This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Assad Condemns "Savage" Paris Attacks, Blames French Foreign Policy
On the morning after the stunning and tragic wave of terror attacks that turned the streets of Paris into a veritable warzone on Friday evening, the French (not to mention the world) are searching for answers.
And we don’t mean in terms of assigning blame. ISIS has claimed responsibility and indeed, despite some early suggestions by terrorist “experts” that the attack looked more like the work of al-Qaeda, there was never any real question as to who would be blamed and who would take “credit.”
Rather, the questions now revolve around how it could have come to this. Between last night’s massacre in the streets of Paris and a refugee crisis that to most Europeans probably seems to have come out of nowhere, it must appear to some as if the world has inexplicably descended into chaos over the past six or so months.
Of course that’s not the case. The events that ultimately led to the enormous people flows into Europe and to Friday’s attacks in Paris have been unfolding in Syria for the better part of five years and because this probably isn’t the time for a scathing Western foreign policy critique on our part, we simply present comments below from Syrian President Bashar al-Assad with not further comment. The first passages are from mid-September, the second from today.
* * *
From September
(via CNN)
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is blaming Western nations for fueling the refugee crisis by supporting opposition groups in his country's bloody civil war.
"If you are worried about them, stop supporting terrorists," he said in an interview with Russian news organizations. "That's what we think regarding the crisis. This is the core of the whole issue of refugees."
"Europe is responsible because it supported terrorism," he said in the interview at his home in Damascus, the capital.
The European Union in May 2013 ended an arms embargo on rebel groups fighting the Syrian government. The United States, meanwhile, has been offering limited support to moderate Syrian rebels in the fight against ISIS.
"Can you feel sad for a child's death in the sea and not for thousands of children who have been killed by the terrorists in Syria?" al-Assad said, referring to images of a dead Syrian boy that shocked the world. "And also for men, women, and the elderly? These European double standards are no longer acceptable."
Despite his bitter accusations, al-Assad said he was willing to shake hands with any leader who would join the fight against ISIS and hoped to cooperate with the West and Saudi Arabia in building a "real antiterrorist coalition," the Russian news agency Interfax reported.
He said his forces weren't communicating or cooperating tactically with the U.S.-led coalition that's carrying out airstrikes against ISIS positions in Syria and Iraq.
"They cannot accept the reality that we are the only power fighting ISIS on the ground," he said in reference to the United States. "For them, maybe if they cooperate with the Syrian Army, this is like a recognition or our effectiveness in fighting ISIS."
He accused the U.S. government of "willful blindness" on the matter.
* * *
From today
Syrian President Bashar al Assad condemned Friday's attacks in Paris and said that such acts of terror were similar to what his people had faced in years of violent civil war.
"What France suffered from savage terror is what the Syrian people have been enduring for over five years," the Syrian President was quoted as saying on state media and Lebanese TV station al Mayadeen
(via AFP)
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said Saturday that French policy had contributed to the "spread of terrorism" that culminated in attacks claimed by the Islamic State group which killed 128 people in Paris.
In a meeting with a delegation of French lawmakers in Damascus, Assad said France's "mistaken policies... had contributed to the spread of terrorism."
"The terrorist attacks that targeted the French capital Paris cannot be separated from what happened in the Lebanese capital Beirut lately and from what has been happening in Syria for the past five years and in other areas," he said.
Assad was referring to twin bombings claimed by IS which killed 44 people on Thursday in the southern suburbs of Beirut, a stronghold of his Lebanese ally, Shiite militant group Hezbollah.
Assad regards all the rebel groups fighting his forces inside Syria as "terrorists", not just IS.
Assad said he had "warned against what would happen in Europe for the past three years."
"We said, don't take what is happening in Syria lightly. Unfortunately, European officials did not listen," he said, in comments to the delegation broadcast by France's Europe 1 radio.
He said French President Francois Hollande "should change his policy."
"The question that is being asked throughout France today is, was France's policy over the past five years the right one? The answer is no."
»
- 418 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Exactly. Assad has lived with attacks like this for years, thanks to the US CIA sanctioned/created ISIS versus a staged pic of a boy on a beach, who was on his way to Europe from Turkey, not Syria.
The US and France attack Syria for years so they can push thru a Saudi Quatari pipeline despite the signed agreement of Syria Iraq and Iran for an alternate pipeline, and then create horror and massacre for children and people in Syria to stop it.
The US will undoubtably use this attack to maxium effect, to further their petrodollar foreign policy, which brings ruin to the MENA region. There will be no press in Syria wringing their hands and lamenting the massacre of Syrians from the increased US and French bombs that will use this attack as a rationale, and the CIA funded ISIS.
If you dont want terror, stop creating and funding terrorists.
But the Wolfowitz doctrine wants to ''destabilize the region'', and so they do want terror.
Paris is what happens unfortunately
What is crazy is Saddam, Kadaffi, and Assad all kept this people in line. Where is the US goes in and kills them off and then the panic ensues for the rest of the world.
My conclustion is that the CIA cant be that stupid and are just trying to ensure that the US has perpetual bases in the middle east.
Not the US. The Obama regime. We didnt kill Saddam. The Iraqi government tried and executed Saddam. We also didnt just break the regime there and leave. We set about nation building. Obama stopped that cold to let the crazies and akready islamic regimes of the area run roughshod there.
We create Al Queda for Afghanistan and ISIS in Jordan for Syria.
This provides the cover to send in troops abroad, and militarized policing at home.
Qui bono?
A perfect perpetual fuck up machine.
Cui*
What is crazy is Saddam, Kadaffi, and Assad all kept this people in line.
