Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله

British Shi'ism Exposed | The Shirazis, "Imam" Taw

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Veteran Member
1 hour ago, Laayla said:

Bismehe Ta3ala,

Assalam Alikum 

Never was comfortable with Nakshawani from the very beginning.  My gut feeling was right.

Salaam.

As someone who knows Ammar personally, I think he was mis-characterized in the video. He has always said that there is a difference between abusing someone and re-telling history. Abu Bakr did in fact have his henchmen go out and kill people who refused to pay zakat. Ammar did not curse or swear at them - he re-told the story.

Secondly, the concept of wali-e-faqih is a theory because not all marajae subscribe to it in Iran and Iraq. There is a famous video of Ayatollah Basheer Al-Najafi saying he is wali-e-faqih as well.

I would definitely not characterize Ammar as being similar to Yassir Al-Habib, Allahyari, Tawhidi and Shirazi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
11 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

Salaam.

As someone who knows Ammar personally, I think he was mis-characterized in the video. He has always said that there is a difference between abusing someone and re-telling history. Abu Bakr did in fact have his henchmen go out and kill people who refused to pay zakat. Ammar did not curse or swear at them - he re-told the story.

 

I have been a long time watcher of Sayed Ammar, and i've also met him. Unfortunately, no matter how much of a supporter of his i have been, i have to honestly say that making a lecture and referring to Abu Bakr and Umar as terrorists, and comparing them to Geddafi and the like, is not something i would have expected someone like him to say. There is no difference between swearing at someone and comparing them to an well known butchers, and calling them terrorists.

We paid dearly for that lecture here, and it's no surprise he even took it down.  However, Salafis managed to save that video and its up anyway. 

Edited by Intellectual Resistance
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Agree with most of this video, but cummon, you just cant compare Ammar with the rest of these lunatics.

Maybe out of emotions, Ammar has said more than he should about the first 3 calips in public, like the example given above. He's otherwise pro-unity for most part, but at the same time, doesnt mean that we dont discuss history at all or not scrutinize the actions of the caliphs or Ayesha. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
45 minutes ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

I have been a long time watcher of Sayed Ammar, and i've also met him. Unfortunately, no matter how much of a supporter of his i have been, i have to honestly say that making a lecture and referring to Abu Bakr and Umar as terrorists, and comparing them to Geddafi and the like, is not something i would have expected someone like him to say. There is no difference between swearing at someone and comparing them to an well known butchers, and calling them terrorists.

We paid dearly for that lecture here, and it's no surprise he even took it down.  However, Salafis managed to save that video and its up anyway. 

I am sure you are well aware of Khalid bin Walid and his actions which we approved by Abu Bakr. How would you categorize Ridda Wars?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
6 minutes ago, IbnSina said:

I hope some of the brothers and sisters payed extra attention to the explanation of the slogans "death to america, death to the UK and death to israel". It is truly sad to see people literately thinking it means death to all humans in those countries, it is actually quite mind blowing that anyone would think that.

If we look from the point of view the people of these countries ,they love their country but because these slogans are very general it needs explanation & unfortunately most of them don’t receive these explanations which leads to mistakes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
3 minutes ago, IbnSina said:

I dont think any human with some degree of common sense would come to the conclusion that it means you would want millions of innocent children, women and men, including many muslims in a country to die.

Also, there is something one can do before assuming, which is to ask.

It’s true but influence of media is very heavy on them & in media it is interrupted as death to people for common people which have trust to media.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

It’s true but influence of media is very heavy on them & in media it is interrupted as death to people for common people which have trust to media.

Yes, but at least we shias who are the main target of the mass media should not be so foolish to be influenced by their simple narratives. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

We have to separate the line between disrecpect/cursing and retelling history. Sometimes, I feel like the line was intentionally blurred to make this an ambiguous area. But, in essence , the point of history is learning from the mistakes of past figures, why should Islamic history be any different?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
1 hour ago, IbnSina said:

I dont think any human with some degree of common sense would come to the conclusion that it means you would want millions of innocent children, women and men, including many muslims in a country to die.

Also, there is something one can do before assuming, which is to ask.

While we know what the chant "Death to America" means, it is naive to imagine that all Americans know what that means. All they see are millions shouting this slogan at the top of their voices. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
42 minutes ago, IbnSina said:

Finally, even before this video, Ammar has really not been anything like he used to be, I remember his lectures on the biography of the Imams(as), they were good... but all his recent lectures in recent years are so monotone and black and white. I hope he did not fall in love with dunya, though he would not be the first.

Actually Ammar has become more politically active now than before which is reflected in his speeches.

