Islamic Taghieh-The Lying Basterds Say that Having Nukes is against Islamic Teachings

[Ardesheer]

These guys want the nukes and they are just lying through their teeth. I recall that there was another writing from Khomeini that also had said that they should work toward the nukes.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100614/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_nuclear
By ALI AKBAR DAREINI, Associated Press Writer Ali Akbar Dareini, Associated Press Writer – 1 hr 42 mins ago
TEHRAN, Iran – The hardline spiritual mentor of Iran's president has made a rare public call for producing the "special weapons" that are a monopoly of a few nations — a veiled reference to nuclear arms.
The Associated Press on Monday obtained a copy of a book written by Ayatollah [COLOR=#366388! important][COLOR=#366388! important]Mohammad[/COLOR][/COLOR] Taqi Mesbah Yazdi in which he wrote Iran should not deprive itself of the right to produce these "special weapons."
[COLOR=#366388! important][COLOR=#366388! important]Iran's [COLOR=#366388! important]government[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR], as well as its clerical hierarchy, have repeatedly denied the country is seeking nuclear weapons, as alleged by the U.S. and its allies.
The Security Council last week imposed a fourth round of sanctions in response to Tehran's refusal to halt uranium enrichment, which Iran maintains is only for its [COLOR=#366388! important][COLOR=#366388! important]nuclear [COLOR=#366388! important]energy [/COLOR][COLOR=#366388! important]program[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR], but could conceivably be used to produce material for weapons.
The new U.N. sanctions call for an asset freeze of another 40 additional companies and organizations, including 22 involved in nuclear or ballistic missile activities.
Yazdi's hardline views, including devotion to the [COLOR=#366388! important][COLOR=#366388! important]Mahdi[/COLOR][/COLOR], a messiah-like figure to reappear ahead of judgement day, have had a strong impact on Ahmadinejad, who shows him more respect than any other senior cleric.
Yazdi's book, "The [COLOR=#366388! important][COLOR=#366388! important]Islamic[/COLOR][/COLOR] Revolution, a Surge in Political Changes in History," was written in 2005 and then reprinted last year, but would have only had a very limited circulation among senior clerics and would not have been widely known.
"The most advanced weapons must be produced inside our country even if our enemies don't like it. There is no reason that they have the right to produce a special type of weapons, while other countries are deprived of it," Yazdi said.
Yazdi is a member of the [COLOR=#366388! important][COLOR=#366388! important]Assembly [COLOR=#366388! important]of [/COLOR][COLOR=#366388! important]Experts[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR], a conservative body of 86 senior clerics that monitors Iran's supreme leader and chooses his successor. He also heads the Imam Khomeini Educational and Research Institute, an Islamic think tank, in the holy city of Qom, 80 miles (130 kilometers) south of the capital.
In his book, Yazdi said Iran must acquire the necessary deterrent weapons in order to be able to stand up to its enemies.
"Under Islamic teachings, all common tools and materialistic instruments must be employed against the enemy and prevent enemy's military superiority," he said.
He also said Muslims must not allow a few powers to monopolize certain weapons in their arsenal.
"From Islam's point of view, Muslims must make efforts to benefit from the most sophisticated military equipment and get specific weapons out of the monopoly of powerful countries," he said.
The last time a high ranking official made such remarks was in 2005 when Mohammad Javad Larijani, now a senior judiciary official, said Islam has not tied Iran's hands in producing nuclear weapons.
But Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the [COLOR=#366388! important][COLOR=#366388! important]final [COLOR=#366388! important]say[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] on all state matters, has repeatedly denied that Tehran was seeking nuclear weapons because Islam forbids weapons of mass destruction.
Khamenei has reportedly issued a fatwa, or religious decree, saying the production, stockpiling and use of [COLOR=#366388! important][COLOR=#366388! important]nuclear [COLOR=#366388! important]weapons[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] was forbidden under Islam.
In May, a senior reformist cleric warned about the increasing power of Yazdi and his loyalists within the ruling system, calling them "a very dangerous and harsh current who won't show mercy to anybody."
Earlier this month, a hardline website called Yazdi an "Imam", a title given only to Shiite Islam's saints and the founder of the Islamic Republic, the late [COLOR=#366388! important][COLOR=#366388! important]Ayatollah [COLOR=#366388! important]Ruhollah [/COLOR][COLOR=#366388! important]Khomeini[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR]. Such a title has not been awarded to Khamenei, Iran's current leader.

 

[beystr 2.0]

Taghieh is right on..I'd like to see where in Islam prevents u from having the bomb.. especially if the infidels have it already.. heck if Sasanian had one we might be ..oh well..LOL

however I've yet to hear a good argument of why Iran or IRI should not have one..?

 

[Ramin]

Taghieh is right on..I'd like to see where in Islam prevents u from having the bomb.. especially if the infidels have it already.. heck if Sasanian had one we might be ..oh well..LOL

however I've yet to hear a good argument of why Iran or IRI should not have one..?

Huge difference beystr jan!