Libyans practiced direct democracy. Often proposals made by Kaddafi were voted down by the people, sometimes not and all was well. It was the most prosperous nation in Africa.
Libya: From Africa’s Wealthiest Democracy Under Gaddafi to Terrorist Haven After US Intervention~"Assad Condemns "Savage" Paris Attacks, Blames French Foreign Policy"~
Well ruck me funning, and all this time I thought the problem was the totalitarian fascist nature of Islam. I guess that goes to show what I know.
Obama will not finish his second term! This will scare millions! Current Events Linked to Ancient Biblical Prophecy!
http://motivationdose.com/alive-after-the-fall/
Isn't it bad enough that I have to look at Hillary and Trump for at least a whole 'nuther year without having to read that same post over and over again as well?
The "attack" was a staged event.
Here is a video and the story of a "crisis" actor who makes the claim that he was talking on his cell phone which took a bullet and "saved his life".
http://www.nbcnews.com/video/cell-phone-stops-projectile-saves-man-in-pa...
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/paris-terror-attacks-man...
Look at his face. IT IS NOT EVEN BRUISED. No CUTS. NO INJURY.
Anybody who has ever been shot wearing body armor is bruised from the impact of a bullet.
Bullets have MOMENTUM. And that MOMENTUM would have transfered to the phone which would have smacked that man on the side of his face. (He claims to have been talking on it.) But there is no swelling, no brusing, no evidence, whatsoever, other than a Cell phone.
And then the bullet magically passed through his hand??? Hold a Cell Phone up to your face. How much of it is covered by your hand?
Now what are the odds that your hand is not injured? (Percentage of the area of Cellphone not covered by your hand to the entire area of the Cellphone).
Now look at the screen of that phone...Look at where the damage is located.
Looking at the pictures of the victims..there is no blood on the sheets and the scene is just too antiseptic...just like it was a Hollywood production.
He must have had the Bible on his cell phone to stop the bullet.
Oh cmon - this story is just silly. You can't draw any conclusion from this. Someone shout Baba- Bouey!!!!
Most news services reported it as a shrapnel fragment. Which is possibly more plausible:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2015/nov/14/man-shows-mobile-phon...
Put up your cell phne toyour face and see how much ofyour hand covers it. His hand would habe been even more likely to have been hit if it were an irregularly shaped shard of shrapnel
yup
try this one
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/survivor-of-bataclan-theatre-massacre...
absolute trash
if she was lying in "pools of blood" for hours..
then that bloody vest is teflon coated
theres some lying going on alright.
.
TBT
Can you really be that dense?
It wasn't merely about killing off Saddam.
It was about a DECEITFUL military invasion of Iraq which killed thousands,
destroyed their government, their infrastructure and economy,set up death squads,
tortured many,
and intentionally fanned sectarianism for occupation purposes (divide & conquer).
The US nation built Iraq? (lol)
The puppet government of miliarily occupied Iraq "tried and executed" Saddam? (rotfl)
Nation building in Iraq, that's not even laughable, that's beyond absurd. Paul Bremer took away most meaningful points out of the plan, which was drawn for post-war Iraq using blueprints or Marshall plan, disbanded military, 'De'Baathed' command structure of the government, essentially ensuring protracted civil war. Watch "No End in Sight" documentary, it details pretty well what was happening right after Saddam was deposed, there are plenty of points supporting the idea that today's ISIS was born out of the ashes of Iraqi army. Ever wonder why most ISIS commanders are ex-Saddam military and government?
"Iraq" was created by western powers drawing maps after.WWI. Sykes-Picot. The post-WWII international regime set up by the WWII allies known as the UN made those borders and that country name "sovereign" and sacrosanct. The collection of peoples there was never meant to be one nation, but the Bush folks tried anyway.
That goes for entire Middle East, all countries including KSA were carved out out of the Ottoman empire post WW1. Bush folks didn't try to plaster Iraq together, never intended to, that's quite obvious and I don't believe it was a blunder.
Of course America killed Saddam, it was their puppet government that they installed that officially did the deeds yes, but, but if we consider him a war criminal, he should have been tried and convicted in Den Haag.
Also America did NOT try to build up the nation of Iraq, they destroyed it. History speaks for itself with the chaos it have wrought.
And just as one small example, they had no respect for the Iraqi culture, as ancient Babylonian ruins were destroyed in 2003 by the Americans in order to make room for a helipad.
Of course America killed Saddam, it was their puppet government that they installed that officially did the deeds yes, but, but if we consider him a war criminal, he should have been tried and convicted in Den Haag.
Also America did NOT try to build up the nation of Iraq, they destroyed it. History speaks for itself with the chaos it have wrought.
And just as one small example, they had no respect for the Iraqi culture, as ancient Babylonian ruins were destroyed in 2003 by the Americans in order to make room for a helipad.
When you have a Saddam and Gaddafi there are less possibilities to 'direct' the country. What they want is democratically elected leaders from a 2 party system (alternating in phases between 8 and 12 years), because these can be bought by the corporations. Gaddafi and Saddam could not be directed or bought by the corporations, they were strong men. Egypt has a strongman again, but he is financially dependent on the US, so that works smoothly.
Assad must be replaced by a democratically elected (hoops, bought) leader from a party duopoly so that the pipeline can be put through and the Russian ships no longer have a port in the Mediterranean. That's why Hillary said "Assad must go" - revealing that the State Department determines who comes and goes. But it ain't so simple.
Islam, the religion, it texts and its adberents, refer to any and all infidel regions as the House of War.
