-------------- --------------- -------------- --------

"O you who believe! Be careful of your duty to Allah, and be with the truthful." [Noble Quran 9:119]

"If you obeyed most of those on earth they would mislead you far from Allah's way." [Noble Quran 6:116]

Return to the QURAN only - the complete and final STAND-ALONE Divine Message which also contains the authentic sunnah of the beloved Prophet Muhammad (SAAW)


I bear witness that NONE is worthy of worship except ALLAH, He has NO partner nor partners, and I bear witness that Muhammad is the slave and Final Messenger of Allah.


Zainabs Lounge blog tracker

Tuesday, August 28, 2012

The Alawites

The Alawites were formerly called 'Nusyaris' after a medieval spiritual leader named Abu Shuaib Nusayri.  But soon after the Alawites considered it highly derogatory to be called "Nusayris."   Instead, they became known as Alawis, being symbolic of following the teachings of Imam Ali. 

The Alawis claim to trace their origin from the 11th imam, Hassan Al-Askari.  Abu Nusayr was said to the the student of Imam Hassan al-Askari, though this isn't confirmed.  However,  Nusayr's ideology deviated into a very different and un-Islamic path by assigning divinity to Imam Ali, a theory that was completely rejected. 

Late Hafez al-Assad of Syria declared the Alawites must follow the same doctrine as the Twelver Shiias (that is, the majority Isn-e-Asheri  denomination of Shiias .. same as the Shiias of Iran).  Bashar al-Assad has continued to maintain the framework of his father's governance.  In fact, under the directions of the Assad government, the Alawite culture has also moved very close to Sunni Islam.  Assad senior had set several examples for the people by adhering to various Sunni practices.  The online encyclopedia writes "The Alawi religion evolved during the years under Hafez Al Assad's rule, so that Alawites became not Shiia, but effectively Sunni. Public manifestation or even mentioning of any Alawite religious activities was banned, as was any Alawite religious organizations or any formation of a unified religious council or a higher Alawite religious authority.  Sunni-style mosques were built in every Alawite village."

In the mid 1970s, Musa Al-Sadr, founder of the Amal Movement in Lebanon, a very senior mainstream Shiia leader and follower of the twelve imams issued a fatwa that the Alawites belonged  to the community of Twelver Shiia Muslims.

Some hardline medieval Sunni scholars such as Ibn Kathir declared Alawites as "pagans" because of the Nusayri ideology.  Although later the Nusayri doctrine was completely trashed by the Alawites, such official declarations by the medieval imams have had far-reaching consequences.  They are still serving as the foundation for sectarian differences, as an outcome of which, the bulk of the Sunni world is supporting the West in the present Syrian conflict.

Under the Assad government, religious minorities have been tolerated far more than they were prior to the 1970s which has led many closed minded observers to presume that Alawis are staunch secularists or even "heretics."  That's of course nonsense and quite the opposite of what people claim.  Tolerance of minorities is a factor much in line with Quranic values.  The Syrian constitution of 1973 upholds that the religion of the republic's president is Islam instead of the state religion being Islam as asserted before - a statement that was often misinterpreted by hardliners.  Issues like these have periodically been blown out of all proportion by firebrand traditionalists, issuing fatwas and declaring Assad's government as "deviants."

It's about time for Muslims to be open-minded and to monitor the truth, otherwise only our imperialist enemies will be the beneficiaries.

Sunday, August 26, 2012

Foreign backed Al-Qaeda rebels and the woes of Christians in Syria

As reported on August 25 of 2012,  an estimated 12,000 people  spent two weeks after being blocked by the foreign rebels in the Christian southern town of Rableh, near Homs in Syria. This town was liberated by Syrian forces on August 24.   Prior to that, for two weeks foreign rebels blockaded this Christian majority town.  As stated by Aid to the Church in Need charity, the rebels who held the residents of Rableh hostage, refused entry of food and medial supplies into the city.  After a continuous blockade of two weeks, the basic necessities were reportedly running out.  Nothing could be transported for fear of the rebel snipers.  Additionally, all bridges linking Rableh with other towns and cities had been blown up and roads were made impassable.

Snipers were waiting for those who thought of leaving the town in search for food. Those who dared to leave were shot at. Three men who attempted to step onto the disaster zone were shot dead, as informed by one of the representatives of the Christian community of Rableh.  There were motorcyclists who tried to carry bread into the village, but they were also fired at.  Fortunately they managed to escape unhurt.   The foreign attackers had cut off the electric supply of this town.  It's now in the process of being restored after the foreign rebels were driven out by the Syrian forces. Those Syrian hostages of Rableh who finally made it to the other side of the border described the situation back home as "critical," that is, the situation being made critical by pitiless and remorseless terrorists supported by the West.   However, the Western media is having a field day manipulating this scenario.  It has filmed these Syrians who were blocked and starved by the Al-Qaeda rebels (most of them trained in Turkey) and portraying them in their stories as "Syrians fleeing killings by Assad's forces."   This is the strategical construction of layers and layers of unfathomable lies that have spread on the Syrian episode by the Western media with utterly false depictions of a "civil war" or a "revolution."   The truth:  Syria is at war.  Syria is under heavy foreign attack. 

Prior to what happened in Rableh, in June 2012 shocking images appeared on RT and PrisonPlanet showing serious damages done to Christian churches in Syria by Western-backed Al-Qaeda rebels.

In the photo below that appeared on RT channel, "a man who is said to be a member of the Free Syrian Army poses in a stolen priest’s robe while brandishing a looted cross in one hand and a machine gun in the other."

In the photo below that appeared on RT channel, "a man who is said to be a member of the Free Syrian Army poses in a stolen priest’s robe while brandishing a looted cross in one hand and a machine gun in the other."

The Western town of Qusayr where the peaceful lives of its residents were turned upside down by the unprovoked violence of foreign radicals, 9,000 Christians were forced to flee after an ultimatum from a rebel military chief. 
Those fleeing the town to save their lives, which included Muslims as well, said they heard announcements from the Masjids made by the rebels that "Christians must leave Qusayr within six days."   Syrian Muslims who were stuck in Qusayr told stories of similar distress.  Also, similar to the destruction of many churches, several Masjids in Qusayr were usurped and occupied by the foreign rebels and left in shambles.

In February of 2012 when the foreign insurgents began infiltrating into Syria, thousands of Muslims and Christians had fled various areas of Homs that fell into rebel hands but were later freed by the Syrian army.

