41 replies to this topic

[Pascal]

Al-Hadi, on 20 May 2012 - 06:54 AM, said:

IF SOMEONE HAS A DIFFERING VIEW IT DOESNT MEAN THEYRE WAHABI.

No, it sounds like a good theory i think. Everyone here who disagrees is just planted here by the ruling Wahabi cabal.

I used to think i was an atheist but i guess im actually a wahabi. Go figure hey?

Just think about it for a second though, why would someone with views like the wahabi's have give even one cent to a site like this? It's almost akin to those among you who detest zionists donating to every zionist cause imaginable.

[Al-Afasy]

Al-Hadi, on 20 May 2012 - 05:55 AM, said:

you guys, are nuts.

Assalamu Alaykum, Hayakum Allah.

No sir, you are the one who is nuts!! You don't realize the truth that Macisaac is Yassir al-Habib himself!! Why do you think he loves defending him so much?!

And what about that mod Repenter....doesn't he seem like a re-invention of Mesbah Yazdi, the main man of Syed Khamenei?! Better yet, it's Against Oneself!

Don't let me start on that shady Shia_Debater....

Keep me in your duas,
Hassan b. Salem al-Ilami.

[Thurston]

fahimah18, on 20 May 2012 - 06:54 AM, said:

Can you please explain why you
Mentioned  macissac, haji and SD?

Errr.......It was meant to be joke since they are part of the admin team.

[Al-Hadi]

Al-Afasy, on 20 May 2012 - 10:56 AM, said:

Assalamu Alaykum, Hayakum Allah.

No sir, you are the one who is nuts!! You don't realize the truth that Macisaac is Yassir al-Habib himself!! Why do you think he loves defending him so much?!

And what about that mod Repenter....doesn't he seem like a re-invention of Mesbah Yazdi, the main man of Syed Khamenei?! Better yet, it's Against Oneself!

Don't let me start on that shady Shia_Debater....

Keep me in your duas,
Hassan b. Salem al-Ilami.

LOOOOL you crack me up!!!!

[Wahdat]

I always suspected Abu Wahabi to be K. Abdullah's special envoy to this site.

[Martyrdom]

I don't think wahabis are  smart enough to be using taqiya through shiachat to make us look bad this site has way more positives then negatives that if it was allowed in saudi it would have the same effect facebook had in egypt. The last thing they want here is another point of view and this site has them by the bundle.

[zameena]

kingpomba, on 20 May 2012 - 09:51 AM, said:

No, it sounds like a good theory i think. Everyone here who disagrees is just planted here by the ruling Wahabi cabal.

I used to think i was an atheist but i guess im actually a wahabi. Go figure hey?

Just think about it for a second though, why would someone with views like the wahabi's have give even one cent to a site like this? It's almost akin to those among you who detest zionists donating to every zionist cause imaginable.

In-fact quite the opposite to weaken the enemy you be one of them and you destroy them from within

Martyrdom, on 20 May 2012 - 12:15 PM, said:

I don't think wahabis are  smart enough to be using taqiya through shiachat to make us look bad this site has way more positives then negatives that if it was allowed in saudi it would have the same effect facebook had in egypt. The last thing they want here is another point of view and this site has them by the bundle.

Not true the major well known Ulamas prohibit mutah with virgins but SC uses sly explanation to encourage it.

and the SC also says the true Quran is with Ali e Paak and we dont have the original. This is not the view of Shia Ulama.

[Kismet110]

We don't live in a vacuum. The billions Wahabbis have spent pulling mainstream sunnis further to the extreme would inevitably pull some Shi'ah into the 'mainstream' gap. That doesn't mean they become sunni, just their viewpoint shifts towards the centre.

I've been on SC for 8+ years and it's 'direction' has changed noticeably for the worse from a Shi'ah perspective but it's just a website so remember the motto - not everything on the internet is true.

ALI

[muhibb-ali]

^
Well said.
Shiachat or any other website cannot become your primary/main source of guidance/knowledge.

Wassalam

[zameena]

Kismet110, on 21 May 2012 - 03:37 AM, said:

We don't live in a vacuum. The billions Wahabbis have spent pulling mainstream sunnis further to the extreme would inevitably pull some Shi'ah into the 'mainstream' gap. That doesn't mean they become sunni, just their viewpoint shifts towards the centre.

I've been on SC for 8+ years and it's 'direction' has changed noticeably for the worse from a Shi'ah perspective but it's just a website so remember the motto - not everything on the internet is true.

ALI

Is it?

How do you explain that SC says that they are community of members when in reality only two or three individuals own all the ids. They mock shia faith and laugh behind our backs while pocketing the money obtained from the site. There are no real shia youths involved. Take an example of marble . He has approximately 37 ids that I have witnessed.

[Kismet110]

zameena, on 21 May 2012 - 04:38 AM, said:

Is it?

How do you explain that SC says that they are community of members when in reality only two or three individuals own all the ids. They mock shia faith and laugh behind our backs while pocketing the money obtained from the site. There are no real shia youths involved. Take an example of marble . He has approximately 37 ids that I have witnessed.

Who owns your ID then? And mine? Is it Marbles?

Seriously, if you have some proof of the above then please present it.

