gandabacha7241

just hold on a second.....shias don't pray taraweeh?? I guess all those nights were for nothing if shias are right lol ...

so i was right, monad was the one that got confused Um, i think you misunderstood my post I'm more pro-Iran than KSA, but I wouldn't say Iran is a "vaccine" when it supports governments that brutal governments like Syria. Also, I'm pretty sure "most of the ummah" in the west, especially many shias here don't share my views about the Muslim Brotherhood. also another thing i have to make clear : (and this is my fault that i didnt say) this post is also a response to @Mohamed1993 The Muslim Brotherhood which you seem to be classifying as one of these terrorists - does not even have much of a presence in the Syrian War. Its members only joined groups like FSA rather than form their own group and claim that they will go through the political process after the end of the war. I responded in my post about other statements in his post like : Yes, the protests became quickly militarized, because Assad fired at the people, like he did many times before when there was any sign of opposition(long before the revolution). Note that the core of the Syrian opposition at the start was made up of defectors and army commanders from Assad's army , does that not say a lot? I'd like to add the "slogans" became so sectarian and genocidal AFTER those events and the people that Assad killed. I mean, i admit there are a lot of sectarian salafi groups in the opposition. I am not justifying terrorists, but i am just showing how supporting Assad in for any reason is wrong. Let's look more into his side. What i know for sure is that if i was a sunni Syrian villager I wouldn't want to be around there when it gets captured by Hezbollah or militants like it. I mean, there have been cases of massacres from shia militants in both syria and iraq as there have been from salafi groups. Also, there can be progress, In some places you'll see people going out in the streets and protesting the occupation from al-Qaeda groups.To go even further there is Turkey keeping Ahrar al Sham in check, and also the group adopting the flag of the Syrian revolution (which led to Ahral al Sham's war with Tahrir al Sham, former al-Nusra).

I was presenting a different narrative.

oh...something went wrong here.... "the masses have been indoctrinated to belief what's not in mainstream media, are all conspiracy theories :-(" by reading this i thought he was FOR "what's not in mainstream media".

I wouldn't say i follow a "mainstream media" . I don't see the world as black and white, "the Russian/conspiracy theorist vs American mainstream media" This is how i see the Middle East, divided into three major factions : ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 - Saudi Arabia and allies (UAE, Egypt, Kuwait, Bahrain, etc) : These countries want a status quo and fear revolutions because they might spread to their own countries, So they have been often a "counter-Arab Spring", which you can see in how they supported Abdal Fattah al Sissi who ousted Egypt's first democratically elected president, how they gave refuge to the dictator of Tunisia, Ben Ali, and supported parties that were linked to him, and have been supporting the military general in Libya. However, they support any revolutions happening in Shia-ruled countries, like Syria and Iraq. They also somewhat pan-Arabic, and are backed by U.S.A, and their interests align with Israel because of their shared enmity towards Iran 2 - The so called "Shia Crescent" (Iran, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Houthi Yemen) : They also want a status quo and we have seen how they (syria and iraq) brutally suppress opposition, but only in their own countries. They have supported shia revolutions in yemen and bahrain, which are backed by the Saudi-led faction. These countries are backed by Russia and are very anti-Israel 3 - Turkey, Qatar and Muslim Brotherhood : These are one of the main perpetrators of the Arab Spring, a lot of which was driven by a pan-Islamic ideology, because many arabs had realized that the post-ww1 Pan-arab socialism had left them with failed states. They seek an Islamic democracy, which is basically a democracy with a newly reformed Islamic constitution. Turkey and Qatar supported many movements like them in the Arab Spring. One can say that the Arab Spring was "ignited" by a Tunisian man who burnt himself, but the Muslim Brotherhood was the "fuel for the fire". But they seem to be on the losing side: Turkey had to deal with a military coup, Qatar is facing a blockade by the Saudi-led group, and the Muslim Brotherhood was overthrown in Egypt, and thousands of its supporters were massacred, and its leaders were arrested by the Saudi-backed Egyptian government. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Then there are "lone wolves" like Gadaffi's Libya (which fell long ago) : The country was isolated, left alone by Russia and Iran, while the USA, the Libyan people, Saudi Arabia and Qatar all wanting an end to his reign. Libya had the "best living standards in Africa", but that was because they had oil. Much of their wealth was concentrated within the elite ranks loyal to Gadaffi. The fact that they had the "best living standards" does not mean much if you're in Africa, and they already had lots of oil. Saudi Arabian citizens have the best living standards..does that mean the Saudi government is good? They massacred their own people during the Arab Spring, which gave the NATO a good excuse to get rid of him. Then there is ISIS and other terrorist groups , many of them were probably funded by Saudi Arabia etc but not anymore of course And then there's Kurdistan, backed by the US

That is a wrong statement. What is prohibited is marrying polytheists which hindus are categorized in, but if there is a purely monotheistic sect that they wouldn't be classified as polytheist/idolater. The name "Hindu" doesn't matter, Hindu after all is a geographic term referring to many religions and traditions in the region But ultimately yes, he is not allowed to marry her.

