Saudi Arabia confirms that it will deploy troops to Syria

[libertycall]

Infact it is not KSA vs IRAN. the Issue is USA vs IRAN.

"Saudi Arabia is prepared to contribute ground troops to the fight in Syria, but only as part of a U.S.-led coalition." he said.
Saudi Arabia: If needed, remove Syria's Assad by force - CNN.com

it is usa that is pushing ksa to yemen and syria. ksa has no choice but to follow usa.

And was it the USA which forced the Ayatollahs to encourage Bashar to maintain his minority sectarian regime? The Ayatollahs could have encouraged the formation of a federal structure for Syria but they decided that on no account would Sunni Syrians be given a say in the running of their country.

Exactly the same way as after coming to power in the 1979 'revolution' they made it illegal for a Sunni Iranian to ever lead Iran.

If the Ayatollahs had encouraged a new democratic power structure in Syria, this would have increased pressure for democratic change on all the Arab regimes in the region, and elevated the status of Iran in the area and world. Now not only is Iran and Hezbollah hated by all the regimes, it's also hated by all the people.

This is exactly why Sheikh Tufayli the first secretary general of Hezbollah warned Iran that it was declaring war against 1.2 billion Sunnis by its own behavior.

You have wrong point of view copied from Saudi/Western media.
Accusing Iran of sectarianism is a big conspiracy handled by the US since 3 decades ago. We have thousands of Sunni and non-Muslim people who live in Iran like Shia Muslims without any problem and they have even several representatives in the parliament who write our laws, while they're less than 4% of our population. The Shia population of KSA is estimated around 10-30%; I want you to judge fairly, how is their situations?
Iran is accused of racism while it has tens of different race itself and is supporting Arabs in Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, …
And is accused of sectarianism while it is supporting the Sunni-Salafi Resistance of Palestine, Sunni Iraqi Kurds, Afghan Sunni mujahideen, syrian and Iraqi army…
Give me just one example of Iranian officials talking about sects and against Sunnis. And I can give you tens of examples of official "unbeliever" consideration of Shiites by Wahhabi heads.
Our problem with KSA is only and only one things: the wrong actions that Arab kingdoms commit in order to save their familiy on rule. We don't care about race and sect; Sunni, Shia, Christian and Jewish are respected by Iran; what we hate in the Saudi regime, is their support to terrorism and their role in providing US interests in the region.

He's a Pakistani. Why are you asking him to compare how the Saudi Arabian government treats its Shia minority versus how the Iranian government treats its Sunni minority?

Why don't you ask him to compare how the Pakistani government treats its Shia minority versus how the Iranian government treats its minority Sunnis?

1. In Iran it's illegal for a Sunni to be the leader of Iran: In Pakistan it's not only legal for a Shia to be the leader but it has had several Shia leaders.

2. In Iran it's illegal for a Sunni to study Sunni religion outside Iran. In Pakistan hundreds of thousands of Shia travel outside the country including to Iran to study Shi'ism.

3. In Iran a Sunni has never been allowed to head any senior military post. In Pakistan several Shia have been generals.

4. In Iran it's next to impossible for Sunnis to get permission for a mosque. In Pakistan there are thousands of not only Shia mosques but also imam-barghas etc.

5. In Iran, Sunnis are forced to read Eid prayers behind a Shia religious leader. In Pakistan, Shia can pray behind whoever they like.

Now be honest. Which is more fair to its minority??

 

[B@KH]

And was it the USA which forced the Ayatollahs to encourage Bashar to maintain his minority sectarian regime? The Ayatollahs could have encouraged the formation of a federal structure for Syria but they decided that on no account would Sunni Syrians be given a say in the running of their country.

Exactly the same way as after coming to power in the 1979 'revolution' they made it illegal for a Sunni Iranian to ever lead Iran.

If the Ayatollahs had encouraged a new democratic power structure in Syria, this would have increased pressure for democratic change on all the Arab regimes in the region, and elevated the status of Iran in the area and world. Now not only is Iran and Hezbollah hated by all the regimes, it's also hated by all the people.

This is exactly why Sheikh Tufayli the first secretary general of Hezbollah warned Iran that it was declaring war against 1.2 billion Sunnis by its own behavior.