He is (was) promoting the shia agenda in the US.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, shiaman14 said:

I am sure you are well aware of Khalid bin Walid and his actions which we approved by Abu Bakr. How would you categorize Ridda Wars?

The lecture wasn't just about Khalid bin Walid, who himself according to Bukhari murdered people until the Prophet (saw) said: "By Allah i am free from what Khalid has done (three times)".  Rather it was one which directly labelled Abu Bakr and Umar as terrorists, compared them to Hitler, Saddam and their ilk, and was delivered in such a manner i don't think is sensible in any way. It caused enormous outrage, especially in the UK, and had a big impact. I had to answer , and i was honest to Sunnis who questioned me and said you're right, this was out of order and against what our major scholars have advised us as to how to engage in these sorts of dialouge.  As a lecture in and of itself, it was also quite weak. 

I have a lot of respect for Sayed Ammar, twice in my life when i've been literally bed bound, his lectures have gotten me through difficult periods and he has done a lot of good. However, he is fallible and i feel he might want to reconsider his approach and return to the old Sayed Ammar. 

Edited by Intellectual Resistance
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
8 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

While we know what the chant "Death to America" means, it is naive to imagine that all Americans know what that means. All they see are millions shouting this slogan at the top of their voices. 

This part of Ammars speech I was truely dissapointed in. 

Lets not forget, the British/US govts toppled musadeqs elected govt, re-installed the Shah, stole Iranian wealth, funded Saddams war- causing millions of death, imposed unjust sanctions, and the list of injustices goes on. And you wonder why they chant this slogan? They are absolutely well justified to- irrsepective of what anyone in the world thinks. Let them criticize the injustice the west has brough upon Iran over the past century first, before questioning the slogan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
On 3/20/2018 at 8:25 PM, Intellectual Resistance said:

The lecture wasn't just about Khalid bin Walid, who himself according to Bukhari murdered people until the Prophet (saw) said: "By Allah i am free from what Khalid has done (three times)".  Rather it was one which directly labelled Abu Bakr and Umar as terrorists, compared them to Hitler, Saddam and their ilk, and was delivered in such a manner i don't think is sensible in any way. It caused enormous outrage, especially in the UK, and had a big impact. I had to answer , and i was honest to Sunnis who questioned me and said you're right, this was out of order and against what our major scholars have advised us as to how to engage in these sorts of dialouge.  As a lecture in and of itself, it was also quite weak. 

I have a lot of respect for Sayed Ammar, twice in my life when i've been literally bed bound, his lectures have gotten me through difficult periods and he has done a lot of good. However, he is fallible and i feel he might want to reconsider his approach and return to the old Sayed Ammar. 

Please me the correct way of categorizing the Ridda wars.

On 3/20/2018 at 8:32 PM, shiasoldier786 said:

Lets not forget, the British/US govts toppled musadeqs elected govt, re-installed the Shah, stole Iranian wealth, funded Saddams war- causing millions of death, imposed unjust sanctions, and the list of injustices goes on. And you wonder why they chant this slogan? They are absolutely well justified to- irrsepective of what anyone in the world thinks. Let them criticize the injustice the west has brough upon Iran over the past century first, before questioning the slogan.

I agree that US started the acrimony with Iran by removing Musadeq and I understand where the sentiments are coming from.

But I am not the average American. All the average American sees is the burning of US flag and chants of "Death to America". Their version of history begins with the embassy incident.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
3 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

Please me the correct way of categorizing the Ridda wars.

This isn't about that to be honest. I want to point out that i don't regard Sayed Ammar corrupt, or on the same league as these individuals, but there is no doubt making a lecture where you explicitly call Abu Bakr and Umar 'terrorists', and compare them to Hitler and Geddafi is contrary to what Ay.Sistani and Khamanei have ruled as acceptable manner of dialogue. As i have said, Sayed Ammars talk caused a lot of damage for Shias in the UK.

The others, such as Allahyari, Tawhidi, and Yasser al-Habib are definitely worthy condemnation. They are worthy of condemnation not just because of their anti-Iran stance, but each is uniquely a trojan horse, whether they feel they are or not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
1 minute ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

This isn't about that to be honest. I want to point out that i don't regard Sayed Ammar corrupt, or on the same league as these individuals, but there is no doubt making a lecture where you explicitly call Abu Bakr and Umar 'terrorists', and compare them to Hitler and Geddafi is contrary to what Ay.Sistani and Khamanei have ruled as acceptable manner of dialogue. As i have said, Sayed Ammars talk caused a lot of damage for Shias in the UK.

The others, such as Allahyari, Tawhidi, and Yasser al-Habib are definitely worthy condemnation. They are worthy of condemnation not just because of their anti-Iran stance, but each is uniquely a trojan horse, whether they feel they are or not. 