This is something that is repeated in Islamic lectures a lot : hijab is not only the clothing on your head. It refers also to behaviour in modesty, "averting your gaze", etc. The same goes for men. They should stop staring at women if they look sexy etc and behave modestly. Yes, the parts that need to be covered for women are much more than men. Legs, hair, etc.. But are men really as beautiful? I really don't think i am being biased or showing just one point of view : women are much more beautiful than men. And men are much more [EDIT] as well. Hijab seeks to create an environment not related to sex at all, and people are appreciated for being people. Remember again, the Quran first talks to men and tells them to be modest and "avert their gaze" .

I think hijab is definitely about modesty, but I agree with you on that part

Vikram, you seem to be out of options, and she seems very important to you, so have you considered converting to a purely monotheistic hindu sect? I heard about bhakti that emphasise direct access to Brahman and not images/other gods..and then you would be classified as ahlal kitab, as Zoastrian was during the Middle Ages - ? I'm sorry if im being offensive, i don't think it is nice to tell someone to just throw their religion away and not be serious about things like this...also i don't know about traditions involving vegetarianism and not slaughtering cows safe in this "sect" ; i dont know much about it at all, im just giving suggestions. I thought traditionally women are not allowed to marry men from ahlul kitaab anyways? Or maybe that is not valid here because it is confirmed the children would be Muslim? (i doubt the purpose of the ruling was for the fate of children, i thought the ruling was more about the fear that muslim women will have no rights in a foreign alien non-muslim society and she might be forced into another religion)

This is one of the few movies that shows the frustration of Muslims, their feeling of being attacked, their pain about the wars, and their conspiracy theories about Jews influenced by issues with Israel.. I like that it shows a Muslim perspective, when we usually always watch hollywood movies with Muslim antagonists etc. but i am disappointed that the Muslim perspective shows only the Jewish/Zionist conspiracy theories and anti semetism :/ Also, of course the quality is bad lol

No, but i was referring specifically to "making sense of politics/wars in the Middle East" . CNN and Fox are useless, yes, but they're irrelevant here. "Do you support bashar al assad? Is the Arab Spring a sham? Gadaffi was a hero? ISIS is a proxy by US? (you might not have to believe that last part, but you get my drift-?)"