Despite this Hell-on-earth situation being unleashed inside Syria by foreign fighters, US intelligence agents and diplomats continue to lend support unabashed to the Al-Qaeda fighters and their trainers against President Assad's forces.  RT reports that according to several senior US officials themselves "the CIA and the State Department are helping the Free Syrian Army develop logistical routes formoving supplies into Syria and providing training in communications.  Saudi Arabia and Qatar have been paying salaries to the Syrian rebels for several months now. Meanwhile, Turkey, which hosts some units of the Free Syrian Army, ensures material and technical support.  And many believe that as long as the US and its allies continue to blindly support the radical rebels, stability in Syria will remain unattainable."  

And .. despite such relentless efforts for destruction by foreign terrorists, their financiers and trainers, so far these ill-trained mercenaries have made no significant headway whatsoever.   As stated by RT, the Syrian government has now officially reported that "Damascus has been freed from militants and the mop-up operation in the financial hub of Aleppo is getting close to the end."

The upshot for now:  Al-Qaeda has been defeated by Assad's forces.    

Thursday, August 23, 2012

Burma: The tragic story of Noor Ashah. Must read, must share, please!

By a humanitarian worker on the ground

"This is Noor Ashah and her husband Jafer Miah.   They belong to a village by the name of Akkap in Myanmar district (Burma).   Hers is a truly heart breaking reality of what is going on in Burma.  In her own words she told me that she was in her house with her five children, when it was set on fire by local Buddhist extremists.   The fire spread so rapidly due to the fact that her house was made of wood and straw roof.   She managed to escape with three of her children but unfortunately she couldn't help the remaining two.  She said she could hear their screams but could do nothing to help them because of the intensity of the flames and she stood helplessly as her whole house was burnt to the ground.   During all of this she was unaware that her foot was on fire and it got burnt to the bone. Soon after, her husband took her and the remaining three children and fled for their lives to the refugees camps on the border of Bangladesh.  That's where I found them.   When I saw the condition of her foot, we immediately took her into a local private hospital for emergency treatment.  She will loose her foot because it burnt all the way to the bone with severe infection.

Her husband tells me she was a lively woman but since this horrific incident she has become emotionless. I urge you all to do what ever it takes to help put an end to the injustices happening to the Muslims in Burma.   Pray for our sister, Noor Ashah."

The brutal Burmese security forces attacking our Muslim brothers by snatching the
Noble Quran from their hands and throwing it on the road.  But the Faith of our 

brothers is strong and firm, and they will never leave the Quran. 

Thursday, August 16, 2012

Al-Quds Day 2012 - Last Friday of Ramadan

"Al-Quds" means "Holy."  The reference is to the city of Jerusalem.    Presently under a very brutal occupation of the Zionist regime, Jerusalem has a long history with a very special place in the heart of every Muslim. 

Narrating about the night journey of Meraj, the first verse of the 17th Chapter (Surah Al-Isra) of the Glorious Quran mentions of our beloved Prophet Muhammed (sw) being carried from Mecca to Jerusalem.    Almighty Allah confirms the surroundings of Jerusalem as a "blessed" neighborhood.   

"Glorified be He Who carried His servant by night from the Inviolable Place of Worship to the Far distant place of worship the neighbourhood whereof We have blessed, that We might show him of Our tokens! Lo!  He, only He, is the Hearer, the Seer." (17:1) Al-Isra.

The Dome of the Rock and close to it, the Al-Aqsa Masjid, were built later within the "blessed" neighborhood .. the third most important site for us, after Mecca and Medina.

The fact that Palestine has been unjustly snatched from its indigenous citizens by the European Zions, makes the subject of Jerusalem a very sensitive one with piles of memories to reflect upon.  

Over the passage of time, Jerusalem became such a famous symbol for the struggle of freedom that today the expression "Al-Quds" is universally accepted as the representation of resistance against all acts of injustice, abuse and tyranny.   As the late Imam Khomeini expressed: “The Quds Day is a universal day. It is not an exclusive day for Quds itself. It is a day for the oppressed to rise and stand up against the arrogant.

It's a day that fearlessly exposes the truth, and facing the truth is profoundly unpleasant for the oppressors.   No surprise that Al-Quds Day has often been an occasion for the ruthless to impose still greater injustice.  Numerous peaceful participants of the Al-Quds Day have been beaten, arrested and even killed by Zionist forces and other law enforcers around the world.   Yet, this constant intimidation has not stopped the truth-seekers and freedom lovers from raising their voices.

The last Friday of every Ramadan is generally commemorated by Muslims as the international Al-Quds Day to show their solidarity with Palestine.   In a battered Ummah torn apart by sectarian, political and racial strife, unity is a rare commodity.   Al-Quds Day provides us with the opportunity to unite for a common cause .. even if it's only for a single day, it's worth it!   Despite the differences, majority of the Muslims across the world agree that Palestine must be liberated, creating a common aspiration and a great opportunity to overlook petty differences.   Furthermore, Al-Quds Day of 2012 is a portrayal of  Muslims coming together for a common cause despite the ongoing political turbulence across the Middle-East.

Observing the Al-Quds Day is an outcome of decades of humiliation and murders by the Israeli occupying forces.   Human suffering has been so widespread and prolonged in the Holy Land that it's hard to pick which Palestinian family or individual suffered the most after being made stateless on their own land.   But for the sake of sharing, the story and image that never leaves my mind and heart is the incident that killed 12-year-old Muhammad al-Durra on September 30, 2000 .. the third day of the second Intifada.   The first Intifada began in 1987, and the second in 2000.  The cause of the second Intifada was Ariel Sharon's decision to attack, desecrate and kill several worshipers at the Al-Aqsa Masjid.  Muhammad al-Durra and his father were caught amidst Israeli snipers.  They hid behind a flimsy protection which wasn't good enough to keep them safe.   Soon after, young Muhammad died of gun shot wounds in his stomach and chest.  His father was seriously injured but miraculously survived after being shot twelve times. 

Let's pray and hope the large gatherings of Al-Quds day, this year and after, will have far-reaching affects for abolishing the scourge of imperialism along with the barbarism it carries.  Insh'Allah.

In the following link, do please watch and share the inspiring images of Al-Quds Day observed in the past years and the innocent victims of Zionist tyranny.

Also worth watching, Press TV video on Al-Quds Day:  'How important is the international Al-Quds Day for Muslim unity?'

