Search the Community

Iraqi's are fighting hard, they always have and they seem to always will. I guess that leaves a legacy in itself that they're fighting for their nation. People are dying, the government army are attacking them with machine guns and other types of operatives. Communities are falling apart... At some point you just think to yourself, is anything going to change? As an Iraqi woman, with full love to my country, and its history, it physically is distressing, and mentally painful to see this happening to my family, to my communities. Protesting has maybe had an affect in other countries, but with a government like Iraqs... Whats bound to happen, anyway??

How accurate is the following statement by the Government of Canada 'Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness' regarding Hizbullah??? Please help, thanks. https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/ntnl-scrt/cntr-trrrsm/lstd-ntts/crrnt-lstd-ntts-en.aspx#30 Hizballah Also known as Hizbullah, Hizbollah, Hezbollah, Hezballah, Hizbullah, The Party of God, Islamic Jihad (Islamic Holy War), Islamic Jihad Organization, Islamic Resistance, Islamic Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine, Ansar al-Allah (Followers of God/Partisans of God/God's Helpers), Ansarollah (Followers of God/Partisans of God/God's Helpers), Ansar Allah (Followers of God/Partisans of God/God's Helpers), Al-Muqawamah al-Islamiyyah (Islamic Resistance), Organization of the Oppressed, Organization of the Oppressed on Earth, Revolutionary Justice Organization, Organization of Right Against Wrong and Followers of the Prophet Muhammed. Description One of the most technically capable terrorist groups in the world, Hizballah is a radical Shia group ideologically inspired by the Iranian revolution. Its goals are the liberation of Jerusalem, the destruction of Israel, and, ultimately, the establishment of a revolutionary Shia Islamic state in Lebanon, modelled after Iran. Formed in 1982 in response to Israel's invasion of Lebanon, Hizballah carried out some of the most infamous terror attacks of the Lebanese civil war, such as the suicide bombings of the barracks of United States Marines and French paratroopers in Beirut, as well as the hijacking of TWA Flight 847. While all other Lebanese militias disarmed at the end of Lebanon's civil war in 1990, Hizballah continued to fight, waging a guerilla war against Israeli troops stationed in southern Lebanon. Following Israel's withdrawal from Lebanon in 2000, Hizballah attacks against Israeli forces continued, concentrated on the disputed Shebaa Farms area. In 2006, Hizballah provoked Israel's invasion of Lebanon by kidnapping two Israeli soldiers and killing 8 others. On January 3, 2018, Hizballah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah announced that the group was working "to obtain all kinds of weapons that would enable it to achieve victory in the next war." Date listed 2002-12-10 Date reviewed 2018-11-21 EDIT: Also, any thoughts or feelings on Canada's statement?

Greetings, To begin this, I need to express that I am not a Western leftist, or anyone trying to virtue signal to Muslims about how "open-minded" i am. I believe in God, country, community, family, and honor. I reject the godlessness of modern America, and seek to resemble my ancestors and their faith. I am the descendant of French Huguenot pilgrims that came to America in the early 17th century, American militiamen that fought against the British, and Confederate soldiers that fought against an invading Federal government. I would give my life to fight this godlessness that has taken the West. Now though i consider myself a true patriot, i despise the American government (and mostly all Western governments) that have been the source of our moral decay and separation from God. Since 1861, they have been the only true enemy of Christianity and the freewill of the American people, and now their tyranny has spread throughout the world. I would give my life to fight against this satanic entity without hesitation. I am reaching out to Shias because i see them fighting this same cause, but with remarkable honor. I listen to Ayatollah Khamenei, and Hassan Nasrallah, and their insight and wisdom. The NSA is probably going to have a field day with me after saying this, but i have a great respect for Hezbollah, and the Islamic revolution of Iran. I will not condemn men who are willing to fight and die to protect Christians and innocent civilians against Daesh in Syria and Iraq. No where else in the world can a resistance movement even begin to compare. I cannot deny that i have felt an urge to convert to Shia Islam, but my heart feels empty when i drift from Christ. Even though i know that there is still a great respect for Jesus as a prophet in Islam, my soul cannot abandon Christianity. I am learning more and more about Islam everyday, and gaining more and more respect, but i do have some serious concerns about what is happening with migration and the heinous crimes that are following. Before anyone else, i again condemn these governments for destabilizing these Middle Eastern countries (and i would even go so far as to speculate that these criminals have engineered this to tear apart Europe, making it easier to control). However, this doesn't change the fact that there is now a horrible rape epidemic that is plaguing European women, the terrorist attacks, the migrants assaults, etc. etc., and the fact that in the next hundred years, native Europeans and Christians may be a minority on their own soil. I cannot tolerate this, and it absolutely drives me insane with rage. I want to see Muslims and Christians living together peacefully, but capitulation to Islamic values in Western nations via immigration is invasion, and i believe wholeheartedly European men need to begin to fight back. I know these are not true Muslims, but how else does a Christian fight this invasion without fighting Islamic migration? Of course, there are Muslims who condemn this, but with the undeniable spike in crimes coming from Muslim migrants (especially horrific migrant sex crimes), what is there left to do? To the Muslims reading this, could you ever imagine seeing a Christian-Islamic alliance to fight both the criminal Western governments, the Zionist control of our government, media and their debauchery, but also the criminal migrants assaulting Western women, and disrespecting our nations? There would have to be compromises on both sides, but do you believe there is a possibility for this? And when i say Christians, i don't mean the modern Western Christian. Imagine Christianity could be reformed to where we resemble what we were during the Renaissance up until the 19th century. Men like Jan III Sobieski, and Confederate General Stonewall Jackson. Honorable men who stand against immorality and invasion with great honor, and do so, without fear, and give all credit to God. Even though Islam and Christianity have a horribly brutal and bloody history fighting one another, perhaps i must learn to accept God's will and see this Islamic migration as a potential blessing. The understanding of God and honor has been lost in the West, and with the rise of immoral atheism, we see their replacement. I believe there is great potential for Muslims and Christians to unite and fight against these evils, bringing an end to this horrible violence between our two religions. However, i am not a Muslim, and I do not know if this is possible. To Muslims, if Christians would act as true Christians, do you believe this type of alliance would be possible? I want to end saying i greatly respect true Islam, and I thank you for reading this wall of text, Sincerely, [Name removed by moderator] PS I must convey that though i condemn and despise the actions of the US Federal government and their use of the US military, i will always have a great respect for much of the American military community. Though there is evil among their ranks, many of these men are very honorable. They are men trying to serve their nation, but are horribly abused by the treachery and selfishness of their Generals and government.