That is such a silly statement. What i noticed here is that every time they discuss Islam, anti-Sunni-ism is in their every thought process, "sunnis are the cause of this! this is the wahabbi mindset!" ... If these criticism can be attributed to sunni Islam, then they can be attributed to Shia Islam. I see no difference in this aspect. I thought Sargon of Akkad had something new and insightful to tell, but it turns out he's just adding to exactly what he had been saying before. It's not "interesting" at all. 1:22 "In Islam" ... This is not Islam. Simple as that. There can be muslims in a part of the world that are sectarian, intolerant, racist, etc, but it does not mean it is Islam. See, what i find wrong in Sargon of Akkad's way of talking, is that he uses the word "Islam" as this huge foreign, alien hive mind, or this huge entity that incorporates all of the ideologies that come out of the Middle East, is responsible for everything in the Middle East. This is just a western conservative view of "them.. Islam" , they don't want to delve deeper to see what is going on, they just say "Islam". 1:34 : Um, did i not just use the word "sectarian?" "intolerance?" what about "bigotry?" I am not justifying the problems in the Muslim world, but his remarks about how this is a new foreign machine with all sorts of bad things ... Yes, there ARE words in the west that describe belief-based discrimination like i mentioned above. Examples of dehumanization : "Libtards" "reich wingers" "commies" "muzzies" " 3:46 : Oh, and i probably should have mentioned this above, but Muslims =/= Islam. If the Muslim world is intolerant, it is not Islam. What's more, is that the majority of the Arab world are just secular arab dictatorships. So Islam isn't even in control . The Muslim world is locked, yes, we need to fix that . moving on 4:47 : This is probably said by the pakistani guy because yes, there is some kind of "anxiety" that Muslims may feel in the west. But that anxiety has more to do with simply living in a non-muslim majority country, where there can be things that are immoral there that are not moral in Islam, and you can easily fall into sin. Yes, we want to convert the people, but we want to convert the nation, their people, so they join us in Heaven. There can be some other Muslims that have different ideas. But the root cause is not this hive mind Islam. I also reject his claims that Islam has never been a minority but were not the rulers : Makkah, the entirety of arabia before taking hold, malaysia/indonesia/brunei, chechnya/dagestan/igushetia/circassia, a huge chunk of central asia, russian tartar republics, the entirety of West Africa, Sudan..... oh, you want an example of a place where Muslims were a minority that didn't eventually convert the whole region? What about China (Hui Muslims), Ethiopia, etc? I was not aware that Islamists opposed the creation of Pakistan. I thought they would be the first ones to lead movements like ones that suggested the Two-nation theory. Sargon uses the word "Islamists" which i perceive as radical Muslims, but I think he also means "Muslims opposed the creation of Pakistan". Because that just shows how he knows so little. There was a struggle by the Muslims of India to create their own Muslim country, because they feared intolerance, they feared that they would not have a voice in Indian affairs because of the huge Hindu minority that hated them. Note that it was not just Pakistanis that are so "anti hindu", the feeling is mutual. They both have ALOT of irrational hatred towards each other, and both also blame Britain for their policy of divide and rule ;) 6:14 : actually, Turkey has a lot of atheists. I've lived in Malaysia, and i can say that Indonesia and Malaysia are much more tolerant than the rest of the Muslim world. Oh, "celeberate their differences" ! Malaysia has a lot of Indian Tamil and Chinese immigrants, and they make their own festivals and traditions and all that jazz... Satu Malaysia ! I don't know much about Morocco, and although they are stable, they are not that rich, and they are a monarchy with not that much freedom.Turkey is not that "free" as well. Ataturk created his nation with strict secular turkish nationalism, and set up a military to oust any democratically elected president that is less Kemalist (remember the attempted coup on Erdogan and all the other coups in turkish history?).How pluralistic do you think a country like that will be? 7:49 There IS a left and right in Middle Eastern politics ! But when they shift into the west, there is no right and left in the small muslim community. Whether they come from Saudi arabia, Indonesia, Turkey, it does not matter, they mostly become liberal (i cant say if that is good or bad), except for some terrorists. 10:11 This ignorance is not acceptable...Do you not see that this is the SAME CASE in the Muslim world? Muslim communities in the west become a "muslim community", while in the Muslim world there are divisions between nationalities and ideologies? And this is what pan-Islamic ideologies have been trying to counter, saying that Turks and Arabs should set apart their historical grievances and come together as brothers, etc? See, this is what i mean by the "hive mind" thing! Maybe you don't understand, but there is this way of talking by conservatives that refer to this "Islamic hive mind" . Many Muslims however do have a stronger bond than christians. Good ! But what you are hinting at is that Islam is this totalitarian ideology. Oh, and now.. this talk about "Islamophobia"...Seriously i myself encourage people to stop using "Islamophobe" to refute arguments, because conservatives complain about it TOO MUCH, and i really don't care or have given any much thought about the word...i just used the word to refer to anti-Muslims. Most of this video was just "pondering" about how Islam is a hive mind/or a totalitarian ideology bent on destroying western civilization....No, it should be seen as a religion. Then there are other ideas, like political Islam. I think Islamism(the non-militant kind, like the Muslim Brotherhood :D) is not that different to the christian counterparts in the west, with their promotion of "Christian values". There is a "sharia scare" in the west, but sharia is constantly debated among Muslims, it depends on the interpretation of Quran and Sunnah, our version of God's laws are not fixed. Also, Muslims do not seek to impose Sharia on the West. As for apostasy, some Muslims think it is punishable by death, and wrongly. The punishment for apostasy in Islam was actually a punishment for betrayal. There was a hadith about how hostile apostates should be exiled, or killed. The same punishment was given to the hostile Jews in Madinah, who broke the Constitution of Madinah , betrayed the Muslims and repeatedly sided with the Makkans, the Banu Nadir and Banu Qaynuqa tribes being exiled while most fighters in the Banu Qurayza tribe being executed.

You can be a conservative in the west and still a Muslim, just know that you're going to be different from everyone else. I actually think it's weird that Muslims in the west are liberals/progressives when they share a little more with "christian values". Anyways, I thought i was closer to right wing in US(except for their views on Muslims) , but then I realised they are wrong as well ; I am neither. I have a really long post replying to some of the things you said, but it's currently "hidden" ... lazy mods? :P I am also going to respond to the Sargon of Akkad video later