Sunday, August 12, 2012

Do not compare NATO's role in the Balkans with that in the Muslim world

Some analysts with confused visions, prone to painting black & white pictures of their thoughts fail to distinguish between NATO intervention in the Balkans war of the 1990s and NATO intervention in sovereign Muslim countries in post 9/11 era.  For instance, these observers are unable to perceive the vast difference between NATO's role in Serbia and its role in Libya in 2011.   They condemn NATO's "bombing" of Serbia the same way as they do of Libya.   I see this as a thoroughly incorrect reading of a very simple issue.

To put it plainly, NATO's bombing of Serbia cannot be compared with the one of Libya, and neither can it be compared with the NATO's ongoing plans involving Syria.  

In connection with Serbia, NATO came into the scenario after a very long time, giving enough opportunity to Slobodan Milosevic to kill, rape and displace 2 million Bosnians and Kosovars.  The situation in Bosnia became much too precarious by 1998 when hundreds of thousands of Kosovar Muslims began pouring into no-man's land in Europe, fleeing Milosevic's ethnic cleansing, with no food, no water, no electricity and no sanitation.  The heart of Europe began looking like the heart of Africa in crisis.   That's when the European leaders woke up and along with their North American partner decided that something needed to be done to stop Milosevic, NOT for the purpose of protecting the Mulsims of the Balkans (who were being butchered randomly) but for protecting Europe and preventing the political instability from spilling over because of Milosevic's ethnic cleansing.  

At this point the NATO member countries had two choices:
1)  Either NATO must intervene to stop Milosevic's blood thirsty mission.   OR
2)  The arms embargo to be lifted from Kosovo and Bosnia who must be allowed to officially have an army, acquire weapons and defend themselves.

Obviously the EU and US chose the former.   They feared that lifting the arms embargo from the Muslim community of the Balkans would not be a good idea.  It could make them feel brave, confident and bold.  They might no longer accept being bullied and looked upon as third class citizens of Europe.  The EU and US decided upon NATO to intervene BUT there was a careful plan behind it.  NATO bombing of Serbia would be surgical to the utmost, and to the very minimal so that it could be finished as early as possible.  Unlike Libya, where more than a dozen cities and towns were raised to the ground, countless number of private and government properties destroyed beyond recognition and the civilian death toll being well into five figures .... NATO's bombing in Serbia killed very few civilians (350 according to the exaggerated version of online Wikipedia), bare minimal of military casualties and much to my disappointment, I never read of the killing of any Chetniks during the air raids who had their hands drenched with blood.   NATO mainly bombed the roads and bridges connecting Serbia with Kosovo to disrupt the communication links between these two provinces and thus largely avoided the risks of casualties.  NATO also used these airstrikes for another discreet purpose, to hit at the Chinese embassy in Belgrade which killed three Chinese reporters and injured 20 embassy staff including diplomats.  NATO claimed it was a mistake but how come NATO took such good care of keeping all Serbian government  bodies safe?   A couple years later, some Serb supporters claimed the use of depleted uranium in Serbia by NATO.  That turned out to be false after a thorough investigation by the United Nations Environment Programme, and a copy-cat claim after news got around by the start of the new millennium that approximately 1.5 million has perished in Iraq due to the use of depleted uranium and white phosphorus by the US forces during the 1990 attack on Iraq followed by terse sanctions resulting in the inavailability of essential medication.    

Subsequently when Milosevic was captured, he was conveniently handed over to the Hague where he would forever loll in a luxury prison cell .. a man who had killed many more of his countrymen in just 5 years than Gaddafi could even dream of killing in 40 years!

NATO's thuggery is restricted within the Muslim world only, NOT in Europe. 

I wish a lot of us had better insight than comparing the Serbians with the Libyans or Syrians or Iraqis or Afghans.  That is intensely disturbing because the analogy is wholly discrepant and intensely unjust.

For more details check Muslim Villa input.

Erdogan and "no-fly" zone over Syria - Let the international robbers know they are not fooling anyone

Ever since the turmoil in Syria was ignited, Erdogan has said more than once that Bashar al-Assad  doesn't have the mandate of his people any longer.  But he conveniently ignores his own lost mandate at home.   Recent opinion polls show that majority of Turkish people strongly oppose their Prime Minister's alliance with the imperialist powers and his terrorism against their next door neighbor.   According to reports in World Socialist Website, even the non-political crowd in Turkey are of the view that their country should at least be neutral instead of helping the cause of the enemy.   

Unfortunately the wishes of the Turkish people are falling on deaf ears.  Erdogan may have won a third term 'democratically' but he isn't ruling democratically by a long shot.  Far from that, the AK Party has now resorted to blatant vandalism.  When a government opts for treachery, it perpetually nurtures a guilty conscience and has plenty to hide.  It has no other choice but to keep matters under control by using the stick rather than the carrot.  This is precisely the scenario in Turkey.   The hoodlums of the AK Party have been entrusted with the responsibility to silence all voices of dissent and to demand obedience by instilling fear in the hearts and minds of the Turkish people.  A person who lives and works in Turkey mentioned to me that some months ago there was a peaceful demonstration in the Turkish capital against Erdogan's foreign policies.  But it took only an hour to break it up and disperse the crowd.   The riff-raffs of the AK Party literally charged into the demo with sticks, batons and shot guns .. the kind of intimidation one would expect to see by the security forces of one of those puppet kings or presidents-for-life in the Middle-East.

Erdogan's lack of tolerance of media criticism in his country is well known.  Since day one, constitutional amendments have been popping up in Turkey to curtail the freedom of press.   Here is an interesting bit from Al-Akhbar stating that Erdogan has "managed to secure the support of a large swath of opportunistic liberal journalists, who sided with the AKP, with deals that have since earned these journalists many benefits, both direct and indirect.  Yet Erdogan did not content himself with this support in the media, as other journalists continued to direct harsh criticism against his domestic and foreign policies. Instead, the government enacted laws and fabricated excuses and premises enabling them to throw dozens of journalists in prison, claiming that they were engaged in conspiracies against the state and the government."

The Turkish Army has long played a pivotal role in its country's politics.   But with the coming of the AK Party, the Army gradually took the back seat.  This may sound complimentary for the AK Party but it isn't.  The role of the Turkish military wasn't diminished by any grand ideology of the leaders of the AK Party.    The Turkish Army was a sellout for which it had big support of the U.S. and E.U.  The AK Party decided to surpass its military by proving itself to be a greater sellout and so, it got bigger support from the imperialist leaders.  

