Sunni vs. Shi'ite
Jason P
Posts: 19,138
OK, I understand why they hate the blue-eyed devil infidels ... but can anyone explain to me why these lunatics keep blowing up each others mosques??? I have not studied the quran, but I'm guessing there is a rule that says that is a very, very, very, very, very bad thing to do.
Explosions kill 42 outside two mosques in Lebanon's Tripoli
TRIPOLI, Lebanon (Reuters) - Twin explosions hit two mosques in the northern Lebanese city of Tripoli on Friday, killing at least 42 people and wounding hundreds, intensifying the sectarian strife that has spilled over from the civil war in neighboring Syria.
The apparently coordinated blasts - the biggest and deadliest in Tripoli since the end of Lebanon's own civil war - struck as locals were finishing Friday prayers in the largely Sunni Muslim city. Lebanese officials appealed for calm.
The explosions in Tripoli, 70 km (43 miles) from Beirut came a week after a huge car bomb killed at least 24 people in a part of the capital Beirut that is controlled by the Shi'ite Muslim militant movement Hezbollah.
....
http://news.yahoo.com/least-seven-killed-blast-lebanons-tripoli-witness-112855348.html
Explosions kill 42 outside two mosques in Lebanon's Tripoli
TRIPOLI, Lebanon (Reuters) - Twin explosions hit two mosques in the northern Lebanese city of Tripoli on Friday, killing at least 42 people and wounding hundreds, intensifying the sectarian strife that has spilled over from the civil war in neighboring Syria.
The apparently coordinated blasts - the biggest and deadliest in Tripoli since the end of Lebanon's own civil war - struck as locals were finishing Friday prayers in the largely Sunni Muslim city. Lebanese officials appealed for calm.
The explosions in Tripoli, 70 km (43 miles) from Beirut came a week after a huge car bomb killed at least 24 people in a part of the capital Beirut that is controlled by the Shi'ite Muslim militant movement Hezbollah.
....
http://news.yahoo.com/least-seven-killed-blast-lebanons-tripoli-witness-112855348.html
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Caste! Caste! Caste!
The poison from the poison stream caught up to you ELEVEN years ago and you floated out of here. Sept. 14, 08
Caste is a form of social stratification characterized by endogamy, hereditary transmission of a style of life which often includes an occupation, ritual status in a hierarchy, and customary social interaction and exclusion based on cultural notions of purity and pollution. Its paradigmatic ethnographic example is the division of India's Hindu society into rigid social groups, with roots in India's ancient history and persisting until today.
Still, killing muslims is still a bad thing, right? At least that's what the dude in the boat scribbled in his own blood.
red line?
I am quite certain we have operators on their soil.
Ill be around
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
red line?
I am quite certain we have operators on their soil.
jessica
You can change the wording of your original post all you want.
The fact is the original and post and question was about the bombing of mosques in Tripoli, Lebanon and about different versions or views on Islam.
The original post and question had NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with President Obama, The current internal strife in Syria, The "red line", spec ops, nor the alleged chemical bombing.
Please try to stay on topic.
Thanks
you are welcome.
all my love
didn't you see the recent poll of louisiana voters who blame OBAMA, who was just a senator at the time, for the shitty hurrican katrina response?? :fp: :fp: :fp: :fp:
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
9/11? obama's fault
vietnam war? obama's fault
civil war? obama's fault
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Obama is definitely responsible for all religious strife ever
As well as all the natural disasters that have ever happened at any time
It's not that they kill each other, it's the blowing up of holy places that boogles my mind. Everyone goes nuts when a stickman of allah is drawn but blowing up churches is ok?
incorrect....this was all Bush's fault.
got me wrong
it's probably too strange to figure it out. you are probably right that hatred is the root cause, just at a maximum rate.
There is a poll out there that shows a surprisingly high percentage of Louisianans blame the Katrina response on Obama.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
Is it Groundhog Day or what?
Another thread prefaced by a lack of critical thinking, instantly turned to partisan bickering….like holy o’fuck.
Did anyone stop to think that maybe the way this article is framed is misleading? That maybe there ARE other interests at work in the middle east, and its not just sunni vs shia as we’re being led to believe?
Why does no one ever ask ‘qui bono?’ before branding people lunatics? Maybe WE’RE the lunatics for thinking our governments have nothing to do with this supposedly sectarian violence?
Thats not a comdemnation of Obama, its a condemnation of Western imperialism. Fack.