 

[General Parsaian]

من اگر جای رژیم بودم حتما بمب اتمی می ساختم و همه تلاشم را می کردم که هر چه بیشتر بمب بسازم
و فکر می کنم رژیم دروغ می گوید و می خواهد بسازد

 

[Ardesheer]

Well, it is interersting that the General is also agreeing that IRI is lying about not seeking nuclear weapons. It's so ridiculous that idiot Khamenie is saying that it is against Islamic teachings to have a weapon of mass destruction. It is so well documented that Mohammad (and Ali) executed around 700 prisoners of war whom included civilians (even Khomeini said it). What's the difference between beheading 700 (a mass murder) and gassing or nuking 700 people? It's just using different tools, and they are both mass murders. Also, Pakistan has nukes. I guess Khamenie considers Pakistan a non-Muslim country, since it is against Islam to have nukes.

 

[ashtar]

Taghieh is right on..I'd like to see where in Islam prevents u from having the bomb.. especially if the infidels have it already.. heck if Sasanian had one we might be ..oh well..LOL

however I've yet to hear a good argument of why Iran or IRI should not have one..?

1. By Islamic law and per Prophet's "Sunnat" during war Muslims were not and are not allowed to even randomly burn or destroy trees or farms much less random and indiscriminate killing of innocent civilians.

2. Christians are not infidels despite what Hollywood movies would have you believe. In Islam Christians are considered the "people of the book" and not infidels.

3. As far as why Iran/IRI should not have the bomb the arguments are plenty and solid. First one has to look at Iran's potential enemies and which one Iran could possibly use a nuclear bomb against. Iran is under 3 different military threats:
a. It's immediate neighbors. Using a nuclear bomb on next door neighbors will first be suicidal given risk of radiation affecting Iran's own population as well as religiously prohibited given all of Iran's immediate neighbors are Muslims. If IRI was not willing to retaliate against Iraq with chemical weapons or indiscriminate bombing it sure as hell will not be using a nuclear bomb.
b. Neighbors not sharing a border with Iran. The only country in the neighborhood that is any real military threat to Iran is Israel. Using a nuclear bomb against Israel would be religiously impossible for IRI given that Islam's third holiest shrine is located in Israel and even if they could manage to use such a weapon without killing the Palestinians as well it will defy their own purpose of trying to give the Palestinians back "their own land".
c. super powers in other continents. Having a nuclear bomb is ineffective against those countries (such as US or UK) because first Iran doesn't have the means of delivery and even if it did those countries will have the means of retaliating in 100 folds at least.

Above said, I don't think IR minds having the know-how and ability to make such a bomb (like Japan or S. Africa) but I really don't think they have any practical use for such weapon and don't think they're spending any time or money on it.

 

[parham79]

Killing innocent people in the streets is allowed in islam?. Since when have the mollah's cared about what is allowed or not in Islam. Look at the Torture chambers under evin or Kahrizak. Is that allowed in Islam to?

 

[Silverton]

1. By Islamic law and per Prophet's "Sunnat" during war Muslims were not and are not allowed to even randomly burn or destroy trees or farms much less random and indiscriminate killing of innocent civilians.

2. Christians are not infidels despite what Hollywood movies would have you believe. In Islam Christians are considered the "people of the book" and not infidels.

3. As far as why Iran/IRI should not have the bomb the arguments are plenty and solid. First one has to look at Iran's potential enemies and which one Iran could possibly use a nuclear bomb against. Iran is under 3 different military threats:
a. It's immediate neighbors. Using a nuclear bomb on next door neighbors will first be suicidal given risk of radiation affecting Iran's own population as well as religiously prohibited given all of Iran's immediate neighbors are Muslims. If IRI was not willing to retaliate against Iraq with chemical weapons or indiscriminate bombing it sure as hell will not be using a nuclear bomb.
b. Neighbors not sharing a border with Iran. The only country in the neighborhood that is any real military threat to Iran is Israel. Using a nuclear bomb against Israel would be religiously impossible for IRI given that Islam's third holiest shrine is located in Israel and even if they could manage to use such a weapon without killing the Palestinians as well it will defy their own purpose of trying to give the Palestinians back "their own land".
c. super powers in other continents. Having a nuclear bomb is ineffective against those countries (such as US or UK) because first Iran doesn't have the means of delivery and even if it did those countries will have the means of retaliating in 100 folds at least.

Above said, I don't think IR minds having the know-how and ability to make such a bomb (like Japan or S. Africa) but I really don't think they have any practical use for such weapon and don't think they're spending any time or money on it.

LOL you're so LAME, trying to say that IR gives two shits about humans or Islam.

You're a traitor and a liar. You don't have one ounce of decency in you.

 

[ashtar]

You're a traitor and a liar. You don't have one ounce of decency in you.