After selling away his self-respect and betraying the trust of the Turkish people, Erdogan has still not had his fill.  This shameless dictator is now negotiating with the U.S. to declare Syria into a "no-fly" zone.  It's a set-up that had been on the table for long to be used as a key resource at the right time.  The time has now arisen after the Al-Qaeda agents of the "friends of Syria," despite being provided with training and weapons worth millions, have failed to win the war against Assad's forces.  

This fetid crap about a "no-fly" zone over Syria smells of a prelude to violation of international norms yet again.   The West and the Sunni leaders, hand in hand, are now working to create circumstances that will enable them to use their trump card as they did in Libya - air strikes by the North Atlantic Terrorist Organization (NATO). 

Most likely it won't take long for the spineless United Nations to announce Syria  a "no-fly zone."  According to the Western myth, the purpose of a no-fly zone is to prevent a government from killing its people by airstrikes.   Though Syria is at war (NOT "civil" war) and is trying to repulse the attack of foreign invaders, the nasty media propaganda with all its manipulations will somehow assure its naive viewers that Syria's actions  have made it eligible for her to be recognized as a "no-fly" zone.   Obviously, the Syrian government cannot be expected to respect such a villainous law and give up defending its country against foreign terrorists and infiltrators.  This will provide the United Nations with the much awaited excuse to give NATO the green light for carrying out its standard terrorism - flying over Syria's "no-fly zone" followed by complete destruction of a sovereign state with the stench of death everywhere.  

If at any time, any one wants to make this planet a slightly better place to live in, the first thing they need to do is to dissolve those three criminal dens - UN, NATO and ICC.   It's an arrangement and they play their roles in sequence.  The UN makes it conducive for NATO to murder and then the ICC turns away from handling the cases of the surviving victims of NATO so that they can be lynched by the Al-Qaeda allies of NATO at home. 

Thursday, August 9, 2012

History: The Big Lie About the Massacre of the Jews of Banu Qurayza in Medina

Before busting this old myth with the help of a series of  logical analysis, let us first re-cap the history of the Jewish tribes of Medina briefly.

The settlement of Khyber was 95 miles from Medina and a stronghold of the Arab Jews.  It consisted of nine or ten Jewish forts.  At Khyber, various pagan Arab tribes that opposed the Prophet (sw) were also given refuge by the Jews.   Khyber stayed an active center of conspiracies against the Muslims in Medina for almost two years.   It was on the 7th year of the Hijrah that the Prophet (sw) was left with no other choice but to confront this source of aggression.

Battle of the Trench (Ghazwa-e-Khandaq) was fought on 5th Hijrah, two years prior to the battle in Khyber.  By this time the Jewish tribe of Banu Nadir had already been expelled from Medina for its continuous role as a trouble maker, many of whose adherents had settled in Khyber.   Banu Qunaika (or Kanuka as in Hebrew) was expelled for its declaration of war on the Prophet (sw) after the Battle of Badr which took place on 3rd Hijrah.  It's recounted that some adherents of Banu Qunaika settled in Wadi-e-Kura, north of Medina and some went to Syria.  But in reality, many of them landed up in Khyber.   Khyber also became the destination of several members of the tribe of Banu Qurayza after their defeat in the Battle of Trench in 5th Hijrah.

That common story about the "massacre of Banu Qurayza" after Battle of the Trench is one of the biggest fairy tales in world history.   Unfortunately, like many orientalists, even some Muslim historians like Ibn Ishaq and Ibn Khalidun have used this fabrication in their works.  

Evidence from the Glorious Quran
Referring to the Sole Criterion, the Noble Quran,  Verses 33:26, there is absolutely NO indication of 'mass killing' of Banu Qurayza.  

"And He brought those of the People of the Scripture who supported them down from their strongholds, and cast panic into their hearts. Some ye slew, and ye made captive some."  (33:26)

Verse 33:26 is a reference to the treachery of Banu Qurayza and when the Muslim army confronted them after the Battle of the Trench.  Mark the words of Verse 33:26 - "some ye slew, and ye made captive some."  This clearly denotes few people being killed in the battle and few being taken as prisoners. It includes only those who were on the frontline of the battle.  A massacre is never described in this manner.  In particular, the language and style of the Noble Quran is so articulate that whichever event is described, whether briefly or in detail, is very vividly and coherently expressed with no scope of any misunderstandings.  The expression mentioning the casualties of Banu Qurayza in Verse 33:26 by no means indicates execution-style killing of the entire tribe.  That's crystal clear.

This Jewish tribe showed open treachery during the Battle of the Trench.  After the battle when Qureysh along with various pagan clans had deserted the battlefield, the Muslims faced up to deal with Banu Qurayza who were in their Jewish stronghold of Medina.  Whatever casualties took place was during the fight between the Muslims and the adherents of Banu Qurayza.   This is precisely what the Quran defines in the above mentioned Verse.  As we can see, the allusion to the confrontation between the Muslims and Banu Qurayza in the Quran is brief and there is no reference whatsoever to any mass slaughter even in the remotest sense.  The Quran refers to it in a battle context, to those who were actually fighting. The Quran is the only authority to be accepted without hesitation or doubt.

The rule in Islam is to punish only those who were responsible for the sedition. To kill such a large number is the exact opposite of the Islamic sense of justice and opposite to the important principles of the Qur'an - particularly the verse "That no laden one shall bear another's load," (53:38).

The version of all women and children taken prisoners is also absurd, without any plausible evidence and completely opposed to Quranic rules concerning prisoners of war, which is: Either they are to be granted their freedom or they are permitted to be ransomed.  

Many historical data conform with information contained in the Glorious Quran (V.33:26)
Many history books recounting the story of Qurayza have stated that a few specific persons were named during the event as having been put to death, some of whom were described as particularly active in their hostility. It is the reasonable conclusion that those were the ones who led the sedition and who were consequently punished - NOT the whole tribe.

The myth of Banu Qurayza is inconsistent compared to the decisions of Muslims concerning Banu Nadir and Qunaika
It is unlikely, if not impossible, that the Banu Qurayza should be slaughtered when the other Jewish tribes of Banu Nadir and Qunaika which had surrendered earlier were treated leniently and allowed to go for the same crime.   Abu Ubayd  Salam relates in his Kitab al-amwal the final words of the Prophet (sw) to Banu Qurayza: "I have known the extent of your hostility to God and to His apostle, yet that does not prevent me from treating you as I treated your brethren."  This is reported as the Prophet's response after the surrender of Banu Qurayzah.