This article, to me, spells it all out in plain English: The corporate owned media and our corporate-owned governments share the same agenda, because they share the same directors and shareholders.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/5346531/5346531
The Media Deception About the Terrorist Attacks in Lebanon
There has been an ongoing information war being fought for hearts and minds inside and outside of the Middle East. The war has mostly been tied to Syria. As the US and its allies begin to focus their attention on Hezbollah in Lebanon, the media war now includes the events in Lebanon. This, however, has not stopped the media attempts to depict the fighting in Syria in sectarian terms as a regional war between Shias and Sunnis or to demonize Syria’s allies…
In regards to Syria, the Israeli media, the Saudi media, and Lebanon’s Hariri-owned media — which belongs to Hezbollah’s US/Saudi-supported rivals — have all carried the same August 2013 AFP story or some derivative of it that deceitfully reports the Iran and Hezbollah are now running Syria. The Jerusalem Post, Arutz Sheva, the Daily Star, Ya Libnan, Al-Arabiya, the Saudi Gazette, Hürriyet, Naharnet, France 24, Fox News, and the Dubai-based Gulf News are examples of the type of media that carried this so-called news. Here is an extract of the text which sums up the entire image that the article is trying to engrain into the minds of its readers: «Assad ‘no longer runs Syria. The real rulers of Syria are the Iranian (elite) Revolutionary Guard… with the participation of Hezbollah fighters,’ Jarba said». The entire report is built around a quote by Ahmad Al-Jarba, the leader of the foreign-controlled and funded Syrian National Coalition.
How the Mainstream Media Legitimizes Terrorism Against Lebanese Civilians
Next the same media outlets finessed the news about the terrorist bombs planted in Beirut’s southern suburb of Dahiyeh. The August 15, 2013 terrorist bombings in the neighbourhood of Al-Rouweiss (Al-Rweiss) were downplayed and, in a manner of speaking, legitimized by the media through their selective use of language. The attack on Al-Rouweiss came about a month after the July 9, 2013 terrorist attack on the neighbourhood of Bir Al-Abed. Both are densely populated neighbourhoods in Dahiyeh. The Institute for Public Accuracy (IPA) in the United States took quick notice of the biased media framing. IPA asked the following, on August 16, 2013, through the title of a report: «Why Isn’t Beirut Bombing Called ‘Terrorist’? What’s Behind It?»
The Lebanese newspaper Al-Akbar is worth looking at to get a grasp of the biased media reporting that has been used to reframe the events as legitimate. It commented thus on August 17, 2013: «The Western media have double standards when it comes to ‘terrorism.’ Within hours after two bombs were detonated at the Boston Marathon last April, many in the media had christened it a ‘terrorist attack.’ Meanwhile, the August 15 bombing in Rouweiss that killed at least two dozen is a ‘blast’ that occurred in a ‘Hezbollah stronghold.’» As Al-Akhbar observes, the word «Hezbollah stronghold?» plays a prominent role in giving the impression that the civilian neighbourhours bombed in Beirut were armed barracks. Al-Akhbar even nicely sums up some of the biased titles used to describe the terrorist attacks:
Wall Street Journal: «Car Bomb Blasts Hezbollah Stronghold in Lebanon»
BBC: «Deadly Lebanon Blast in Beirut Stronghold of Hezbollah»
LA Times: «Massive Explosion in Beirut Rocks Hezbollah Stronghold»
Washington Post: «Bomb Explodes in Hezbollah Stronghold in Beirut, Injuring Dozens»
Reuters: «Over 50 Hurt as Car Bomb Hits Hezbollah Beirut Stronghold»
Associated Press: «Car Bomb Rocks Hezbollah Stronghold in Lebanon»
France24: «Car Bomb Rocks Hezbollah Stronghold in Beirut»
Mixed with the other narratives that the same media outlets are painting, the terrorist attacks are being tacitly portrayed as some type of legitimate retaliation. Readers are basically led to think that the terrorist attacks in Dahiyeh were a military act against some type of Hezbollah base.
How the Mainstream Media Lies and Deliberately Places the Blame on Sunni Muslims
Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, the secretary-general of Hezbollah, responded to the terrorist attack on Al-Rouweiss by categorically saying that the attacks were not the work of Sunni Muslims. He gave a speech saying that there were going to be those groups and individuals that would try to blame the terrorist attacks in Beirut on the Sunnis and said that these groups and individuals should be outright dismissed. In fact, he said that anyone that used this divisional logic was an «Israeli» and a partner in the goal of creating massacres. He made it clear that the individuals who planted the bombs did not represent the Sunni Muslims or the Arabs or the Syrians or the Palestinians. In a message to the US and its allies, he also said clearly that Hezbollah was aware that the intelligence services of the US and its allies had infiltrated various terrorist groups and manipulate them as tools.