Yeah, I think I know what's going on I saw your Sargon of Akkad thread and i think i should have replied to it... You watch too much politics on Youtube, or website like it. We know how much right-wing that place is. A long time ago I thought i saw myself as a Muslim that agreed with a lot of conservative/right wing views in USA , just because of Youtube. I saw RT, Sargon of Akkad, Paul Joseph Watson, and wondered "what the heck is going on here??", all those videos about Syrian refugees etc. What i found out, is that if you follow only one narrative, whether it's the conservative or liberal, you will always start thinking that the other side is completely ... let's say unintelligent, because using the word retar**d will get me another warning from the Mods. For e.g, leftists see rightwingers as old men that think old fashioned, and are basically jerks, racists, homophobes, sexist, and dumb sheep that follow religion Rightwingers see brown muzzies, feminazis, fat people, degeneracy, "white guilt", and basically completely ... "very unintelligent people" (leave me alone Mods!) I came to the conclusion that both of them are equally crazy. Or smart. Whichever. Anyways, I'm going to address the first issue you seem to be concerned about : the rape crimes in Europe (because thats what right wingers are concerned about!). Conservatives claim that they do this because of some kind of Islamic doctrine that tells people to rape people if they do wear revealing clothes. First of all, that "doctrine" is not existent in Islam at all, but im not going to argue about that. What i am saying is : yes, they are filth, they are criminals, but that's all they are. Reports say they've been drunk or smoking - proof that they're just "bad muslims" (non practising muslims) that steal and rape etc. They're not even religious. What the problem is, is that they are simply from third world countries, ranging from Libya, Nigeria, etc to Syria, Iraq etc. I would be surprised if crime rates DIDN'T get higher. Also, another thing I'd like to add is that people on Youtube exaggerate the rape crimes too much. For example, they claim that there was some kind of "rape game" in Egypt, saying that egyptian boys call it "taharrush gamea". But that "name" was just a word that they used for that kind of sexual harassment, not a name of some common game. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/alex-shams/sexism-isnt-an-arab-cultural-practice_b_9022056.html. I doubt most of refugees are even wahabbi at all. A large chunk of them are even Shia. I watched a video about "muslims rapefugees and germans clashing", but after research it turned out that the "clashing" was just a bunch of shias cheering for Assad, and protesting ISIS, and the germans were actually joining in. And another video that claimed that Muslims were invading and holding "arab flags" but the video was actually showing pakistanis in pakistan celebrating their cricket victory. They have been removed though :/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2rmA9A7CEM Oh and if you're referring to ISIS, i give you that, they are using their interpreation Islam to justify raping. But they are SUCH a small minority -_- , i don't even know how you think they are part of Islam in this regard. The fact that the Muslim world faces huge problems involving sexism, racism, intolerance, sectarianism, etc, is not a new, and they undoubtedly have to be fixed. But what i oppose is style of your claims (influenced by Sargon of Akkad lol, i will respond to him later ), which accuse Islam as this huge entity that is responsible for everything in the muslim world, as this hive mind, bent on destroying western civilization ! See, what i mean by "hive mind/entity", is that there is a separate movement within islam, but this is not Islam. Of course, i do not deny that there are "Muslims". Is Islam responsible for ISIS? In a way, but this should be specified to political issues and wahabbism. ISIS is basically a reaction to oppression of regimes in Syria and Iraq, but unfortunately they replaced tyranny with tyranny. But you will reply "oh, but they're muslim and religiously motivated, and so Islam is at fault !" .. this is the mindset of westerners that see everything out of the middle east as this huge Islamic hive-mind that creates problems, they don't delve deeper to see what is happening, they just don't want to have anything to do with it and say "Islam". I am not trying to run away here, but for e.g, your claims about modern muslim countries not having freedom of speech etc... Did you forget that most Arab countries are secular dictatorships? Saudi Arabia and GCC countries are a whole another matter, but the important thing to note is that they are such a small part of the Islamic world. Honestly , do you really think ISIS does its rapings because they think it is holy/sacred, or because it wants to? I would usually say, yes, ISIS is "islamically motivated", but the rapings are clearly not. Wahhabism is a movement within Islam that is spreading, but they are not Islam. They are not credible in any way, they are backed only by imams in Mosul motivated by revenge ... Even wahabbism by itself does not mean terrorists. They can promote intolerance, sexism, etc but not directly terrorism like ISIS. They have a doctrine, but is it really Islamic? Islam is submission to God and His will, which is worshipping/praising/remembering God, doing good deeds, being kind and loving , etc. If you choose some sect like barelvies, and they start a genocide, (im not being serious of course, why would they do that lol?), then will you make the conclusion that Islam is the cause? Now, for your talk of reformation..what needs to be reformed is the muslim world. Sexism, racism, intolerance, etc. of third world sectarian countries. Not Islam itself.

oh i guess lol Most people probably did look at stuff from RT one way or another though , if you're interested in politics . RT is a Russian-backed news channel that people follow mainly because it confronts the mainstream western narrative : right wingers in the west, people from russia or countries it backs, some muslims that want a news source that shows the west as antagonists . https://www.rt.com/ and the famous gadaffi video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuqZfaj34nc