Can someone provide the status of these hadiths and their arabic texts? They are found in Usul Kafi, in the book of leadership with divine authority. I was just wondering how authentic they were and whether translated correctly. The first hadith I included here I was wondering about because it seems the Prophet (sawas) is giving advice to an anonymous ruler after him, without specifying who his wasi is? H , Ch. 104, h 3 A number of our people has narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad from ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Hammad and others from Hanan ibn Sadir al-Sayrafi who has said the following. "I heard abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) say, ‘The Holy Prophet (s.a) was given the news of his own death while he was in a good health and he did not suffer any pain." He said, "The trusted Spirit came to him." He said, "The Holy Prophet called for a prayer in congregation. He then ordered the Muhajir and Ansar (people from Makka and the people of Madina) to arm themselves. The people all came and the Holy Prophet climbed the platform, the pulpit and gave out the news of his own death and then said, "I warn of Allah the ruler after me over my followers for not being kind to the community of the Muslims. He must honor the elders among them and be kind to their weak, treat their scholars with dignity, must not harm to humiliate them. He must not allow them to suffer poverty that would turn them to disbelief, must not close his door to them to let their strong over run the weak ones. He must not use them in the (armed) campaigns for food that would banish the offspring of my followers. Then he said, (Certainly) I have delivered to you the message, gave you good advice so you must bear this testimony." Abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) has said that this was the last words of the Messenger of Allah from the pulpit." H , Ch. 103, h 2 Muhammad ibn al-Hassan has narrated from some of our people from Ali ibn al-Hakam from Hakam ibn Miskin from a man from Quraysh from the people of Makka who has said the following. "Once Sufyan al-Thawri said to me, "Come with to meet Ja‘far ibn Muhammad (a.s.)." The narrator has said that he went with him and they found Ja‘far ibn Muhammad (a.s.) had already rode his horse. Sufyan said to him, "O abu ‘Abdallah narrate to us the text of the sermon of the Messenger of Allah in the Mosque of al-Khif." He said, "allow me to go for my needs because I am already on the horse back and when I will return then I will narrate to the text of the sermon." He said, "I swear you to your close relation to the Messenger of Allah, you must narrate the sermon first." The narrator has said that the Imam (a.s.) dismounted his horse. Sufyan said to him, "Ask someone to bring me ink and paper so I can write it down." He asked for ink and paper and it was brought for him. The he said writhe, "In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful the sermon of the Messenger of Allah in the Mosque of al-Khif "May Allah grant joy and happiness a servant who would listen to my words, then understands them and would deliver them to those who have not heard them. O people, those of you present here must deliver them to those absent. There can be many scholars of Fiqh (law) who do not have understanding as there can be many bearers of Fiqh (law) to those who are better scholars of Fiqh (law) then the bearer. There are three things in which the heart of a Muslim does not feel greed and treachery. Sincerity in deeds for Allah, wishing well for the Imams (leaders) of the Muslims and to stay close with the group of the Muslims because their call encompass those behind them and the Muslims are each other’s brothers. Their lives are as each other’s lives and they act as one hand against their enemies and the least important among them strive to fulfill their responsibilities." Sufyan wrote it down and proof read before him. Abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) then rode his horse. I and Sufyan came back. Somewhere on the way he said, "Stay where you are. I want to look at this Hadith." I then said to him, "There is no doubt, by Allah, that abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) has tied something to your neck as such that it will never go away." He aske, "What is that thing?" I then said, "There are three things in which the heart of a Muslim does not feel greed and treachery. Sincerity in deeds for Allah, is one that we know it. The other one is ‘Wishing well for the Imams of the Muslims.’ Who are these Imams for whom we must wish well? Are they Mu‘awiya ibn abu Sufyan and Yazid ibn Mu‘awiya and Marwan ibn al-Hakam? (They are such disqualified people that) the testimony of no one of them is acceptable to us and it is not permissible to pray behind them." Also his words, "Stay close with their group" Which group is it? Is it the Muji‘a group that says, "Those who do perform prayers, do not fast, do not clean and wash themselves after carnal relations, cause the destruction of the Ka‘ba or marry his own mother have the same degree of faith as those of angel Jibril and Mika’il. Is it the Qadri, (pre-destinationist) who say, "What Allah, the Most Majestic, the Most gracious, say will not happen but Satan says will happen."? Is it the Harawri group who is the enemy of Ali ibn abu Talib (a.s.) and call him an unbeliever? Is it the Jahmiy group who says that the only thing needed is to know Allah only is faith and nothing else is required?" He then said, "Woe is you, what then they say?" I said, "They say, "Ali ibn abu Talib, by Allah, is the Imam for whom we must wish well. To must stay close to their group means, his Ahl al-Bayt (members of the family of Prophet Muhammad).’ The narrator has said that Sufyan al-Thawri then tore the document of Zadith and said, "Do not tell it to anyone." H , Ch. 103, h 4 A number of our people has narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad from ibn al-Faddal from abu Jamila from Muhammad al-Halabi from abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) who has said the following. "Whoever would distance himself from the company the Muslims even by one shibr (one foot) he has removed the band of allegiance with Islam from his neck."