No tangible historical evidence of such an incident
Had this slaughter actually happened and if so many hundreds of people had actually been put to death in the "market-place" (as babbled in the fabricated stories and forged ahadith), it's very strange and unusual that there was never any trace of mass graves nor any sites of mass burial anywhere in Medina, even though many other important historical landmarks were preserved for a long time, some are present even now.  But absolutely nothing to indicate that an entire tribe had been executed and buried at any particular spot or scattered spots in Medina.  

No evidence of Saad bin Muad being told to decide the fate of Banu Qurayza other than forged narrations
Just as the descendants of Banu Qurayza would want to glorify their ancestors, so did the descendants of Saad bin Muad, the chief of Aus tribe of Medina whose adherent was Banu Qurayza.  According to the myth, the Prophet (pbuh) requested Saad bin Muad to make a decision about the fate of Banu Qurayza.   Later, evidence emerged that that part of the story which claims all men of Banu Qurayza were put to death and women and children taken prisoners was transmitted from one of Saad's direct descendants with no evidence that the Prophet at all approached Saad to decide about Banu Qurayza.  In other words, this account from one of Saad's descendents is exactly as unreliable, rather utterly false, as 99.9% of the fabricated Ahadith we have read. 

Senseless gossips only expose this myth still more
As usual, lots of illogical narrations from irrelevant personalities have come up, hurling one falsehood upon another concerning the Banu Qurayza story.  For example, one historical narration claims that all prisoners of Banu Qurayza were incarcerated in the house of a woman from Banu al-Najjar.  No one even knows who this woman was nor does this Arab tribe of Banu al-Najjar have any significance in Islamic History.  Moreover, how could so many hundreds of prisoners be accommodated in a common house belonging to a woman of Banu al-Najjar?  Just doesn't make sense. 

Gossip mongering by Arab Jews a prime factor for distortions, creation of this tale and confusion among historians
The blatant fact of the matter is that stories regarding the Arab Jews have been distorted and manipulated grossly by their descendants until almost 200 years after the passing away of the Prophet (sw).   Regarding the unacceptable story of the slaughter of Banu Qurayza, the real source of this myth was the descendants of the Jews of Medinah, from whom Ibn Ishaq took these "odd tales". For doing so Ibn Ishaq was severely criticized by other scholars and historians within the circle of the traditionalists themselves.  Ibn Ishaq was called "an impostor" by Malik.

What is being confused or intentionally distorted by various historians is the inside story coming directly from the Jews of Banu Qurayza in the words of their leader, Kaab bin Asad, who in his lengthy and aggressive speech is reported to have suggested that Banu Qurayza should eliminate their women and children and make a last desperate attempt against the Muslim army.  It's interesting to note that according to the information contained in several episodes of history, an ancient and frantic Jewish tradition in times of complete despair and distress was mass suicide.  That tallies with the report in some history books about Kaab bin Asad's intentions in his long and aggressive speech.  However, another historical version suggests that many Jews of Banu Qurayza refused to commit suicide, giving further evidence that NO mass death was inflicted upon the Jews, neither by the Muslims nor by themselves.  It also explains how scores of adherents of Banu Qurayza were later found to have joined the Jewish stronghold at Khyber, giving still greater credence to the fact that after the Battle of the Trench, the tribe of Banu Qurayza was expelled from Medina and NOT executed en masse.

False Ahadith only strengthened the falsified version of the Banu Qurayza story
When the culture of Hadith narrations began in full swing during the reign of the Ummayads, a lot of those young so-called sahabas who had never even met or seen the Prophet (sw) began narrating tons of fabrications.  Several of them who converted to Islam were Jews or Christians.  They were brazen opportunists with no sincere attachments to Faith.  They forged plenty of narrations that were discreetly supportive of the Jewish tribes of Arabia.

The siege of Masada used as a prototype for concocting the Banu Qurayza story by medieval Arab Jews
Frankly, if you search the annals of history, you will find that circulation of such falsehoods and motivated exaggerations are quite common from Jewish sources.  For example, similar unsupported stories of atrocities by Romans in 73 AD during the destruction of temple mount have been recounted by the Jewish descendants of those who lived at that time but without a shred of evidence.  

A lot of Jewish history comes through the stories of the 1st century Jewish historian/priest, Flavius Josephus.  He belonged to Greece but lived in Jerusalem.  He has particularly mentioned a lot about the first Jewish-Roman war that resulted in the destruction of temple mount known as the "siege of Masada."   Masada was the name of a place situated in the South of what's today known as Israel.   This is the place where the first Jewish-Roman war began in the 1st century.  The event of the siege of Masada itself, as reported by Josephus, is supposed to be full of inaccuracies.  Which portions of it might conform with the truth is only known to Allah Almighty.  Although Josephus was aware of many unethical actions of the Jewish rebels, he covered them up by giving plenty of wrong accounts of the actual event.  If you read his works carefully, you will find that his writings and cover-ups (devoid of evidences) are very similar to the false narrations and accounts coming from Jewish sources about Banu Qurayza.   For example:   According to Josephus, the well known "siege of Masada" by the Romans led to mass suicide of many Jewish rebels known as "sicarii," a large segment of hardline extremist Jews.  The history of Masada also mentions that when the Jewish rebels reached a point of despair, their leader, Eleazar, addressed them (just as Kaab b. Asad addressed the Banu Qurayza) suggesting that they kill their women and children.  Later, when they came to a point of complete despair, they planned to kill each other.  Probably this was Josephus' notion of painting the "sicarii" as 'courageous.'  Historical evidence?  None.  Clearly, the story of Masada is strikingly similar to the story of Banu Qurayza, except that the Muslims of Medina have been made falsely responsible for the deaths of these Jews.   

Another example: According to Josephus, when Alexander ruled Jerusalem, he hung 800 Jewish prisoners upon the crosses and slaughtered their wives and children before them.  Historical evidence?  Again, none.  Sounds awfully similar to the fabrication of the story of Banu Qurayza.

The story of the siege of Masada seems to have served as a prototype, based on which other similar stories have been constructed by the Jews of later times .. the story of Banu Qurayza being one of them.