ALI

[Martyrdom]

zameena, on 21 May 2012 - 02:40 AM, said:

In-fact quite the opposite to weaken the enemy you be one of them and you destroy them from within






Not true the major well known Ulamas prohibit mutah with virgins but SC uses sly explanation to encourage it.

and the SC also says the true Quran is with Ali e Paak and we dont have the original. This is not the view of Shia Ulama.

When I say it has more positives then negatives I mean overall . For example I can get different points of view on everything I'm not a blind follower and SC is not the Holy Quran or my main source of guidance I get my guidance from lectures,books,etc... Its illogical to think that everyone on this site should agree with one another or disagree this site would be boring if everyone had the same opinion. The beauty of this site is that it is diverse in its opinions. You have atheists,agnostics,muslims, jews, and all different kind of people exchanging ideas and having discussions that in itself is wahabis worst nightmare.

[Khadim uz Zahra]

<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>

Kaniz e Zahra, on 20 May 2012 - 07:39 AM, said:

<br />
Wait kids i don't know these things who run it,who don't..but how those Shias are trying to elevate the cause of Shi'ism,who believe Quran has been distorted nauzbillah,that is the point where all the old sunni/wahabi scholars issued fatwas of Shias being kaafir,with excuse that we believe in tahreef..infact none of our ulema ever believed in this perverted idea.<br />
But if &quot;some shias&quot;will advocate this idea.wahabis are surely going to use it as a proof of kufr,so what would we say then?it's not just a matter of difference of opinion,if one wants to believe in all what wahabis alleged us,then where do in their beliefs, the Shi'ism stands for?<br />

</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>First of all, let me just assure you that I am not some undercover Salafi (ask the members here because I have been posting quite a lot) but, in fact, it is true that, at least, one of our scholars (I have forgotten the name but you can ask the more knowledgeable members here) did believe that the Quran had changed but we do NOT advocate this idea and, from what I have seen, even those members which are considered the most radical on this site have never supported this idea, directly or indirectly.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>As for the original issue, I seriously find this to be a false allegation. I mean, seriously, just go look at the Shia-Sunni section; I really don't think it would be in the benefit of Sunnis to fund a site in which their beliefs are bashed as much as they are here.</p>

[Khadim uz Zahra]

Al-Afasy, on 20 May 2012 - 10:56 AM, said:

Assalamu Alaykum, Hayakum Allah.

No sir, you are the one who is nuts!! You don't realize the truth that Macisaac is Yassir al-Habib himself!! Why do you think he loves defending him so much?!

And what about that mod Repenter....doesn't he seem like a re-invention of Mesbah Yazdi, the main man of Syed Khamenei?! Better yet, it's Against Oneself!

Don't let me start on that shady Shia_Debater....

Keep me in your duas,
Hassan b. Salem al-Ilami.

Hey! How come I am not on the list?!

[Kaniz e Zahra]

Khadim uz Zahra, on 23 May 2012 - 06:50 AM, said:

<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p> </p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p> </p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>First of all, let me just assure you that I am not some undercover Salafi (ask the members here because I have been posting quite a lot) but, in fact, it is true that, at least, one of our scholars (I have forgotten the name but you can ask the more knowledgeable members here) did believe that the Quran had changed but we do NOT advocate this idea and, from what I have seen, even those members which are considered the most radical on this site have never supported this idea, directly or indirectly.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>As for the original issue, I seriously find this to be a false allegation. I mean, seriously, just go look at the Shia-Sunni section; I really don't think it would be in the benefit of Sunnis to fund a site in which their beliefs are bashed as much as they are here.</p>

Sorry brother there are members whom i saw advocating..i don't want to take names,sometimes i make them realize when they say something like that or force me to make them remember..but whats the point of advertising their names.
And i don't say they are trolls ,or something,but that belief of distortion is a wrong one that is what i believe.

Edited by Kaniz e Zahra, 23 May 2012 - 10:09 AM.

[Khadim uz Zahra]

Kaniz e Zahra, on 23 May 2012 - 09:38 AM, said:

Sorry brother there are members whom i saw advocating..i don't want to take names,sometimes i make them realize when they say something like that or force me to make them remember..but whats the point of advertising their names.
And i don't say they are trolls ,or something,but that belief of distortion is a wrong one that is what i believe.

Well, I also do NOT believe that there was any Tehreef but the reason I said this was to just, as a side note, tell you that one of our scholars did, indeed, believe in it (although he gave reasons and explanations about it). Alright, if you don't want, don't name anyone but I have not really seen any of the members say that they believe in it. We must remember that some of our scholars do believe that although none of the verses have been changed, the order of the verses has been changed and, so, maybe this is what you may have seen them saying, which is a belief held by some but it does not really imply that any changes have been made to the text and, therefore, it is not, technically, tahreef. There are also others who try to explain the hadith in our books that there are 17000 verses in the Quran by saying that the verses in the Quran were originally shorter, which, again, does not imply that changes have been made to any of the text itself. (There is, of course, the group which just says that these Ahadith are weak or cannot be accepted). All I want to say is that if you have seen any members saying this, this is a belief held by some but is not, technically, tahreef.

By the way, no need for sorry!

[Shia_Debater]

Marbles doesn't have over 37 accounts. He has like over 10,000 posts, I doubt he has time to have 37 accounts even if he wanted to, also you said that him and ImAli are the same person but they definitely aren't and I can prove it based on some posts on SC - besides things like how you type and what not would give it away if Marbles did really have that many accounts