Since 13 centuries running, no matter what your foreign policy is, you live in the House of War.
France is just hutting the.stage.of their islamisatiin where the islamic minority starts to extend its control beyond the occupied public slum cities to impose their totalitarian values on the greater.public. Bars, restaurants and nightclubs with drinking, dancing uncovered women were targeted. You cant read the Koran and Hadiths and Sharia dictates and fail to understand the choice of targets.
As People of the Book, Christians and Jews are allowed their own religions and customs. The Islamists, exactly like American Evangelicals, are a small idiot minority. Even then it takes someone to organize and direct them. Otherwise, they'd just be embarassing party guests.
"Yeah, those American Evangelicals with their suicide bombers yelling "John 3:16!" as they indiscriminately blow up random innocents are the real problem in the world today"...said no person, ever.
Put down the crack pipe and start living in the real world, you fucking delusional retarded dipshit.
"Since 13 centuries running, no matter what your foreign policy is, you live in the House of War". Totally wrong, the non-Muslim lands are the House of Disbelief (Daar ul Kufr) unless the House of Islaam is attacked, at which point self-defence becomes an obligation if called for by the Leader (Imaam/Khalif). The Qur'aan explicitly forbids acts of aggression and so the status change from House of Disbelief to House of War (Daar ul Harb) is totally down to whether or not the non-Muslims lands act aggressively against the Muslims. It is not even a foreign policy, it is a domestic policy.
"The Qur'aan explicitly forbids acts of aggression..."
I guess you have a different version of the Koran than everyone else does.
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/023-violence.htm
Question:Does the Quran really contain dozens of verses promoting violence?
Summary Answer:
The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.
Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, the verses of violence in the Quran are mostly open-ended, meaning that they are not restrained by the historical context of the surrounding text. They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subject to interpretation as anything else in the Quran.
The context of violent passages is more ambiguous than might be expected of a perfect book from a loving God; however this works both ways. Most of today's Muslims exercise a personal choice to interpret their holy book's call to arms according to their own moral preconceptions about justifiable violence. Apologists cater to their preferences with tenuous arguments that gloss over historical fact and generally do not stand up to scrutiny. Still, it is important to note that the problem is not bad people, but bad ideology.
Unfortunately, there are very few verses of tolerance and peace to abrogate or even balance out the many that call for nonbelievers to be fought and subdued until they either accept humiliation, convert to Islam, or are killed. Muhammad's own martial legacy - and that of his companions - along with the remarkable stress on violence found in the Quran have produced a trail of blood and tears across world history.
The Qur'an says point blank: "Fight in the way of God against those who fight you, but do not commit aggression. Truly God does not love aggressors" (2:190).
Both Wahabbi cultists and anti-Muslim bigots do this sham cut-and-paste approach of singling out some Qur'anic verses regarding war and ignoring other verses that teach restraint and ethics in warfare, thus removing any context and creating an imaginary evil Islam that has no basis in history.
http://www.aboutjihad.com/terrorism/quran_misquote_part_2.php
And you are claiming the Old Testament is more civilized with regard to war? The Old Testament has dozens of verses calling for the kiillng not just enemy men, but women, children and babies in their cribs. Read the Book of Joshua to see how the Bible promotes killing children and babies and holds such acts as heroic. Islam was the first of the Abrahamic religions to establish that killing civilians in war is haraam (forbidden) and that priests and monks of other reiigions were not to be molested. It was the Biblical injunctions that motivated the Crusaders and the Spanish Conquistadores to slaughter millions of women and children in the name of Christ, while it was the Qur'anic injunctions that restrained Muslim warriors like Saladin from committing massacres of Christians and Jews in battle.
Compared to the Bible, the Qur'an is a pacifist tex:
http://www.amazon.com/Laying-Down-Sword-Ignore-Violent/dp/0061990728
Ignorant bullshit. http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/023-violence.htm
Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, the verses of violence in the Quran are mostly open-ended, meaning that they are not restrained by the historical context of the surrounding text. They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subject to interpretation as anything else in the Quran.
The context of violent passages is more ambiguous than might be expected of a perfect book from a loving God; however this works both ways. Most of today's Muslims exercise a personal choice to interpret their holy book's call to arms according to their own moral preconceptions about justifiable violence. Apologists cater to their preferences with tenuous arguments that gloss over historical fact and generally do not stand up to scrutiny. Still, it is important to note that the problem is not bad people, but bad ideology.
Unfortunately, there are very few verses of tolerance and peace to abrogate or even balance out the many that call for nonbelievers to be fought and subdued until they either accept humiliation, convert to Islam, or are killed. Muhammad's own martial legacy - and that of his companions - along with the remarkable stress on violence found in the Quran have produced a trail of blood and tears across world history.
You're one those useful idiots that still believe Islam is the religion of peace and Muslims are all victims of those mean old European atheists, East Asian Buddhists, Indian Hindus, and Christians.
Tell use where is the new version of the Koran that teaches peace? How is it in this day and age, so many Muslims are still going around blowing people up and chopping off heads if the Koran is so pacifist? I don't see Christians, Buddhists or Hindus across the world chopping off heads. Why weren't their religions hijacked by cultists? The truth is 90% of Muslims are Wahhabists. That means your religion of peace is a psychopathic cult. All you Muslim fanatics can do is point to a randon act of violence by other religions every decade or so or maybe something that happened 1000 years ago. Islam today is much worse than anything any other religion has ever done. It cannot transform itself into a religion of peace because it is a violent and controlling political cult like Nazisim or Communism.
