatally wounded. But it found the officer guilty only of assault, stating that he had not acted with intent to kill. An appeals court subsequently reduced the seven-year prison sentence to six months.

Bahrain’s allies in London, Washington, and Brussels have failed to press the government of Bahrain to take serious steps to hold security forces accountable for abuse, or to call openly for the release of high-profile political prisoners. The UK Foreign Office, in its annual report on human rights published in April, highlighted judicial reform in Bahrain as an area where “the overall trajectory on human rights will be positive.”

“Something is seriously amiss when calling for a republic gets you a life sentence while shooting and killing an unarmed protester gets you six months,” Stork said. “Stability and reform will remain out of reach in Bahrain as long as its allies, notably the UK, offer uncritical support in the face of mounting evidence of abuses.”

 

[al-Hasani]

The only injustice is that the terrorists have not been barrel bombed like in Syria or deported to Mullahistan.

Sunni Muslims are a majority in Bahrain now anyway. That is why the opposition has had close to no success at all. Many Arabs from other Arab countries have been naturalized as Bahraini citizens. Non-Arabs too.

 

[HAIDER]

So, unfortunate When Muslim ask for democracy , same fellow divide the nation on sectarian bases. Or find back door to bring majority in minority . What a shame....Dictatorship in any form and any where in the world has very short life...Dictatorships are the breeding ground of terrorism and we have lots of living example.....