If the above is true then I have to say you're very smart. LOL

 

[The_Referee]

من اگر جای رژیم بودم حتما بمب اتمی می ساختم و همه تلاشم را می کردم که هر چه بیشتر بمب بسازم
و فکر می کنم رژیم دروغ می گوید و می خواهد بسازد

خوب شد جای غربیها و اسرائیلیها نبودی و با این طرز تفکر یکی دوتا بمب اتمی سر تهران و قم مینداختی که نذاری رژیم بمب بسازه. ​

 

[The_Referee]

1. By Islamic law and per Prophet's "Sunnat" during war ...

بابا تو همین الآن تو یه ترد دیگه گفتی اگه خامنه ای نبود این وحشیها موسوی و دارو دسته شو اعدام میکردند. اونوقت داری حرف از سنت و قانونی میزنی که این رژیم و افرادش بهش پایبندند؟

البته تقصیر نداری. کسی مغز متفکرش عباسیه - مدام هم شعرنو تلاوت کنه تعجبی نداره. ​

 

[ashtar]

بابا تو همین الآن تو یه ترد دیگه گفتی اگه خامنه ای نبود این وحشیها موسوی و دارو دسته شو اعدام میکردند. اونوقت داری حرف از سنت و قانونی میزنی که این رژیم و افرادش بهش پایبندند؟ ​

البته تقصیر نداری. کسی مغز متفکرش عباسیه - مدام هم شعرنو تلاوت کنه تعجبی نداره. ​

1st, I said: "there are elements within the regime and Sepah who will have no hesitancy to put on trial and execute or imprison not just Mousavi but anyone else involved in the first 2 decades of this revolution with the charge of treason or incompetence." That is quite different than just randomly killing Mousavi and anyone associated with him.

2nd, lets assume there are rogue elements within the regime who don't believe even in god or Islam much less its teachings. So what? What does that have to do with official policies of a regime or government? There are nut jobs like Mccain in the US who go around singing "bomb bomb Iran". Does that mean that's the official policy or beliefe of everyone in the US government?

3rd, topic and question of discussion was "a good argument of why Iran or IRI should not have" such a weapon. Thus I was providing both religious and non-religious reasons of why Iran or IRI should not have these kinds of weapons. hala to beh kheeyal khodet oomadi moch giri koni. LOL

 

[beystr 2.0]

Ashtar..C'mon..u know that u can interpet several Aye inQuran to Justify having the bomb..or even using it...I think General will concure on this with me..really How do u think Islam expanded ? by nice and humane wars..? but thats not the discussion ..

Middle east is asuch a compact area in population that anybody droping bomb is a nutcase going for a Apaclypse and dooms day senario and they themselves will be a victim of their own madness..so its supposed to be deterance according to West..and in that u gotta have cancelling capabilities...Israel is the only country that the world has allowed to bypass this law...Bull crap...1st of all..they are mad enough to think about using it..and u bet I'm all for iRI to have a deterance for those sickos

 

[beystr 2.0]

ye..don't let these guys tell u." oh well we don't trust IRI ".and crap like that...considering their barbaric contemporary history which includes dropping the bomb..we gotta be everybit weary of them having it.

 

[keyvan_pars]

1. By Islamic law and per Prophet's "Sunnat" during war Muslims were not and are not allowed to even randomly burn or destroy trees or farms much less random and indiscriminate killing of innocent civilians.

2. Christians are not infidels despite what Hollywood movies would have you believe. In Islam Christians are considered the "people of the book" and not infidels.

.

تو واقعن این کس و شر هارو قبول داری یا فرم رو کیر گیر آوردی ؟

 

[Ardesheer]

1. By Islamic law and per Prophet's "Sunnat" during war Muslims were not and are not allowed to even randomly burn or destroy trees or farms much less random and indiscriminate killing of innocent civilians.

2. Christians are not infidels despite what Hollywood movies would have you believe. In Islam Christians are considered the "people of the book" and not infidels.

No, per Islamic teachings, it's do all these things, and also lie about it too. Have you ever picked up a book? It seems that you haven't even read Quran. Stop spreading lies.

 

[footballeirani]

You may not be allowed to burn trees for a random purpose, but when a shepeshoo and ozgal akhund says that it is mostahab in rahe khoda then it becomes your duty to do so.

Tree ke che arz konam, at that point you could kill whomever. Like writers, dissidents, politicians, and sons of other ozgal ayatollahs.

 

[deerouz]

In Islam suicide was supposed to be the greatest sin ever committed and the person would be condemned to hell for eternity. Then just now they have discovered that no, suicide bombing is not exactly "suicide" and so the person committing it will be rerouted from the deepest levels of hell right up to the heaven in the arms of virgins and ghalmans!

Or the hadith from Imam Sadegh that looking at a chess board is the equivalent of looking at your mother's .....! When Khomeini issued the fatwa that Chess was halal, I was wondering if he did look at it or not

 

[Motori]

"Taghyyeh" is not an islamic rule, it is Shia rule. 9 out of 10 muslims around the world don't believe in it.

 

[Iranpaak]

In Islam suicide was supposed to be the greatest sin ever committed and the person would be condemned to hell for eternity. Then just now they have discovered that no, suicide bombing is not exactly "suicide" and so the person committing it will be rerouted from the deepest levels of hell right up to the heaven in the arms of virgins and ghalmans!

deerouz JAn, who are "they" you are referring to, and what have they discovered to legitimize suicide?