Many modern analysts and historians have opined that in the early days a certain version of the myth of Banu Qurazya was cooked up and preserved by the descendants of Banu Qurayza.   Then, the later generations of the Jewish descendants of Banu Qurayza superimposed the details of the siege of Masada on the already fabricated story of the siege of Banu Qurayza, perhaps through confusion but more likely intentionally - in other words, medieval Jewish propaganda.   Ibn Ishaq took this story without bothering to verify any of the details and several other historians borrowed, what appeared as Ibn Ishaq's version of the Banu Qurayza story.

Monday, August 6, 2012

"a Day" = a thousand years and fifty thousand years

BismAllah ..

"He directeth the ordinance from the heaven unto the earth; then it ascendeth unto Him in a Day, whereof the measure is a thousand years of that ye reckon."  (32:5)

"A questioner questioned concerning the doom about to fall
Upon the disbelievers, which none can repel,
From Allah, Lord of the Ascending Stairways
(Whereby) the angels and the Spirit ascend unto Him in a Day whereof the span is fifty thousand years."   (70:1-4)

Some readers get confused between the verses of the above two Surahs.  They wrongly think the span of one thousand years and fifty thousand years to be a "contradiction."   We will analyze the contents of the above verses to perceive that there's NO contradiction at all.

In Verse 32:5 Allah Almighty tells us that He sends down His Divine regulations and rules to the people of this earth, and then the reports regarding these rules (that is, human reaction or human obedience / disobedience toward these rules) ascend to Him in a Day which according to human calculation would be one thousand years.  Most likely this is a reference to the Ascending Stairways (Al-Maarij), the title of Surah 70.
Next .... by reading verses 1 to 4 of Surah 70, we will know the difference between the two.  Verses 1 to 4 of Surah 70 elucidate that Allah is the Lord and Master of the entire universe and of the Ascending Stairways which reach upto Him at a very high and special place in the heavens where no one is permitted to go except the angels who serve HIM and carry out HIS commandments assigned to them.  The ascension of the angels through the Ascending Stairways is One Day for Allah, but it's equivalent fifty thousand years as per human reckoning.

The difference of the span of time of one thousand years in Verse 32:5 and fifty thousand years in Verse 70:4 can now be understood.  The two different verses refer to two separate aspects of Allah's governance of the universe.

Verse 32:5 speaks of the report or the outcome of Divine regulations reaching Allah or ascending to Allah which is One Day for Him but it's one thousand years for us.  We may presume that these reports are carried back to Allah by the angles but as we can see, Verse 32:5 does not specify about the angels.  After all, Allah can make anything happen.  Allah has appointed the angels to carry out His duties because that's the way He desires to construct HIS Government.  But if HE wants, HE can also implement all HIS commandments without the service of angels, by only saying "Be and it is."

Verse 70:4 states specifically of all angels going to the presence of Allah through the Ascending Stairways to be assigned their duties or to report matters to HIM - only Allah would know the details of these matters.   However, this ascent of the angels through the Ascending Stairways is fifty thousand years as per our calculation but only One Day for Allah.

Therefore, I repeat, Verses 32:5 and 70:4 discuss two separate functions.  Verse 32:5 consists of the function of Allah's regulations or ordinance descending and then ascending back to Him in "a Day" (one thousand years for us).  And Verse 70:4 mentions of the general heavenly functions concerning which the angels ascend to Allah through the Ascending Stairways in "a Day" (fifty thousand years for us).

Similarly, quite surely, in Verse 32:4 the expression "six Days" refers to a very different length of time than six days on earth, the exact duration of which would be known to Allah alone.  

"Allah it is Who created the heavens and the earth, and that which is between them, in six Days. Then He mounted the Throne. Ye have not, beside Him, a protecting friend or mediator. Will ye not then remember ?"

The term "six Days" refers to a duration with regard to the vast universe and heavens, the time calculation of which would be very different from earth.  As soon as we step outside the earth, earthly time is naught.  The earth, compared to the vast expanse Allah refers in the Quran, is only a drop in the ocean or even smaller.  

Syria: It's NOT a "revolution" you dummies!

Whenever some irrelevant freak defects and joins the Al-Qaeda invaders of Syria, the mainstream media celebrates with the utmost of hype.  Presently it's celebrating the defection of a Syrian opportunist called Riyad Hijab who was appointed prime minister of Syria a couple of years ago.  Prime minister's post in Syria is that of a figurehead.  He never had much power nor any influential or political clout.  Power is mainly rooted in the Syrian Army and the security apparatus of the government that stand firmly to defend Syria from the foreign aggression of Al-Qaeda, its Arab/Turk financiers, Israel and USA.  

For practically purposes, Hijab's defection is quite insignificant.  But it will surely provide greater fuel for running the international propaganda machine.  Hijab never belonged to the close circles of the Syrian government.  He was one of the Sunnis with a reclusive attitude.  Thus, it took him little time to fall on the lap of his country's enemies.  Hijab was helped by the Al-Qaeda allies of the "free Syrian army" to defect.  And the joke of millennium - Hijab calls himself a "soldier of this blessed revolution."  Yet, he isn't fighting.  He simply escaped to Jordan (a member of that diabolical den called "friends of Syria") where he is relaxing in luxury.  

What's happening in Syria is NO revolution, just as what happened in Libya was NO revolution.  Do I even need to say that?   A revolt that blossoms into a revolution stays meaningful only as long as it's one hundred per cent homegrown.  The moment foreigners get involved, it loses its ideology and its goal of 'freedom' and 'independence' becomes a deception.  

What's happening in Syria now is identical to what was attempted in Iran in June 2009 instigated by the West.  I'm sure we all remember that failed drama.  The only difference was that in the case of Iran the imperialists used 1% of those Iranian dissidents within the country (with the help of George Soros), while in Syria the same imperialist powers are using the fierce terrorists of Al-Qaeda to assist a fraction of the Syrian defectors and wreck havoc throughout the country.   It's so darn simple to sense the similarity. 

Let's learn some more history to understand the foreign revolt against Syria better.

What's happening in Syria today is a repetition of Iranian history in 1953.   The purpose of the events in Iran in 1953 was financial protection of UK and the US involving Iranian oil.  The Syrian episode today is mainly for the protection of the illegal state of Israel but also involves imperialist interest in the energy resources of Syrian Kurdistan. 

Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddeq was the democratically elected leader of Iran and the choice of the Iranian people.  In August of 1953, he was toppled by a coup known as the Mordad coup orchestrated within Iran by the intelligence agencies of Britain and the United States.  This imperialist-led coup ushered the authoritarian rule of the Western agent, Reza Shah Pahlavi, and Iran's transition from the peoples' government to a tyrannical monarch supported and protected by the United States.

So, what was the reason for ousting Mosaddeq, a leader chosen and liked by majority of his people?   Please read carefully and remember.  In the 1920s and 1930s Iranian oil was strictly controlled by the Brits via a British owned Anglo-Iranian oil company (AIOC).  The Iranian people, majority of whom have always been very independent minded and have downright rejected imperialist thefts, gradually began resenting this arrangement involving the AIOC.  By the 1940s the peoples' dissatisfaction over the AIOC became widespread which was seen for what it really was - a exploitative body and a lucrative investment of British imperialism.  In 1951, Mossadeq passed a bill in the Iranian Parliament to nationalize Iran's oil industry, thus, booting out AIOC.   This bill was supported by the Iranian Parliament almost unanimously.  It was an unpleasant jolt for the imperialist powers.  It spelled the clear message for them to "go back home, no more robbing of Iran's wealth."   But Western democratic norms function only as long as they serve its interest.   Nationalizaton of Iranian oil industry was a heavy kick deep inside the rear of the imperialists.  Not being able to rob Iran any longer meant huge financial losses to them.  Ignoring Mossadeq's popular support in Iran, the British flatly refused any cordial negotiations on this issue.  They wanted nothing less than the return of imperialist rule in Iran.  A leader popular among the masses didn't suit the imperialist national interest.  Subsequently, imperialist vandalism began being unleashed against Iran.  Britain started by initiating a worldwide boycott of Iranian oil to pressure Iran economically .. similar to the harsh sanctions we see today against Iran/Syria/Hezbollah.  Then it started using Iranian agents to destabilize Mossadeq's government .. much the same as George Soros' mischief using the services of those few thousands of Iranian dissidents and supporters of the former Shah now residing in the US to destabilize post-revolution Iran.  While all this went on, Britain was constantly working on the possibility of mobilizing its army and sending it inside Iran to seize the Abadan oil refinery.  And finally when Churchill became Prime Minister of Britain and Eisenhower led the US, they instigated and financed a coup with the help of a small number of Iranian dissidents and toppled the very popular government of Iran. Mossadeq was overthrown.  That's how Iran's first peoples' government was destroyed by foreign invaders until 1979, when our brave Iranian brothers and sisters rose up again and threw out the imperialists and their autocratic representative.  Even a pro-West source as the online encyclopedia writes on the 1953 coup of Iran: "Classified documents show British intelligence officials played a pivotal role in initiating and planning the coup, and that Washington and London shared an interest in maintaining control over Iranian oil."  It also names the commanders of this coup viz.  "Dwight Eisenhower and Winston Churchill."  And imperialist lackeys, "Mohammad Reza Pahlavi and Fazollah Zahedi."

More than 1,000 Iranians were killed in this coup.

Today, post-revolution Iran has vowed it won't let the international robbers steal her wealth ever again.  InshAllah, Iran will always be independent and sovereign, trading as fair business partners with the rest of the world, NEVER as their slaves.

And now think of the events in Syria.  We would have to be dumb sickos if we still cannot catch the truth. 

Is Hajj-e-Badal Permissible?

For those of our readers who don't know what Hajj-e-Badal means:  It's the act of performing Hajj on behalf of another person who is either deceased or not healthy enough to perform Hajj for themselves.  According to Shariah, Hajj-e-Badal can only be performed by a person who has already performed Hajj for themselves.   So, where do these rules come from?  Surely not from the Quran.

Let's briefly check what the Quran says about Hajj and the concept of dedicating your good deeds to others.  

The Noble Quran gives a very detailed account of how to perform Hajj, it's purpose and benefits.  To know the complete list of information mentioned in the Quran about Hajj, please read our post What does the Quran say about Hajj?  The entire contents of this post have direct references to the Quran.  You will observe that the Quranic information on Hajj is very extensive, complete and inclusive of all significant aspects.  But Allah has not mentioned any such ideas of one person performing Hajj for another.  Kindly check it for yourself.

The other very important information contained in the Noble Quran is the truth about the independence of each soul created by Allah.  Allah says in the Quran, loud and clear, that every soul is responsible and answerable for its own deeds.  This concept is one of the cornerstones of the Glorious Quran.

"And no burdened soul can bear another's burden, .... He who groweth (in goodness), groweth only for himself, (he cannot by his merit redeem others). Unto Allah is the journeying."  (35:18)

"And guard yourselves against a day when no soul will in aught avail another, …"   (2:48)

"That no laden one shall bear another's load,"  (53:38)

"And that man hath only that for which he maketh effort,"  (53:39)

Allah has inspired each human soul (separately) with a conscience and awareness of right & wrong.  It’s the responsibility of every individual to select their path of conduct.  Those who allow their conscience to grow are the successful ones in His sight, while those who keep it stunted are the losers.

"And a soul and Him who perfected it
And inspired it (with conscience of) what is wrong for it and (what is) right for it.
He is indeed successful who causeth it to grow,
And he is indeed a failure who stunteth it."   (91:7-10)  Ash-Shams

All of the above verses clearly indicate that there are absolutely NO concepts of one person's deeds being transferred to another for their benefit.   Hajj is a form of worshiping Allah.  How can one person be told to perform worship for another person?   It's a bit like saying "Oh, I'm not feeling well.  Can you please offer my Fajr prayer for me?"  If we feel unwell and cannot offer  our salaat, all we can do is to sincerely ask forgiveness of Allah.  Allah is Forgiving and Merciful, and He knows the truth within every person's heart.  If He wants, he will forgive.  But that's as far as we can go.  Allah has said that those who are able to go for Hajj must undertake this journey.  But concerning those who cannot afford it financially or those who are not physically or mentally healthy it's up to Allah to forgive them.  The Quran definitely does not give us any reasons to presume that in case of any compelling reasons we can send someone else for Hajj on our behalf and earn His blessings. 

 The idea of Hajj-e-badal has crept into the Muslim culture through the stories of Hadith.  From all the Quranic evidences provided above, it's not at all hard to perceive that the concept of Hajj-e-badal in Hadith is NOT compatible with the Quran, rather it quite obviously clashes with Quranic principles.

The following are the UNAUTHENTIC Ahadith that are responsible for bringing this unwarranted practice within Islam.

Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith 9.418 Narrated by Ibn Abbas
A woman came to the Prophet (saws) and said, "My mother vowed to perform the Hajj but she died before performing it. Should I perform the Hajj on her behalf?" He (saws) said, "Yes! Perform the Hajj on her behalf. See, if your mother had been in debt, would you have paid her debt?" She said, "Yes." He (saws) said, "So you should pay what is for Him, as Allah has more right that one should fulfill one's obligations to Him."

Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith 2.589    Narrated by Abdullah bin Abbas
Al-Fadl ibn Al-Abbas was riding behind Allah's Messenger (saws) and a woman from the tribe of Khath'am came. The woman said, "O Allah's Messenger (saws)! The obligation of Hajj enjoined by Allah on His devotees has become due on my father and he is old and weak, and he cannot sit firm on the mount; may I perform Hajj on his behalf?" The Prophet replied, "Yes, you may." That happened during the Hajj-al-Wida (of the Prophet (saws)).

Sunan of Abu-Dawood Hadith 1806  Narrated by Abu Razin
A man of Banu Amir said: ‘O Messenger of Allah (saws), my father is very old, he cannot perform hajj and umrah himself nor can he ride on a mount.’ The Prophet (saws) said: ‘Perform hajj and umrah on behalf of your father.’

The rule of Hajj-e-badal being performed by a person who has already performed Hajj for himself first comes from the following Hadith:

Sunan of Abu-Dawood Hadith 1807  Narrated by Abdullah ibn Abbas
The Prophet (saws) heard a man say: ‘Labbayk (always ready to obey) on behalf of Shubrumah.’  He (saws) asked: ‘Who is Shubrumah?’ He replied: ‘A brother (or relative) of mine.’  The Prophet (saws) asked: ‘Have you performed hajj on your own behalf?’  He said: ‘No.’  The Messenger of Allah (saws) then said: ‘Perform hajj on your own behalf, then perform it on behalf of Shubrumah.’

As you can see, the Hadith lies about the Prophet (pbuh) with a lot of confidence.  The Hadith conveniently forges very authoritative statements which are not at all in conformity with Quranic information and dumps them on the Prophet (pbuh).  This is a mean game and please do not fall for it.  The reason for this being that the Hadith narrators & compilers wanted to change Islam.  And since none of them were aware of Quranic information, therefore their haphazard lies contradicted the Quran very blatantly.  Yet the Muslims are not able to read in between the lines and separate truth from falsehood. 

I ask the mainstream Muslims, in the presence of the Noble Quran, would the Prophet (pbuh) so authoritatively overlook Quranic laws and principles and implement his own rules that contradict the contents of Allah's Final Message?  The answer is a firm NO.

Conclusion:  Hajj-e-badal is not a Quranic law and it clashes with Quranic principles. 

Thursday, August 2, 2012

The Syrian Baath Party and former Iraqi Baath Party are NOT the same

It's a common misconception by many, mostly the supporters of the Arab and Turkish governments who are helping the imperialists and Zionists to topple Bashar al-Assad that Assad is a "Marxist" and a "socialist" and therefore he is a "disbeliever."  This propaganda is being allowed to grow to fool the people as it benefits the governments of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey who are training the al-Qaeda insurgents to invade Syria. 

Secondly, many Wahabi propagandists are also insinuating the pathetically WRONG idea that the Ba'ath Party of Syria is the same as Saddam's former Ba'ath Party of Iraq which fought an eight-year-old bloody war against Iran.  This is another big LIE.

Here is the clarification and the truth. 

The history of the Ba'ath Party is very long with plenty of political details that culminate to tell us the two very diverse courses taken by the Syrian and Iraqi Ba'ath Parties with the passage of time.  I will summarize that history for the convenience of our readers so that this reading isn't too time consuming for them but at the same time they get to know the facts and subsequently reject the false propaganda about Assad being a "socialist" and the Syrian Ba'ath Party being the same as that of Iraq.

The Ba'ath Party was founded in mid 1940s by a Christian, a Sunni Muslim and an Alawite Shiia in Syria under the name "Arab Baath Party" representing pan-Arabism, an ideology which became increasingly popular in the Arab world after WW2.  It was basically an Arab socialist movement, albeit socialism of its own kind with predominantly Arab characteristics.  Let's not forget, Arab socialism is very different from Western socialism. In 1950s the Ba'ath Movement merged with the Arab Socialist Party establishing the 'Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party' in Lebanon. It was this party which passionately supported Gamal Abdel Nasser's pan-Arab policies in the 1950s.  After the establishment of the Arab Ba'ath Party in Syria in the 1940s, Ba'athist ideas began getting very popular in much of the Arab world. Rise of the Ba'ath Party led to considerable internal struggle. The Iraqi branch of the Ba'ath party led by Ali Saleh al-Sadi declared itself a Marxist and began drifting toward the hardline-left demanding 'socialist planning.'  In 1965 there was a coup led by hardline left-wing extremists of the Ba'ath party based in Iraq which overthrew the Syrian government. Many of the moderate Ba'athists based in Syria fled to Lebanon. But they gradually returned and re-grouped. It was from this point onward that the Damascus-based Ba'ath Party and the Baghdad-based Ba'ath Party became two completely separate organizations with very different policies. 

Everyone knows that the policies of Assad's government have done well in keeping Syria economically stable and providing satisfactorily to the common citizens of Syria.  At the same time there is freedom of faith for everyone.  Sunnis, Shiias and Christians are all permitted to follow their faith with complete freedom.   For decades Shiias, Sunnis and Christians have been living in Syria in total harmony.   Unlike many other countries, there has not been a single incident of violence or rioting in Syria between the Shiias and Sunni nor the Muslims and Christians. 

Our brethren around the world need to open their eyes, think on truthful lines and reject this nonsensical propaganda being circulated by the Arab & Turkish governments and their clerics to discredit Bashar al-Assad.  Both the West and Arab governments have their own selfish motives involved in this scheme.  The West wants to break the Syria-Iran-Hezbollah block and install an Israeli-friendly puppet like in other parts of the Arab world.  The Sunni Arab governments, being jealous of the efficiency, courage and strength of the Syria-Iran-Hezbollah resistance against the Zionists, want to install a gutless and treacherous Wahabi puppet regime which will hate Iran and Hezbollah and serve the interest of Israel and America as in other parts of the Arab world in exchange for power and money.