Please come out of this sectarian shit. There is no sectarianism in Syria. Most of the Supporters and defenders of Asad are Syrian Sunnis.

so no need to propagate this wahabi filthy belloho of sectarianism. grow up now.

it is the turn of the sunnis now to rise up and get rid of haram and illegal monarchy on Holy land. Shia do not want to become head of sunnis and we do not like this since shia only lead pious and truth and independent.

DO NOT forget that warmonger KSA discarded and rejected the Pakistani Mediation effort.

Saudi awaits US order for troops deployment in Syria: Jubeir
Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir has said that any decision for the deployment of special forces to Syria would follow the will of the US-led coalition allegedly hitting hideouts of the Takfiri Daesh militants.
PressTV-Saudi awaits US order on Syria: Jubeir

 

[patientlion212]

I think the young prince is going too far, not only that he can't win, but he's putting the existence of his state at risk and I believe knowing why

 

[libertycall]

Please come out of this sectarian shit. There is no sectarianism in Syria. Most of the Supporters and defenders of Asad are Syrian Sunnis.

so no need to propagate this wahabi filthy belloho of sectarianism. grow up now.

it is the turn of the sunnis now to rise up and get rid of haram and illegal monarchy on Holy land. Shia do not want to become head of sunnis and we do not like this since shia only lead pious and truth and independent.

Sure there isn't.

"Before the twentieth century they were usually referred to as Nusayris, after their eponymous founder Ibn Nusayr, who lived in Iraq during the ninth century. Taking refuge in the mountains above the port of Latakia, on the coastal strip between modern Lebanon and Turkey, they evolved a highly secretive syncretistic theology containing an amalgam of Neoplatonic, Gnostic, Christian, Muslim, and Zoroastrian elements. Their leading theologian, Abdullah al-Khasibi, who died in 957, proclaimed the divinity of Ali, the Prophet Muhammad’s cousin and son-in-law, whom other Shiites revere but do not worship. Like many Shiites influenced by ancient Gnostic teachings that predate Islam, they believe that the way to salvation and knowledge lies through a succession of divine emanations. Acknowledging a line of prophets or avatars beginning with Adam and culminating in Christ and Muhammad, they include several figures from classical antiquity in their list, such as Socrates, Plato, Galen, and some of the pre-Islamic Persian masters.

Nusayrism could be described as a folk religion that absorbed many of the spiritual and intellectual currents of late antiquity and early Islam, packaged into a body of teachings that placed its followers beyond the boundaries of orthodoxy. Mainstream Muslims, both Sunni and Shia, regarded them as ghulta, “exaggerators.” Like other sectarian groups they protected their tradition by a strategy known as taqiyya — the right to hide one’s true beliefs from outsiders in order to avoid persecution. Taqiyya makes a perfect qualification for membership in the mukhabarat — the ubiquitous intelligence/security apparatus that has dominated Syria’s government for more than four decades. …

Nusayris believe in metempsychosis or transmigration. The souls of the wicked pass into unclean animals such as dogs and pigs, while the souls of the righteous enter human bodies more perfect than their present ones. The howls of jackals that can be heard at night are the souls of Sunni Muslims calling their misguided co-religionists to prayer.

It does not take much imagination to see how such beliefs, programmed into the community’s values for more than a millennium, and reinforced by customs such as endogamous marriage — according to which the children of unions between Nusayris and non-Nusayris cannot be initiated into the sect — create very strong notions of apartness and disdain for the “Other.”"

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/14/syrias-ruling-alawite-sect/

So much for the belief system and its view of Sunnis.

Now let's look at how the power is arranged in Syria.

"As Reuters reported in April, “Although some officers from the Sunni Muslim majority have been promoted to senior ranks, Sunni influence has been weakened and Assad’s brother Maher controls key military units packed with Alawite soldiers.”

Assad holds Syria army despite Sunni-Alawite divide| Reuters

But you're quite happy to promote this [term used by Imam Zayd ibn Ali (A.S) for those extremist Shiites who insisted that he curse and reject the Imam's Abu Bakr (A.S), Umar (A.S), and Uthman (A.S)] filth?