.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sufism
Saudi Arabia is a strict adherent to Wahhabism under the umbrella of Salifism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabism
http://www.barenakedislam.com/2012/07/05/salifism-the-most-radical-sect-of-islam-is-also-the-worlds-fastest-growing-sect-of-islam/
No, they were a problem back in the 80's when they were burning/blowing up abortion clinics. But ever since Bush 41 put the ATF onto them, they've settled for assasinating physicians.
Oh, right, yeah. Half a dozen abortion clinics versus 27,269 acts of Islamic terrorism since 9/11?
You are making a clown of yourself.
Over 200, nationwide. And there was no wealthy royal family financing them.
Over 200? You're more full of shit than the Saudi royal family. Atheist nutjob cultists have killed far more people than all religions in the world combined. Second is the Muslims.
Yeah, those Homicide Droners, going by names like Aaron, Adam, Ben, Jonathan, Levi... Zach. Real Christians have OT names, don't ya know? /s
all the (mutually exclusive and invented by kleptocrats) invisible masters are bad for us (and good for them) - priming bovine mases to be mental slaves (through what's basically child abuse)
Yup! Fanatics are fanatics. All of them want to rule the world. Fucking hypocrites. Pawns of deception.
Some fanatics want to impose freedom in these hell holes, human right as understood in the West. Other fanatics, foreign and domestic, do indeed want to impose abject tyranny. Know your fanatic types.
Where are these fanatics that want to impose freedom? The vast majority of idiots in the world today think that mob rule is freedom. Freedom is an individual right, not the right of the majority to impose their will on the minority.
Tell me about the responsibilities of freedom as an individual right. . .
There are more Muslims in the world than Christians.
None of the religions is worth its salt. All religions are more trouble than they are worth.
This is really about the control and ownership of the Golan Heights and the associated water and oil there.
Israel will continue to foment until it is theirs.
We fanaticized some folks
What do you call the country that has the world record in killing people and destroying lives?
Oh oh oh pick me! Is it Russia? China you tell me? Damn. They arent even tied?
Shep Smith is having kittens right now that one of the suicide bombers had a Syrian passport on him showing he came through Greece with the rest of the refugees.
Me, personally, I always carry my passport on me when I'm going to blow myself up. Plus they're well known to be very tough documents that are rarely damaged even in the middle of a high yield bomb explosion.
I'm going camping in a few minutes. Had enough of this shit for one weekend. See y'all on Monday.
Don't forget your Kevlar passport.
Well, if 'going camping' is a euphemism for going out to kill a bunch of sheeple in a terror attack, then BY ALL MEANS, he must not forget to bring his passpord with him.
Otherwise, then it's not much use.
French newspapers are reporting the attackers were wearing bright white, super clean, Nike sneakers.
That's odd.
Just seen a report a Frenchman has been arrested at Gatwick airport London dumping a gun amongst other things in a bin, he was acting suspiciously and the public reported him to the airport police.
Not odd at all. Helps you quickly identify each other on the street on D-Day.
Not only they kill innocent people, they even have bad taste for clothing. In Paris (the capital of fashion), imagine that...
It seemed to work for the 9/11 Hijackers.
7/11 was a part time job.
Well...
1) Paris police do stop and demand ID from people. I've had this happen to me before. Having your passport or a copy of it on you while walking the streets of Paris is standard procedure for anyone not wanting to take a trip to the police station.
2) The dead terrorist in question may not have blown himself up.
If I had an AK and planned to shoot people with it I wouldn't be too concerned with a Policeman asking to see my ID. I doubt the police asking would get away alive if they tried to apprehend a bloke with a bomb belt and an AK.
obviously a lot of ZH'ers don't consider the logistics for criminal acts very well. You'd all make pretty bad criminals, that's not a bad thing.
Only a moron would walk around the streets of Paris with bombs and guns and not be actively shooting them. Instead, groups like this meet from different areas, likely at a quickly-arranged drop spot where they pick up weapons to do their deed. Only an absolute fool plans a massacre by having his team get in the paris metro with all of the gear they need for terror.
Cmon people, think. The passport would be a necessary thing to have on you if you're a muslim from a muslim country and you're trying to make your drop point without a major delay.
Well obviously likewise I doubt the police response to a man with an AK would be to ask him for his ID. Yes a passport would be required up to the point you decide to start the attack then maybe leave it at home or burn it or throw it a random bin somewhere.
And you don't think the rush of adrenaline and excitement of getting a weapon handed to you, with the full knowledge that you're about to slaughter innocents and die in the process might be distraction enough to forget to ditch your passport copy?
This isn't a false flag, face it.
Has anyone considered that the passports were deliberate, like a calling card.
maybe alah checks passports before doleing out the virgins
You're so stupid it went right over your head. They had to have the passport to get to their staging area where the weapons were stashed, which was probably near where the attacks happened.
The level of intelligence is not what it used to here, is it?
I know many ZH veterans bemoan lack of depth in my posts and onelinens.
That does not bother me as much. Short and to
the point is fine with me. I also find cleaver
oneliners entertaining.
However, sheer stupidity is hard to take.
A foreign passport wouldn't be necessary. There are enough French citizens of North African/Middle Eastern ancestry that French identity papers would pass just as well.
The point is, any appropriate form of ID--real or fake-- will do. You just need something to show if you get stopped. If a passport is easier to get ahold of, you use that. Fake Syrian passports are just about the easiest thing to get in the last 6 months. I'm sure the supply on the street is abundant.
nuubee :hasbara troll
Sadly most of these people are drowning in false-flag water.