Despite Nasrallah’s clear words, his words were totally changed by the same media outlets that were legitimizing the terrorist attacks in Beirut. The Israeli media, the state-run British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), Al Jazeera, and Al Arabiya would blatantly fabricate the news and claim that Nasrallah «blamed the Sunnis» or try to manipulate readers into getting the impression that he did. The New York Times would title an August 16, 2003 article on the terrorist attacks as the following: «Hezbollah Makes Vow to Step Up Sunni Fight». It would never even mentioning that Nasrallah went out of his way to say that the people involved in the terrorist attacks were the tools of the US and Israeli government and not really Sunni Muslims. Instead Ben Hubbard would focus on sectarianism in Lebanon and write: «In short, Hezbollah has more enemies than it used to have».
The BBC on the other hand would write a similar article on August 16 too. It would also use a grossly misleading title. The title would be «Hezbollah blames Sunnis for bomb». After a large number of people caught it, the BBC would change the title to «Beirut bomb: Hezbollah’s Nasrallah blames Sunni radicals».
Exposing the Yellow Journalism at Work as a Tool of War
Aside from their direct or indirect links to these media outlets, even the political actors involved show that the way the news is reported is not circumvent of them. Saad Hariri, the leader of the Future Party and a Saudi client, even responded to Hassan Nasrallah’s speech by saying that he had no right to designate what groups are terrorists. Hariri’s overlords in Saudi Arabia, on the other hand, refused to even condemn the terrorist attacks. This again is tied to the attempts to reframe the terrorist attacks in Beirut as a legitimate military act.
This type of yellow journalism that relies on misleading headlines that essentially say everything that the hollow articles carry and have little or no newsworthy material is not politically neutral. It is a weapon of war. All these articles are agitating for bloodletting in the Middle East, specifically between Shias and Sunnis. This type of journalism either directly or indirectly stokes the fires of sectarianism in Lebanon and the Middle East with the intentions of spreading sectarian animosity. This is why it deliberately ignores and refuses to even acknowledge the main points of Nasrallah’s speech that clearly pointed the finger at Israel and the US and said that the terrorist attacks had nothing to do with Sunni Muslims.
Now this one could work if ya wanna fight on the side that maybe he had relatives from the day who were working the fields. Just an idea, tossed out there on a Fryday.
The poison from the poison stream caught up to you ELEVEN years ago and you floated out of here. Sept. 14, 08
Think of it the way Catholics and Protestants are both Christians. One church founded in Rome and the other in England. Different sects, of the same base religion.
...
Why do Sunnis and Shi'ites fight? Religious fundamentalism.
Hail, Hail!!!
One side had their churches bombed a few weeks ago. Now the other side gets theirs bombed. Perhaps I'm a fool, but my critical thinking is not just based on this single article, but from a slew or articles that seem to be coming in almost daily that share a common central theme that isn't defined by borders or regimes.
There should be leaders uniting and shouting to the heavens, "what the hell are we doing?!"
There should be... but, there aren't.
That's what religion does to some people... it make them absolutely, positively, 100% sure that they KNOW what God has in store for us. If you get it pounded into you head by your parents who got it pounded into their heads from people who've had it pounded into their heads for hundreds of of years... it becomes truth.
Religion is not truth and never has been. It is all man made, not by God. That is the only truth about religion... made by Man.
Hail, Hail!!!
Their leaders ecourage what is going on. You marry into your caste. You hang around with people in your caste. Everything and I mean everything revolves around it. The nice PC term that we have over here is arranged marriage. Ask someone (if you know one in one of those marriages) about caste. Shit, they will marry nieces, cousins, sons, daughters, to each other, to keep money and religion together. No need for anymore conversation.
The poison from the poison stream caught up to you ELEVEN years ago and you floated out of here. Sept. 14, 08
As for "lunatics"....that article quotes Nusrallah, leader of Hezbollah, as saying unequivocolly, that these bombings were not sectarian violence. That's not an interpretation. He is a shia militant. Would it not benefit him to blame this on Sunni militants if their objective was to blow each other up? If both sides are blaming the attacks on a western strategy of divide and conquer, who are the true lunatics?
EDIT: This is not to say I don't believe they often distort the facts or create their own narrative. I just don't think they are as responsible for Sunni Shi'ite conflict as that article suggests.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
how?
easy.
common demoninator.
have a good weekend.....going windsurfing.
And then, at the end of your post, you reach the grand conclusion that "hatred" has everything to do with this? What does that even mean? Not that I'm suggesting you do this, but it's interesting that when Western nations or groups kill, it is extremely complicated what would drive them to do that: perhaps political or economic reasons, or ideological, or even a mixture; perhaps it's mental problems that can be traced back to when a suspect had certain childhood development issues; whatever. But when it happens to be Muslims? Oh, easy: it's just hatred. Granted, this is a topic having to do with something extremely troubling, the bombing of a holy place, but I think we should allow for a bit more nuance than this discussion has enjoyed so far.