I read till the part of Pakistan and your awarded respect to her neutrality. The important bit.
The rest well who cares
It's your decision what to read and what not to read. Nobody can demand anything of anyone here as long as the rules are followed.
Anyway allow me to elaborate on posts 47 and 49. This is not aimed towards you but just in general.
I have always been against the Al-Assad regime since the very beginning of the Syrian civil war/revolution/conflict (call it what you want to here almost 7 years later).
It is my belief, both Islamic, ethical, moral, logical, political, humanitarian etc. that it is the right of the Syrian people to resist a bloody tyrant like Al-Assad and his regime after the incredibly brutal reactions to peaceful protests across Syria. Saying that Syrian regime soldiers and regime people are legitimate targets (I will consider it as such regardless of any laws in the West, KSA or the Arab world saying the contrary), I agree with and I have no problem with saying that openly.
However from having such a belief to calling for civilians to be killed, relatives, calling for the extermination of certain sects or political groups, there is a very, very long way. Normally such a distinction is what separates what many would consider a legitimate fight from terrorism, exemplified by Daesh for instance.
Similarly private individuals going to Afghanistan in the 1980's to fight a war against a oppressive invader (USSR) for either religious, political, humanitarian or other reasons, are those individuals decisions. However there is a long way from that and for instance what later occurred in Afghanistan among various groups (Northern Alliance, Taliban, Al-Qaeda) or what Abdullah Azzam, OBL, Mullah Omar etc. and his likes pursued afterwards.
So we are back to some Mullah saying that grave worship is discouraged or that he disagrees with Shia Islam (as do 90% of all Muslims for instance) for this and that reason and some villager or uneducated people or educated person with a agenda somewhere in the world, taking 1000 extra steps by killing some childhood Shia friend in the local Husseiniya. Hopefully my point cannot be misunderstood here.
So who do we blame? The Mullah saying that grave worship is bad? The perpetrator? His teachers? His family? His friends? His local Mullah's? The stuff that he has watched on the internet? Personality disorder and other personal problems? Maybe he is just using religion as a excuse for other aims or frustrations? Shall the host country of the Mullah be blamed or the country of that Mullah's origin and the people that he happens to share a nationality with? The security apparatus in country x or y? Rulers for having previously used such people to their advantage against others and for their own benefits?
etc. etc. etc.
As you can see it's not as black and white as I hear so often everywhere.
So we can discuss from today and until the end of times when we must draw the line. Is saying that regime x or y is bad, possibly going to make radicals take actions in their own hands? A homosexual liberal from KSA probably wants to see the end of House of Saud rule. He shares that wish with an ISIS fanatic or MB supporter. However a clear line in the sand must be drawn when the line is crossed and then it does not matter what sect that person belongs to, political group, nationality etc.