“Your papers please, monsieur.. my, that a fine looking black outfit and matching AK-47 you have there.. move along”
:-)
Problem is streets in Paris are so friggin dangerous anything of value you carry will be stolen by black muslims from north africa. They would drool over an American passport or drivers license. Oh yeah, I almost got killed in the Paris subway but luckily run too fast for the two rather fat MENAs who tried to catch me. Thank goodness they did not have a gun to shoot me in the back.
Running away is one of my favorite strategies of attack. I think the French invented it.
I don't plan on going back to 90% of Europe any time soon. It's crazy when South America and Asia are safer.
I always wanted to visit the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, and Poland-- but up until now had preferred western Europe.
Now central/eastern Europe is looking good!
You can wear an AK-47 and a bomb-belt in Paris, as long as you have your passport in your pocket it's all right.
Vee vill find zis mad boomber... :>D
I'm surprised that they didn't "find" a Russian passport for good measure.
All part of Soro's plan...
http://sheekyforums.com/thread/52121254/politics/i-wonder-who-is-behind-...
http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/forum/21/221
Spock tells me that he's 'fascinated' by the facts that ISIS is nicely supplied with US ARs (from 'Moderate' Rebels), when fighting in the ME, but are now using Russian AK-47s when attacking abroad. Fascinating.
I had to remind him that ISIS and its sponsors are image and PR-conscious, and that they don't want to leave the wrong kind of subliminal impression behind. /s
After you say Suicide Bomber everything else seem logical. I'm surprised he was even wearing pants.
Reminds me of NY police finding the passport of I think it was Atta, intact in the dust and ebris of the buildings
Reminds me of NY police finding the passport of I think it was Atta, intact in the dust and ebris of the buildings
You can't change an Oligarch's agenda, the Elite (hopefully they hang first), The Evil Ones (who will burn in hell), have a target and it must be achieved at all costs. Welcome to WWIII Prelude.
Indeed...
ISLAM IS TERROR. http://imgur.com/gallery/aeIGCJv
The Saudi Secret Service is not Islam. And while they're Muslims, all Muslims aren't terrorists. You from Texas?
No, not all Muslims are terrorists-- only the best Muslims are terrorists.
Quran (4:95) - "Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home), except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame, etc.), and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has preferred in grades those who strive hard and fight with their wealth and their lives above those who sit (at home). Unto each, Allah has promised good (Paradise), but Allah has preferred those who strive hard and fight, above those who sit (at home) by a huge reward " This passage criticizes "peaceful" Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah's eyes. It also demolishes the modern myth that "Jihad" doesn't mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle. Not only is this Arabic word (mujahiduna) used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption. (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man's protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad, which would not make sense if it meant an internal struggle). According to the verse, Allah will allow the disabled into Paradise, but will provide a larger reward to those who are able to kill others in his cause.
Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing...
but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)" (Translation is from the Noble Quran) The verse prior to this (190) refers to "fighting for the cause of Allah those who fight you" leading some to believe that the entire passage refers to a defensive war in which Muslims are defending their homes and families. The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, however, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did). Verse 190 thus means to fight those who offer resistance to Allah's rule (ie. Muslim conquest). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is disingenuous (the actual Arabic words for persecution - "idtihad" - and oppression - a variation of "z-l-m" - do not appear in the verse). The word used instead, "fitna", can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. This is certainly what is meant in this context since the violence is explicitly commissioned "until religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief.
Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot.
Quran (33:60-62) - "If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and the alarmists in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them, then they will be your neighbors in it but a little while. Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter." This passage sanctions the slaughter (rendered "merciless" and "horrible murder" in other translations) against three groups: Hypocrites (Muslims who refuse to "fight in the way of Allah" (3:167) and hence don't act as Muslims should), those with "diseased hearts" (which include Jews and Christians 5:51-52), and "alarmists" or "agitators who include those who merely speak out against Islam, according to Muhammad's biographers. It is worth noting that the victims are to be sought out by Muslims, which is what today's terrorists do. If this passage is meant merely to apply to the city of Medina, then it is unclear why it is included in Allah's eternal word to Muslim generations.
I noticed you edited out (2:190) that limits entire section you claim to quote: "Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not commit aggression; for God loves not aggressors."
Amazing how you can quote an entire section of the Qur'an and intentionally then leave out the first verse that says don't commit aggression. What does that say about you?
In fact the Qur'aan actually prohibits Muslims from spying. Ergo Saudis who joint the Saudi spy agencies actually cease to be Muslims in fact, however they no doubt continue their prayers and fasting to assuage their consciences. Shame that no-one in Saudi has the guts to flog or kill these apostate spies, but I'll happily volunteer.
"In fact the Qur'aan actually prohibits Muslims from spying."
Really? Care to cite that?
Regarding lying to infidels, there is plenty of historical support for that.
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/011-taqiyya.htm
Muslims are allowed to lie to unbelievers in order to defeat them. The two forms are:
Taqiyya - Saying something that isn't true.
Kitman - Lying by omission. An example would be when Muslim apologists quote only a fragment of verse 5:32 (that if anyone kills "it shall be as if he had killed all mankind") while neglecting to mention that the rest of the verse (and the next) mandate murder in undefined cases of "corruption" and "mischief."
Though not called Taqiyya by name, Muhammad clearly used deception when he signed a 10-year treaty with the Meccans that allowed him access to their city while he secretly prepared his own forces for a takeover. The unsuspecting residents were conquered in easy fashion after he broke the treaty two years later, and some of the people in the city who had trusted him at his word were executed.
