Jump to content
MuslimahAK

Ayatollah Shirazi's Son is arrested

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Because we don't see weapons in the pictures, so they didn't have any.

Very childish argument. 

I assure you these people have stored many cold weapons, (the very ones they use in their tatbir sessions.)

And Iran's ambassador said the same thing, cold weapon.

This issue is to divert the main incident, as if they have gone there with a flower bouquet! Do the same thing with any embassy of any country and see what it is described and what the consequences are. 

But since the badriyya and uhudiyya hatred and grudges of some people with IRI never end, they go this far to justify this act, and I'm sure they will go even further. 

Edited by mesbah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, mesbah said:

Because we don't see weapons in the pictures, so they didn't have any.

If they don't have any weapons equipped, then no one can accuse them of having any such weapons without a proof.

In any respectful country, everyone is innocent until he is guilty. 

23 minutes ago, mesbah said:

I assure you these people have stored many cold weapons, (the very ones they use in their tatbir sessions.)

1. First of all, maybe the British government actually takes the knives/swords/whatever-they-use from them after Ashura. Maybe someone else keeps them other than the ones that were present at London's demonstrations. Maybe they lost it. Maybe they sold it. Maybe they don't even use 'cold weapons' during Ashura. The possibilities are countless. 

2. Secondly, accusing someone of hiding cold weapons just because they do Tatbir is an unrealistic accusation.

Can we accuse people of hiding cold weapons because they do Hujama (Islamic blood-letting medicine) once a year?

Can we accuse people of hiding cold weapons because they work as smiths once a year? 

3. Thirdly, even if they do have it, they did not carry it for this to be categorised as an attack. 

23 minutes ago, mesbah said:

And Iran's ambassador said the same thing, cold weapon.

Yes, the weapons that only he (somehow) saw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, mesbah said:

Because we don't see weapons in the pictures, so they didn't have any.

Very childish argument. 

The photo on page 3, of the flag ceremony, where Yasser Al-Habib's men change the flag on their own flagpole on their own territory, is the one without any visible weapons.

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235056242-ayatollah-shirazis-son-is-arrested/?do=findComment&comment=3126492

The photo on page 5, of the hooligans removing the Iranian flag from the Iranian embassy, has been reported that there were "sticks & machetes" (weapons) in their possession, since they were invading someone else's territory. 

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235056242-ayatollah-shirazis-son-is-arrested/?do=findComment&comment=3127363

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just out of genuine curiosity, but how is the discussion of Yasser al-Habib having a Militia relevant to the thread in discussion? I'm not asking because i was told not to discuss the men in that parade he had, but because i'm curious if there is some sort of deeper link here. BarkAllahu Feekum brothers and sisters. 

Edited by Intellectual Resistance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

Just out of genuine curiosity, but how is the discussion of Yasser al-Habib having a Militia relevant to the thread in discussion? I'm not asking because i was told not to discuss the men in that parade he had, but because i'm curious if there is some sort of deeper link here. BarkAllahu Feekum brothers and sisters. 

Look back at the beginning of the topic. SheikhAlHabib'fan made this quote: "We need Shi'a-Shi'a hatred." Then the Shirazi posts came after that and whenever Shirazi name is mentioned it won't be long before Yasser Al-Habib comes up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Hameedeh said:

Look back at the beginning of the topic. SheikhAlHabib'fan made this quote: "We need Shi'a-Shi'a hatred." Then the Shirazi posts came after that and whenever Shirazi name is mentioned it won't be long before Yasser Al-Habib comes up. 

 

Yes, i understand that, but i am still struggling to understand why all these posts discussing the picture of Yasser al-Habib on the march are entirely relevant to a discussion about another man entirely who was arrested? 

EDIT: There also seems to be a discussion on tatbir, hiding weapons and the like, which again i am not sure are relevant either.

If someone could connect them to the original post / discussion of the thread, which is the arrest , i would be grateful. 

Edited by Intellectual Resistance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/17/2018 at 11:40 PM, Intellectual Resistance said:

EDIT: There also seems to be a discussion on tatbir, hiding weapons and the like, which again i am not sure are relevant either.

If someone could connect them to the original post / discussion of the thread, which is the arrest , i would be grateful. 

They discuss an event that took place directly after the arrest, which (for some reason) is actually one of the semi-charges against Sayyed Hussein Shirazi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/17/2018 at 11:01 PM, Mark Enlightment said:

This is a typical political opinion. Sayyed Khomeinei's choices aren't holy to criminalise their criticism. Especially when most of us here did not actually live at that period while Sayyed Hussein Shirazi did and that it doesn't make any practical difference today (Saddam is dead).

Salam I remember that time ,if Saddam was successful in his plan ,he would kill all Marjas ,oppreess all shia muslims as it was the plan of ISIS because of the Iran revolution caused that people around the world hear about Shia Islam & research about it.