There's a lot of talk in Muslim communities in general about democracy, its merits and even its supposed Islamic character. But when I look at the situation Muslims face and which the Shi'a face especially in these times, I wonder if perhaps the pursuit of democracy has not caused the Shi'a to break apart into competing factions who do not possess the unity and strength needed to combat terrorist organizations like the United States or to meet the power of the more absolutist regimes in the Arab/Persian Gulf whose activities threaten them. In Iran, the conservatives and liberals squabble among themselves. In Iraq, there are more political parties than one can count. And in some places like Pakistan, Shi'a feel somewhat helpless these days against the "democratic" forces of the countries they live in which tend to move towards a wedding of Islamic nationalism and Sunni domination. All the time I hear democracy this and democracy that among Shi'a laity and otherwise sensible and honorable ulama, and even what's left of the Iranian monarchists pay the obligatory homage to "democracy", which is more and more becoming an idol or just another pipe dream for the Middle East and North Africa. But what benefit has democracy really given any of the Muslims or the Shi'a? ISIS would have been stopped a lot sooner were it not for the divisions in the Islamic world, everybody agrees on that and divisions in the Islamic world are by no means new. But doesn't the introduction of "democracy" in both its secular and fundamentalist forms share some of the blame for intensifying these divisions? And haven't the Shi'a suffered the most due to internal party politics and Sunnis using "democracy" as a means to oppress them? And even for the Sunnis, I don't think democracy has made them stronger, it's just made them bigger tools of the Arab oil kings who hold far more money and power.

assalamu alaykum. This is a philosophical question primarily but you may answer it according to your beliefs too. i'm almost thinking out aloud here: I believe -as a Sufi-- that the Prophet (salallahu alayhi wa sallam) had the authority to change Shariah Law as he (saws) saw fit. My question is that do you believe his successors -- whoever you believe they should be -- as his vicegerents -- should also be authorised to have this authority since human society changes constantly and laws which may be suitable for a tribal desert society in the 7th century can't apply to future human societies? To me this makes logical sense and then it follows that his Successors should also be Immaculate (masoom) but one such Successor should always exist in society until the end of the world to guide people. What are your views?

I often wonder why there is so much squabbling over who deserved to be the first Caliph. I mean, beyond the sectarian religious arguments concerning right of successorship, what would Ali have done in terms of policy-making that would've been significantly different to what Abu Bakr did? Eventually, Imam Ali became the 4th Caliph anyway. How did he govern? Was he a proponent of big government, socially or economically? How did he approach welfare, housing, healthcare, employment, business? What was the amount he levied on lower class and higher class income? How did he deal with foreign nations? Did he believe in the right of a nations' sovereignty? I.e. not imposing one's values on another nation? Did he debate any issue in the legislature or put out a referendum on any issue? Or was it strictly authoritarian? It would help a great deal if someone could provide a short historical insight as to how his government operated.

"There is evidence at least 20 prominent paedophiles - including former MPs and government ministers - abused children for "decades", a former child protection manager has claimed." BBC Credit: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-28203914 Wow what a world we live in!! May Allah bring justice on that which is deserved inshAllah!

Hi I have an exam in a few days for my law degree and I am looking to answer an essay on separation of powers, the theory, its practicality and reality in the UK government but feel free to talk about the US aswell because i need to mention them too. So tell me what you know about the theory of separation of powers and the UK system of law and government.