 

[UniverseWatcher]

what do you expect from a puppet run country

 

[libertycall]

I think the young prince is going too far, not only that he can't win, but he's putting the existence of his state at risk and I believe knowing why

Alawites served under French officers along with the other "reliable" minorities15 in local forces. The French favored recruiting rural minorities because they were far from the urban-dominant political ideology, Arab nationalism. The French policy of military recruitment involved weakening the forces of nationalism that Arab Sunnis used to challenge the French over the future of Syria. As a result, in the mid-1940s, when that struggle was at its height, Arab Sunni representation in the army was much lower than their numbers in the population.16

The Troupes Spéciales du Levant were used to maintain order and suppress local rebellions. Largely composed of minorities, their activities generated resentment among Sunnis. By the end of the mandate, several infantry battalions were composed almost entirely of Alawites. Not one battalion was composed entirely of Sunni Arabs. Even those few battalions with significant Sunni Arab components were filled mostly with men from rural areas and far-off towns. The wealthy Sunni Arab landowning and commercial families, who led the Arab nationalist movement during the mandate, indirectly reinforced the trend towards strong representation of minorities in the Troupes by refusing to send their sons for military training, even as officers, in a force which they viewed as serving France's imperial interests.17 The Alawites formed about half of the eight infantry battalions of the Troupes, serving as police and supplying intelligence.18 The French made every effort to keep the Troupes immune from the Syrian ferment in the towns by using the Alawites and other minorities to suppress urban nationalist disorder.

Roots of Alawite-Sunni Rivalry in Syria | Middle East Policy Council

If you think that a small sectarian minority can impose its will on a majority which has access to a border region where the majority can obtain aid and support...you need to brush up on your history!

You place too much of a premium on capturing territory. The majority population will just shift fighting tactics.

 

[B@KH]

Roots of Alawite-Sunni Rivalry in Syria | Middle East Policy Council

If you think that a small sectarian minority can impose its will on a majority which has access to a border region where the majority can obtain aid and support...you need to brush up on your history!

You place too much of a premium on capturing territory. The majority population will just shift fighting tactics.

rubbish.

still you are talking the sectarian nonsense. you people have either sectarian or ethnic everywhere.
turkey is killings sunni kurds. so it too should be Turk vs Sunni rivalry.
KSA toppled Sunni MB. so it too should be KSA vs Sunni rivalry.
Pakistan killing sunni rebels. so it too should be Pak vs sunni.
iraq vs sunni rebels. so it is Iraq vs sunni. (while most sunni fight rebels in Iraq)
syria vs sunni rebels. so it is syria vs sunni (while most syrian sunni support asad)

Infact this all make no sense.

it is all monarchists and Nato games for dominance and to destroy peace to prolong their rule.

 

[T-Rex]

rubbish.

still you are talking the sectarian nonsense. you people have either sectarian or ethnic everywhere.
turkey is killings sunni kurds. so it too should be Turk vs Sunni rivalry.
KSA toppled Sunni MB. so it too should be KSA vs Sunni rivalry.
Pakistan killing sunni rebels. so it too should be Pak vs sunni.
iraq vs sunni rebels. so it is Iraq vs sunni. (while most sunni fight rebels in Iraq)
syria vs sunni rebels. so it is syria vs sunni (while most syrian sunni support asad)

Infact this all make no sense.

it is all monarchists and Nato games for dominance and to destroy peace to prolong their rule.

Yes, you're right but at this stage how different is Asad from the monarchists?

 

[libertycall]

rubbish.

still you are talking the sectarian nonsense. you people have either sectarian or ethnic everywhere.
turkey is killings sunni kurds. so it too should be Turk vs Sunni rivalry.
KSA toppled Sunni MB. so it too should be KSA vs Sunni rivalry.
Pakistan killing sunni rebels. so it too should be Pak vs sunni.
iraq vs sunni rebels. so it is Iraq vs sunni. (while most sunni fight rebels in Iraq)
syria vs sunni rebels. so it is syria vs sunni (while most syrian sunni support asad)

Infact this all make no sense.

it is all monarchists and Nato games for dominance and to destroy peace to prolong their rule.