On 3/17/2018 at 11:01 PM, Mark Enlightment said:

He never said 'all' and never accused the whole country. He doesn't just say that it happened, he claims that he is an eyewitness to some of tho

only Marja that accused was accused was Ayt Saanei that now he currently active https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yousef_Saanei  http://saanei.xyz/ 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

EDIT: There also seems to be a discussion on tatbir, hiding weapons and the like, which again i am not sure are relevant either.

You mentioned tatbir on page 2. Nobody was thinking about tatbir until then. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Ali Al Kashmiri said:

JazakAllah for this brother, one of the best speech I've ever heard. This should be put on the televisions of every Shirazi follower in the world so they can watch this. @Mansur Bakhtiari @SheikhAlHabib'fan @Mark Enlightment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to reports, Sayyed Hussein Shirazi has been released now. 

And an 'odd' report by Al-Alam website about the reason for his arrest. (e.g. He didn't go the court, that they didn't know who he was, the reason for all this was the 'attack' on the Iranian embassy which in reality happened several days after the arrest)

http://www.alalam.ir/news/3437861/السلطات-الايرانية-تفرج-عن-حسين-الشيرازي

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Hassan- said:

JazakAllah for this brother, one of the best speech I've ever heard. This should be put on the televisions of every Shirazi follower in the world so they can watch this. @Mansur Bakhtiari @SheikhAlHabib'fan @Mark Enlightment

 

4 hours ago, kirtc said:

they wont watch it.

They will, it's just blinding to them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Q: What is your opinion about S. hussayn shirazi being arrested by Iranian authorities?

A: The law of the Islamic Republic is applicable to all.

jumadi al-thani 19th, 1439h 

The office of Grand Ayt. Sayyid Ali Sistani in Lebanon 

 

1521455661525.jpg

Edited by mesbah
add the pic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Ali Al Kashmiri said:

It's amazing. So much of what he said was wrong.

He is surely out of his mind to say that the most dangerous of people now are the Shirazi people.                                                               What about the diabolical and extremist Salafi terrorists who have killed, raped and destroyed the lives of thousands of people all over the world? Are these terrorists in his eyes more pleasant and better people?

Funnily he also claims that he is familiar with the British police, and how they were apparently late to prevent 'the attack' on the embassy from happening.          What attack is this guy and other Iranians talking about?

The only thing YH followers did was climb the balcony and take down the flag and make a protest outside. None of them even entered the actual embassy itself or put anyone's lives in danger.

One of the most ridiculous things he says is that one of the Shirazis made a fatwa saying that tatbir is wajib. No one in the history of our time has made such a ruling. The current marji from them, Sayed Sadiq Shirazi believes it is mustahab, not wajib.                             There is a massive difference between mustahab and wajib.

There is much more garbage from this Araki guy that I can comment on, but he is without a doubt a waste of time for anyone to treat with any value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is one of Sayed Muhammed Shirazi's actual fatwas on tatbir.

Question:

If one engages in the Ta’ziah (mourning) program of for Imam Husayn alayhis-salam, and goes on to serve the program, but does not do Tatbir, is he regarded as a sinner, who deserves to be humiliated?

Answer:

Tatbir is a desirable act, and a mukallaf – i.e. one who has reached the adolescence age and is duty bound – may forsake a desirable act.

However, it is not allowed to humiliate a Mu’min53, and also one who does not do Tatbir may not humiliate or insult others, or accuse them (of false things).

 

See, Mohsen Araki is a liar with regards to this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, ali_fatheroforphans said:

@emceemo40 Isn't that fatwa literally a copy from Sayed Sadiq Al Shirazi's website?

Well Mohsen was talking about Sadiq Al Shirazi's brother.

Salam brother.

No this is indeed the fatwa of Sayed Muhammed Shirazi, the older brother of Sayed Sadiq. And no this isn't a copy from Sayed Sadiq's website.

Thanks

Edited by emceemo40

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you saw Mokhtarnamah people's like Shirazi cult were 5 column of enemies & cause of destabilizing & defeat of shias against enemies of Ahlulbayt (as) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/17/2018 at 4:51 PM, Mansur Bakhtiari said:

Shirazi's are the ones slamming maraji?

Heck, at Husainiyāt Rasool al-Adham (A centre that honours the Shirazi family - with their portraits on the walls) they held a La'anah Majlis in honour of Ayatollah Khamenei (h).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, emceemo40 said:

Salam brother.

No this is indeed the fatwa of Sayed Muhammed Shirazi, the older brother of Sayed Sadiq. And no this isn't a copy from Sayed Sadiq's website.

Thanks

Did you listen to what Ayatollah araki even said? He said shirazi (who isn’t even a mujtahid according to Sayed al khoei and other ulama) made it obligatory only 55-56 years ago. It was obligatory only in that time. 55 years ago was 1963, he died in 2001, so in that 38 year span it’s highly possible he changed it to mustahab.

Edited by Hassan-
Changed the number 55 to 38

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×