Another example of lying is when Muhammad used deception to trick his personal enemies into letting down their guard and exposing themselves to slaughter by pretending to seek peace. This happened in the case of Ka'b bin al-Ashraf (as previously noted) and again later against Usayr ibn Zarim, a surviving leader of the Banu Nadir tribe, which had been evicted from their home in Medina by the Muslims.
At the time, Usayr ibn Zarim was attempting to gather an armed force against the Muslims from among a tribe allied with the Quraish (against which Muhammad had already declared war). Muhammad's "emissaries" went to ibn Zarim and persuaded him to leave his safe haven on the pretext of meeting with the prophet of Islam in Medina to discuss peace. Once vulnerable, the leader and his thirty companions were massacred by the Muslims with ease, belying the probability that they were mostly unarmed, having been given a guarantee of safe passage (Ibn Ishaq 981).
Such was the reputation of Muslims for lying and then killing that even those who "accepted Islam" did not feel entirely safe. The fate of the Jadhima is tragic evidence for this. When Muslim "missionaries" approached their tribe one of the members insisted that they would be slaughtered even though they had already "converted" to Islam to avoid just such a demise. However, the others were convinced that they could trust the Muslim leader's promise that they would not be harmed if they simply offered no resistance. (After convincing the skeptic to lay down his arms, the unarmed men of the tribe were quickly tied up and beheaded - Ibn Ishaq 834 & 837).
Today's Muslims often try to justify Muhammad's murder of poets and others who criticized him at Medina by saying that they broke a treaty by their actions. Yet, these same apologists place little value on treaties broken by Muslims. From Muhammad to Saddam Hussein, promises made to non-Muslim are distinctly non-binding in the Muslim mindset.
Same as with every religion. Only those so deeply rooted in their own are unable to see it in their own. Distorted senses, the shit still stinks. Great control devices!
Nature is deceptive. Humans are OF nature.
The Qur'an says bluntly regarding speaking the truth, even against your own self: "
O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm in justice, witnesses for God , even if it be against yourselves or parents and relatives. " (4:135)Taqiyya is an an obscure doctrine primarily used by Shia to hide their beliefs from Sunnis when facing persecution. Most Muslims have never even heard of it. Similar ideas exist in all reigions -- any rabbi will aggree that if a Nazi puts a gun to the head of the Jew, it is ok for the Jew to say "I am not a Jew, don't kill me."
As for your alleged historical examples, the Quraish (enemies of the Prophet) broke the treaty of Hudaybiya by allowing their allies to attack Muslims. I find it strange that your sympathies are with the barbaric pre-Islamic Arabs who buried baby girls alive and were offended by Muhammad telling them to stop.
As if it really makes a difference. Version 3.0 of shit is still shit.
Islam as a religion is based on ramblings of an epileptic right after his seizures.
His very first vision was a heart attack. Lucky goat fucker survived it in times before paramedics. Chances
are the heart attack is what brought on the epilepsy and who knows what else. I wonder how long he lied on the ground with his brain being deprived of oxygen.
Does not matter, it is 1400 year old bullshit.
You could not be a successful trial attorney or DA, if you aren't a master at both Taqiyya and Kitman.
Nor a very successful salesman or businessman.
Our whole Judicial system and Business are predicated upon them. Go mull that one over.
The belief that "My phycopathic leader is better than your phycopathic leader" is killing a lot of people, but not as many as the more popular "My magic book is better than your magic book"
Communist Manifesto? Or The End of History?
In the case of the latter, I take it that you mean "My dad/deity can beat your dad/deity"
I think it was Bertrand Russell that was suggesting the scenario where two opposing groups were heading to battle against each other, both claiming that "God" was on their side, with "God" looking down upon the scene unfolding. To paraphrase: "Good god, said God, I've got my work cut out for me!"
God save the queen!
Gott mit uns!
Blah, blah, blah...
Humans are such an insecure lot. I'm sure that Spock would agree.
""If you are worried about them, stop supporting terrorists,"
Kinda hard to argue with that.
The Brussels dictators stood aside for the last three years and allowed thousands of EU Passport holders to leave Europe and travel to Turkey and Jordan to attend US training camps, then enter Syria to join Jihadist groups like ISIL, Al-Qaeda,Al-Nusra. The EU security police did nothing as thousands of Europeans traveled back and forth to Syria to wage Jihad. Brussels and NATO knew these people were going on Jihad, and stopped hardly a one of them.
Now Jihad has come home. And the tears flow. The idiot sheep do their usual flower laying and cry for TV cameras like the sheep they are.
Not a one asks why Europe supports Jihad in Syria. Nobody asks why Europeans are allowed to train in US camps and enter Syria to carry out mass terror on those people. They only know how to cry for themselves when their own terrorists and their pals come home and act like they are in Syria.
France brought this on itself. But claims innocence. France let 3,000 Jihadists with French Passports travel to Syria. Hoping that Jihad would allow Syria to be taken over by pro US Jihadists.
How stupid you French are. I listen to you crying all over Twitter, your ignorance is mind blowing. You ask no hard questions, just do what your media training tells you to. Run for the nearest TV camera hoping to be flimed crying into it!
Why not ask so questions for once you fucking feeble Sheep!
Perhaps somebody loves it when a plan comes together. But this is not in the interest of the EU cause it can lead to the union falling apart. Who stands to benefit?
Read up on UN agenda 2030 and the strong cities initiative. When the reaction from the white french natonalists finally comes, then the UN will disarm the local police and send in the multiculti-nazi's to enforce diversity. Paris is screwed just like all the capitals in europe.