Turkey is killing members of a Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist gang funded and armed by the USSR and Syria which has been killing Turkish and Kurdish people for decades. They're not 'Kurdish' in the sense that as good little 'cultural revolutionaries' they believe Kurdish culture is fake and a result of false-consciousness of true class divisions in the proletariat.

I'm sure you don't care if Pakistan kills fundamentalist Muslims in Pakistan for taking up arms, so why are you attacking Turkey for doing the same to a group of people who are trying to destroy Muslim culture by killing people? The Pakistani army did exactly the same to Marxist groups in Pakistan in the 1950's.

 

[T-Rex]

Turkey is killing members of a Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist gang funded and armed by the USSR and Syria which has been killing Turkish and Kurdish people for decades. They're not 'Kurdish' in the sense that as good little 'cultural revolutionaries' they believe Kurdish culture is fake and a result of false-consciousness of true class divisions in the proletariat.

I'm sure you don't care if Pakistan kills fundamentalist Muslims in Pakistan for taking up arms, so why are you attacking Turkey for doing the same to a group of people who are trying to destroy Muslim culture by killing people? The Pakistani army did exactly the same to Marxist groups in Pakistan in the 1950's.

The problem with these leftists is that they are despotic and undemocratic. I am against you using the term 'fundamentalist' to describe any Muslim. The westerners abuse this term to slander Muslims. The more appropriate term is 'Muslim terrorists' because in many cases those terrorists are secular Muslims like sisi and asad. Terrorism is a crime against humanity, it doesn't matter whether it is committed in the name of Islam or secularism.

 

[Madali]

And was it the USA which forced the Ayatollahs to encourage Bashar to maintain his minority sectarian regime? The Ayatollahs could have encouraged the formation of a federal structure for Syria but they decided that on no account would Sunni Syrians be given a say in the running of their country.

Exactly the same way as after coming to power in the 1979 'revolution' they made it illegal for a Sunni Iranian to ever lead Iran.

If the Ayatollahs had encouraged a new democratic power structure in Syria, this would have increased pressure for democratic change on all the Arab regimes in the region, and elevated the status of Iran in the area and world. Now not only is Iran and Hezbollah hated by all the regimes, it's also hated by all the people.

This is exactly why Sheikh Tufayli the first secretary general of Hezbollah warned Iran that it was declaring war against 1.2 billion Sunnis by its own behavior.



He's a Pakistani. Why are you asking him to compare how the Saudi Arabian government treats its Shia minority versus how the Iranian government treats its Sunni minority?

Why don't you ask him to compare how the Pakistani government treats its Shia minority versus how the Iranian government treats its minority Sunnis?

1. In Iran it's illegal for a Sunni to be the leader of Iran: In Pakistan it's not only legal for a Shia to be the leader but it has had several Shia leaders.

2. In Iran it's illegal for a Sunni to study Sunni religion outside Iran. In Pakistan hundreds of thousands of Shia travel outside the country including to Iran to study Shi'ism.

3. In Iran a Sunni has never been allowed to head any senior military post. In Pakistan several Shia have been generals.

4. In Iran it's next to impossible for Sunnis to get permission for a mosque. In Pakistan there are thousands of not only Shia mosques but also imam-barghas etc.

5. In Iran, Sunnis are forced to read Eid prayers behind a Shia religious leader. In Pakistan, Shia can pray behind whoever they like.

Now be honest. Which is more fair to its minority??

Holy shit, enough. In EVERY thread, whatever, the topic, you are only talking about sectarian crap and Iran. I keep ignoring you, but you can't seem to shut up. If it's a topic about Saudi, then you talk about Shias & Iran. If its a topic about Syria, then you talk about Shias and Iran. ENOUGH. We get it, Iran is EVIL.

But since you are constantly trying to create sectarian rifts, let me response to your bullshit.

Lets see.