I found the story about Sumte in Germany where a remote, idylic village of 100 is forced to take on 750 "refugees" quite revealling. They are dispersing their orcs troughout the countryside in order to prevent the provincials from rising up an cleaning house in the cities after the UN sends in the strong cities goons. The provincials will be forced to stay home and defend their families.
The situation also helps promote bio-metric ID. The UN wants to roll them out for refugees. The people will demand this as a way to keep terrorists in check but once all the immigrants have bio-metric ID then it will be necessary for citizens to have them as well to prove that they are not immigrants or terrorists. It's the mark of the beast and people will demand it.
French sheeple are as stupid as US sheeple, Canadian sheeple, UK sheeple
the operative word is sheeple, the country of origin ain't important
the sheeple worldwide will support the war in Syria to overthrow Assad while they pretend to attack ISIS as in the last 2 years
if they weren't sheeple they'd know it was State sponsored terror to manipulate them
so now they will assist those who did it to them, and will act like barbarians to innocent refugees who are the victims of the same assailants
It does not matter one whit if those refugees are innocent or not. Europe is going to find that it cannot support them, and that alone will be enough to turn the natives against them. Just the act of letting them in guaranteed that there will be a huge body count.
victims of the same assailants... US foreign policy of Imperialism
It is not "US" foreign policy, per se.
The US is merely the Controlled Uber-Bully, doing the bidding of its Masters, who are tapping into their latent "Manifest Destiny" tendencies.
People are PROGRAMMED to be sheeple. Programmed via governments/Wall Street/religions.
had to log-on jack to up-vote
absolutely stunning analysis
bravo!
I do feel kind of bad for the French people. I fully understand what it is like to have a government that cares more about geopolitical buggery than its own citizens.
Seriously, do French people care or even KNOW that the US created ISIS ? (with help from France and Britain etc.?)
Also, I watched CNN yesterday for several hours before this incident. The subject was ISIS and Syria. They covered the whole civil war, up to the future plans of the US in Syria. BUT - they did not even once mention Russia. Nothing.
indeed... and you'll find that ZH's are years ahead of the USSA propaganda machine, aka, MSM.
what you've read is /has been discussed on the ZH forum since its inception.
'on a long enough tymeline all will come to pas[t]s?'
so... read up, and contribute your thoughts and analysis without fear of the 'FaceBook Syndrome'
Note: terrorist groups foment 'symbolic`events' to maximize global reach, just as the USSA had targeted "Jihad John' killing. think long and hard about such a worldwide vendetta to show the world who's in charge while launching missiles from the persian gulf nuclear-armed`submarines to take out a USSA/SA toyota???
Jack, it's much more complicated than even that!
http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/forum/21/221
Putting aside the fact that this is all pretty ugly, ask what one would look to do knowing that the demography pretty much shows a dead-end ahead. You're going to be overrun at some point. Do you force it now, while there's still a chance to institute some control (all the crap that we don't like, like banning personal arms), or do you wait until everyone is too old to do anything and you're overrun/wiped out completely? TPTB are looking to fortify themselves, same as it ever was: it's a natural instinct for survival; they've just created the necessary distraction so that they could gain more means of survival (at the expense of everyone else- that's pretty standard behavior in nature). Again, TPTB are setting this all up, the motive is there! (though even they have to know that all it'll ever do is buy them some time)
With the technology advantage Europe has they could not
be overrun if the population has dropped to 10%.
Population growth and shrinkage goes in cycles..long term.
We had not had a down cycle for a long time thanks to advances in science - medicine, food, sanitation. Being
able to heat one's home during the winter also helped.
Eventually even in Europe population would start to grow again.
If it dropped to the point where the major cities were not so crowded then a certain dynamic changes and so does human behavior.
Good comment, thanks for great link.
Thanks Seer, I am reading the link!
http://angryarab.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/some-observations-about-carnage-...
Ha ha ha - ISIS is going to have Assad's head on a stick before too long.
Cheering for the head choppers again zio-man?
Hey Zio-man. You overestimate the power of the CIA and Moosad - Putin and iran will work with syria to wipe ISIS, the CIA and Moosad out of Iran , Iraq and then on to get the Wahabists terrorist savages out of Saudi Arabia. The Saudi people deserve democracy anyway. Putin will be the champion of Democracy and religious freedom in the Middle East.
I see you understand who caused the Paris terror attacks
Assad's head on a stick is just what the US and Israel want
coincidental how ISIS and Al Qaeda just happen to share the same objectives as the US and Israel
I always thought it was a big mistake to not arrange sanctuary for Ghaddafi. Sure he was a tyrant, but he was our tyrant, he started playing nice after he saw Saddam. . .real fuckin eye opener. Putin will do this for Assad if it ever came to that, which it won't. The russian quagmire in Afghantsi has no bearing here, unless . . .we pull a Charlie Wilson and give a shitload of stingers to ISIS. Or ISIS. Or Daesh, or whatever.
To quote the fearless drone pilot Obama: all options are on the table. Oh, my! They always are, aren't they?
Ghaddafi started toning things down after his family members were extra-judicially killed by US air strikes decades ago. Ghaddafi got taken out because he was a threat to the petro-dollar (which is just kind of bad behavior that Saddam was soon to engage in [when the sanctions got lifted due to expiration- the West didn't have anything else to keep this lid from popping off so they had to make up the WMD shit]).
https://thinkpatriot.wordpress.com/2015/11/14/in-reality-everything-is-c...
All of the world's serious problems are now government-inflicted, generated by government policy.
It has been clear forever that world peace can only begin when we have armed our neighborhoods so that we can protect each other, when enough people are carrying weapons at all times, so that crazies cannot commit acts like these.