1) When you say "leader", what do you mean? You mean can a Sunni become the Velayat Faghih in Iran? Duh, I doubt it, because it's a Shia concept. Could he become President? Maybe, but its extremely doubtful given that over 90% of the population are Shia. How about in the Majlis? Yes, there are Sunnis. How about in the Assembly of Experts.
As you can see there are both. There are not that many, but that's democracy for you.
Dream Of Iran

2) Bullshit. It's not illegal. I have personal knowledge of sunnis who have gone to even Saudi Arabia to study and came back to their city to then teach others.

3) Lies. I don't want to go and research this, but here is a quick example,
گفتگو با فرمانده اهل‌ سنت که به درجه سرتیپی رسید +عکس

He is a Sartip, which is a Brigadier General.

In his words,
"حرف من با آن گروه از افراد که مي گويند درجه اميري را به اهل سنت نمي دهند اين است که خيلي از شيعه ها هم به درجه اميري نمي رسند.دريک پادگان شايد ۱۰ نفر سرهنگ باشند و تنها يک نفر سرتيپ وجود داشته باشد.اما چون تعداد نظاميان اهل سنت در مقايسه با اهل تشيع کمتر است تعداد افرادي هم که از بين اهل تسنن به درجه اميري مي رسند کمتر از شيعيان است و اين هيچ ارتباطي با سياست هاي نظام ندارد."

What he is saying basically is, to those who claim sunnis can't be generals, it's because in one brigade there might be 10 lieutenants, and only 1 general, and because sunnis are fewer than shias, then obviously, there will be less sunni generals than shias.

If you knew farsi, you could have read the comments on that page. Every poster is proud of him. This shows that the way Iranians look at such news. ALL of the comments on that page are wishing him the best and praying for him.

4) Another lie. First of all, THIS NEEDS TO STOP. THERE ARE NO SUNNI/SHIA MOSQUES. THERE IS ONLY ISLAMIC MOSQUE.
Cant a sunni pray in a shia mosque or a shia in a sunni mosque?

There are hundreds of sunni mosques in Iran. I once calculated, and saw that proportion to the population, the mosques are higher in number.
Here is one example,

5) Another lie. There is no such law. In Sunni majority cities, I am sure shias will pray behind a sunni religious leader.


In Iran, Khameini released a fatwa on his followers that if any of them creates any rifts between the two sects, it is considered Haram.
"“Any statements and actions that set fire between Muslims or insulting sanctities of any Muslim sects is a service to the camp of disbelievers and haram.”
"In this vast arena we must try not to let the enemy forment discord among us (among shias , sunni's etc). There must be a sense of brotherhood among us""

Here are some statements by the two leaders,

Look at this beautiful quote

 

[B@KH]

Yes, you're right but at this stage how different is Asad from the monarchists?

The problem are the ksa monarchists lover who are crying that No ASAD.

Asad is syrian and has big following and has right to participate in any election. while ksa monarchists crying NO.
Asad is not at fault since he is ready to participate in any election. Elections minus Asad are not acceptable to a large segment of syrian society.

so please try to understand the conflict and do not mix asad with monarchists.

Turkey is killing members of a Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist gang funded and armed by the USSR and Syria which has been killing Turkish and Kurdish people for decades. They're not 'Kurdish' in the sense that as good little 'cultural revolutionaries' they believe Kurdish culture is fake and a result of false-consciousness of true class divisions in the proletariat.

I'm sure you don't care if Pakistan kills fundamentalist Muslims in Pakistan for taking up arms, so why are you attacking Turkey for doing the same to a group of people who are trying to destroy Muslim culture by killing people? The Pakistani army did exactly the same to Marxist groups in Pakistan in the 1950's.

your post itself speak of your insanity.

Marxists or Monarchists.

come out of sectarian and religion. these wars are not imposed by religion or sects.
the trouble makers only fooling that that these wars are due to sects and religions.

Monarchy is a proven curse for muslims. making hell everywhere.

 

[libertycall]

Holy shit, enough. In EVERY thread, whatever, the topic, you are only talking about sectarian crap and Iran. I keep ignoring you, but you can't seem to shut up. If it's a topic about Saudi, then you talk about Shias & Iran. If its a topic about Syria, then you talk about Shias and Iran. ENOUGH. We get it, Iran is EVIL.

But since you are constantly trying to create sectarian rifts, let me response to your bullshit.

Lets see.

1) When you say "leader", what do you mean? You mean can a Sunni become the Velayat Faghih in Iran? Duh, I doubt it, because it's a Shia concept. Could he become President? Maybe, but its extremely doubtful given that over 90% of the population are Shia. How about in the Majlis? Yes, there are Sunnis. How about in the Assembly of Experts.
As you can see there are both. There are not that many, but that's democracy for you.
Dream Of Iran

2) Bullshit. It's not illegal. I have personal knowledge of sunnis who have gone to even Saudi Arabia to study and came back to their city to then teach others.

3) Lies. I don't want to go and research this, but here is a quick example,
گفتگو با فرمانده اهل‌ سنت که به درجه سرتیپی رسید +عکس

He is a Sartip, which is a Brigadier General.

In his words,
"حرف من با آن گروه از افراد که مي گويند درجه اميري را به اهل سنت نمي دهند اين است که خيلي از شيعه ها هم به درجه اميري نمي رسند.دريک پادگان شايد ۱۰ نفر سرهنگ باشند و تنها يک نفر سرتيپ وجود داشته باشد.اما چون تعداد نظاميان اهل سنت در مقايسه با اهل تشيع کمتر است تعداد افرادي هم که از بين اهل تسنن به درجه اميري مي رسند کمتر از شيعيان است و اين هيچ ارتباطي با سياست هاي نظام ندارد."

What he is saying basically is, to those who claim sunnis can't be generals, it's because in one brigade there might be 10 lieutenants, and only 1 general, and because sunnis are fewer than shias, then obviously, there will be less sunni generals than shias.

If you knew farsi, you could have read the comments on that page. Every poster is proud of him. This shows that the way Iranians look at such news. ALL of the comments on that page are wishing him the best and praying for him.

4) Another lie. First of all, THIS NEEDS TO STOP. THERE ARE NO SUNNI/SHIA MOSQUES. THERE IS ONLY ISLAMIC MOSQUE.
Cant a sunni pray in a shia mosque or a shia in a sunni mosque?

There are hundreds of sunni mosques in Iran. I once calculated, and saw that proportion to the population, the mosques are higher in number.
Here is one example,


5) Another lie. There is no such law. In Sunni majority cities, I am sure shias will pray behind a sunni religious leader.


In Iran, Khameini released a fatwa on his followers that if any of them creates any rifts between the two sects, it is considered Haram.
"“Any statements and actions that set fire between Muslims or insulting sanctities of any Muslim sects is a service to the camp of disbelievers and haram.”
"In this vast arena we must try not to let the enemy forment discord among us (among shias , sunni's etc). There must be a sense of brotherhood among us""

Here are some statements by the two leaders,


Look at this beautiful quote

You begin by doing what you accuse me of doing, and take the opportunity to pretend that you're 'masoom'?

1. The Supreme Executive of Pakistan can be and on occasions have been Shiite.

In Iran, the Supreme Executive MUST be a Shiite.

This isn't a ruling which has come down from heaven. It's a law made by the Ayatollahs of Iran, who are men, so don't pretend that it is about anything more than seizing power on behalf of one religious community.

When the rulers of Iran made such laws, they automatically declared all Sunni Iranians as second-class.

2. I'll take that with a shipload of salt.

3. One bird does not herald spring.

4. Check the link below

Authorities discriminate against Muslim minorities, including Sunnis who account for about 10 percent of the population, in political participation and employment. They also prevent Sunni Iranians from constructing mosques in major cities. In recent years officials have repeatedly prevented Sunnis from conducting separate Eid prayers in Tehran and other cities.

World Report 2012: Iran | Human Rights Watch

Sunni Muslims in Tehran have been banned from congregating at prayers marking the end of Ramadan.

Iran, a Shia country, ordered its Sunni minority not to hold separate prayers in Tehran for Eid al-Fitr, the Muslim festival that brings the month of fasting to an end. They were instead asked to have a Shia imam leading their prayers – something that is against their religious beliefs.

Hundreds of security police were deployed in the capital to prevent Sunni worshippers from entering houses they rent for religious ceremonies.