Everywhere we have crazies killing large numbers of people in gun-free safety zones produced by policy. We have given our futures to crazies by policy.
Because our beloved (not) European leaders are too dumb ass to see they have been played by the "Arab Spring", instigated by you-know-who. Sarkozy of course dumped Ghadaffi because the latter had given the former millions so Sarkozy could secure the elections. Sarkozy wanted to get rid of witnesses. The rest of the European leaders -after in 2003 not supporting the Gulf War with the notable execption of Britain- then supported the wars in Libya and Syria. Well, dumb asses, this is what you got in return and this ain't over yet.
RE
"you-know-who" = The Fed (the big driver of the Arab Spring as food inflation).
Sarkozy's role is even more in question now that they just found a shit ton of Yayo on one of his planes.
Why, oh, why will Assad not come out and spill the beans on the West and their collusion in the 'terrorist threat'? What has he got to lose?
He has already, and the following quote is also in the above article. Putin has also:
"If you are worried about [refugees], stop supporting terrorists. That's what we think regarding the crisis. This is the core of the whole issue of refugees.”
https://www.rt.com/news/315848-assad-syria-isis-interview/
Maybe Assads afraid the US etc. will label him a psycho conspiracy theorist trying to cover up his crimes against humanity. Ofcourse it was the US that actually committed these crimes through their proxy.
Problem is is that this would change nothing. People have already been programmed to believe that Assad has to go, that HE is the problem.
The irony here is that the ones best suited for taking care of all of this have been ID'd as bad guys from a long time ago- the Russians. Rather than siding with less radical neighbors, the Russians, the Eurpoeans sided with the US, which is well known to stir the pot and then run. I suppose that if the following were true then there actually is a strategy driving all of this:
http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/forum/21/221
The EU green lights the US to wage war in the middle east (and the Ukraine) .... and the EU gets all the displaced refugees - what a great deal!.
Assad has a valid point.
Events are coming together nicely for an invasion . All the plebes are changing their Facebook profile too we stand with Paris photos. They're already to go get those mooslims, of course they want to send other people's children to get them. The silence is deafening about 223 dead Russians.
They can go and get the mooslims. They have well over a million of them in Europe. No travel to ME is needed.
Sounds pretty articulate. The elephant in the room is looking more and more like the Neocons in the USSA, their European puppets and their Saudi/Qatari facilitators. Playing with matches and getting burned. Song needs to change from Assad Must Go, to what Russia/Syria/Iran are saying which is ISIS must Go. Shame on all the politicians that have lead to millions of deaths and displaced families all in the name of the almighty dollar. Blood on your hands Holland et al.
The House of Saud must go. Then Uncle Sugar must go---get out of Europe and the Middle East and stay out.
Israel can take care of herself, and Russia will need her help cleaning up the mess left by Uncle Sugar. The number of other European and Middle Eastern countries with governments worth a drop of American blood is pretty much zero.
ASSAD is still alive thanks to Putin! Now they sheep of France and America will conduct correlated attacks on Syria in till Assad is dead.. Israel has been allowing bombs to detonate on Israeli citizens to get more funds and support from America.. France just copycatted Israel REAL policy.. They NEVER target government buildings were the real problem is instead lets target civilians to get them emotionally involved and to get them on board.. FUCK YOU ZIONIST
But Assad you are wrong. We must act with "moral highground" to lecture anyone have different views from us.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8qSdDAY5W60
Documentary on Philip K. Dick.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afam25BJMeU
At 4:18:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8piysZ03E7E
One of the people interviewed, a friend of Phil, mentions his theme was often how people believe one thing and it turns out not to be true. When people find out the reality is false it is unpleasant.
Sounds like ZH and the news media today. People come to ZH and other web sites and find out everything the media says is a lie. Everything you have been taught about history is largely a lie.
Anything said by: CNN, Fox, all of TV News, Bloomberg, Reuters, AP, NY Times, NPR and the list is almost endless is ALL a lie.
More and about Blade Runner.
at 4:28 he talks about the cops calling him a crusader and that they did not need crusaders. If he did not leave the county he would be shot. More of that California police fascism that has always been part of California. See RFK murder where the ballroom of that hotel was filled with See Eye Aye contractors and agents.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlUtYO2wL9E&list=PLDFCF87EB88D17B99
Also Philip K. Dick share a strong distaste and loathing of something that I also cannot stand - Hollywood.
We were warned. It was called "Programming" from the very start! And now we return you to your regularly scheduled programming...
But what if Zero Hedge is also a lie
Forming a sort of neat little counterpoint for rudderless minds...
What happens to those little brains then?
People interested in the truth generally do not do slick presentations.
the awfull reality of our physical world tells a even darker story, we come to Internet la la land for comfort it seems.
Ladies and Gentlemen, James Taylor!
(Who's lost more than his hair)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kuWEkUcS0lI
All I saw was a bald pretzal.
What a goddam buffoon. Mister Kerry, meet President Le Pen.
Political leaders have a moral duty to protect their citizens first. If not, the politician should be removed.
Angela should be removed.
Info wars has just reported one of the dead was a "refugee" from Syria and processed on island of Lesbos.
Angela and the rest of the politicians who are selling out their people in Europe, America, Canada, NZ, UK, AU, Turkey et al should be Mussolinied.
Merkel and Erdogan should be among the first.
Putin and Assad at least care about their countries and their people.
Of course he was.
That's not a wave of refugees. That's an invasion force.
And the time will come when the AK's are retrieved from the basements of a thousand Mosques.
When I was a kid, it was M-1 rifles in the basements of Catholic parish churches. Yeah, yeah, yeah...