In recent decades, Iranian authorities have refused Sunnis permission to build their own mosques in Tehran. There is currently no Sunni mosque in the capital, despite there being several churches and synagogues for much smaller Christian and Jewish populations. .

"Tehran's security police prevented Sunni worshippers from performing Eid prayers in various parts of the capital," the official website of the Sunni community in Iran said. "They surrounded the houses where Sunnis perform prayers and have prevented worshippers from going inside."

Sunni Muslims banned from holding own Eid prayers in Tehran | World news | The Guardian

ERBIL, Kurdistan Region - Iranian security forces prevented Sunnis from gathering for Friday prayers during an Islamic Unity Conference in Tehran attended by Sunni and Shiite leaders from around the world.

Iranian Internet websites reported that security forces blocked all roads to a small mosque where Mawlawi Abdulhamid, a prominent Sunni cleric, was scheduled to lead the Friday sermon.

Abdulhamid and hundreds of Sunni clerics and scholars from around the world were in Tehran for the Islamic Unity Conference, organized by Iranian authorities last week.

Pictures from the conference showed Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei speaking with Abdulhamid.

Abdulhamid is the leading imam and preacher of Iran’s Sunni Baloch community in the eastern city of Zahidan.

Jalal Jalalizadeh, a Kurdish professor at Tehran University and former MP from Sanandaj (Sina), confirmed that he found all streets leading to the mosque blocked when he went there to pray on Friday.

Jalalizadeh told the baloch campaign website that security forces had warned the caretakers of the Sunni mosque a day earlier “that they did not have the right to hold Friday prayers this week.”

Reports of the Sunni prayers being stopped by the security forces came just two days after Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani called for religious coexistence in the country.

Iranian police prevent Sunni prayers during Islamic unity confer

I'm less impressed with quotes about peaceful intentions, than I am by deeds showing them.

I look forward to the day when an Iranian Sunni has just as much right to be the supreme executive of Iran; as a Pakistani Shiite has to be the same in Pakistan.

Now if you don't want to discuss these topics, I suggest you don't bother replying. I would have more trust in your word that you are not interested in discussing these issues.

 

[Zaneesh852]

Russia actually opened up the pandorabox for Syria. Though invited by Asad regime, Russians gave excuse to Turks and Saudis for making an official push into Syria. And this is just the start, I afraid soon we will see many countries pushing into Syria to fulfill their own agendas and ISIS will be the least significant part of that.

 

[B@KH]

You begin by doing what you accuse me of doing, and take the opportunity to pretend that you're 'masoom'?
1. The Supreme Executive of Pakistan can be and on occasions have been Shiite.
In Iran, the Supreme Executive MUST be a Shiite.
This isn't a ruling which has come down from heaven. It's a law made by the Ayatollahs of Iran, who are men, so don't pretend that it is about anything more than seizing power on behalf of one religious community.
When the rulers of Iran made such laws, they automatically declared all Sunni Iranians as second-class.
2. I'll take that with a shipload of salt.
3. One bird does not herald spring.
4. Check the link below
World Report 2012: Iran | Human Rights Watch
Sunni Muslims banned from holding own Eid prayers in Tehran | World news | The Guardian
Iranian police prevent Sunni prayers during Islamic unity confer
I'm less impressed with quotes about peaceful intentions, than I am by deeds showing them.
I look forward to the day when an Iranian Sunni has just as much right to be the supreme executive of Iran; as a Pakistani Shiite has to be the same in Pakistan.
Now if you don't want to discuss these topics, I suggest you don't bother replying. I would have more trust in your word that you are not interested in discussing these issues.

senseless and worthless. Iran is overwhelmingly shia and all minorities have their due rights and representation.

In Pakistan Shia do not consider themselves as minority. since shias are the second largest segment after sunni barelvis. therefore there is no point of any such legislation in Pakistan that ruler be sunni and not shia. Pakistan is quite a different. Zia tried but failed. The only chance in Pak is equal rights. KSA gangs too did their best to marginalize and deprive shias of their due rights without much success since Shias are not less in pak and cannot be defeated or marginalized.

these sectarian talks lead to nowhere. this problem will be over when Muslims ummah get rid of the monarchy.