I agree with you here. Ammar said the right thing in the wrong way and he should not be lumped in with those other fitna-mongers.

Edited by shiaman14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, shiaman14 said:

I agree with you here. Ammar said the right thing in the wrong way.

Not something you want to be saying publicly if you believe it. I think the issue could have been better on an academic front, but that's just my view. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
3 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

I agree with you here. Ammar said the right thing in the wrong way and he should not be lumped in with those other fitna-mongers.

Yes, he is definitely not in that group. I really think this was an error of the brothers at Islamic Pulse to lump him in with that crowd, even if he has been doing somethings one would regard as questionable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I think it is absurd for anyone to think Ammar Nakashwani is funded to corrupt Muslims around the world, or he has an evil plan alongside Tawhidi and Yasir Habib.

For sure, he makes some controversial lectures without considering their implications, and they can come across as 'unprofessional' and 'offensive to other sects'.

However lets forgive Ammar Nakshwani. In some of the recent shows, I feel he genuinely wants Sunni Shia unity. Ammar may have just gotten a bit passionate hence he made those lectures, but it doesn't mean that we view him in a negative light forever. 

And yeah, he is strictly against the "death to America" chant (I don't have any issue with the chant), However this doesn't mean that he hates the Islamic Republic of Iran or anything, he just feels that the language they use isn't appropriate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Amazing work is done in this video. But I may disagree with Ammar's part. His lectures made me a strong shia today, we have to discuss shia suni difference in academic way and he does it best. He was right terrioism is not new, it was since 1st khalifa. Who can be more wise and tolerant than Imams (A.S) but still terrioirsts and political thugs stood against them. I think we should not stop exposing truth due to fear of extreme sunis. We have to tell the truth to next the generation in decent way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
2 hours ago, ali_fatheroforphans said:

And yeah, he is strictly against the "death to America" chant (I don't have any issue with the chant), However this doesn't mean that he hates the Islamic Republic of Iran or anything, he just feels that the language they use isn't appropriate.

Brother, a simple question that you don't have to answer because we all know the answer to it: Would Imam Mehdi (as) agree to "death to America" chant?
So anyone who is strictly against this chant (as you mentioned) what side are they on? If people believe that Imams would not be against this, then I guess there has to be more effort done to understand the sunnah of Ahlulbayt. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
1 hour ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

Yes, he is definitely not in that group. I really think this was an error of the brothers at Islamic Pulse to lump him in with that crowd, even if he has been doing somethings one would regard as questionable. 

The Islamic Pulse folks are staunch WF supporters to the point that they consider non-WFers to be non-shias...almost

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
2 hours ago, ali_fatheroforphans said:

I think it is absurd for anyone to think Ammar Nakashwani is funded to corrupt Muslims around the world, or he has an evil plan alongside Tawhidi and Yasir Habib.

For sure, he makes some controversial lectures without considering their implications, and they can come across as 'unprofessional' and 'offensive to other sects'.

However lets forgive Ammar Nakshwani. In some of the recent shows, I feel he genuinely wants Sunni Shia unity. Ammar may have just gotten a bit passionate hence he made those lectures, but it doesn't mean that we view him in a negative light forever. 

And yeah, he is strictly against the "death to America" chant (I don't have any issue with the chant), However this doesn't mean that he hates the Islamic Republic of Iran or anything, he just feels that the language they use isn't appropriate.

That's the thing. The much respected WF wants shias to stop tatbir because of the image it portrays but in turn continue with the "Death to America" chants. I can say from personal that more people have asked me about these chants and slogans than about tatbir.

So if we are concerned about our image, then these chants should stop first before tatbir.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

@shiaman14 Tatbir and "Death to America" chant are completely different areas which we shouldn't compare.

The "Death to America" chant is a political chant which has history associated with it - something which means a lot to the Irannians who fought for freedom. I think we as foreigners never understand what Irannians went through and as long as America continues to be evil, then the "Death to America" chant is totally understandable.

Tatbir is something Sadiq Al Shirazi labels as "recommended" meaning he is linking it to religion with no basis - we are to be rewarded if we engage in tatbir. Majority of our great scholars have a strong stand against it and it surely sets a bad image for Shias, as people think it has a religious basis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Sayed Ammar sure has good intentions, slips here and there but that's not the main thing.

Him taking a picture with Imam Tawhidi, is this acceptable?

Why would he EVER associate with the likes of him?

Edited by Hussaini624
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
2 hours ago, ali_fatheroforphans said:

@shiaman14 Tatbir and "Death to America" chant are completely different areas which we shouldn't compare.

The "Death to America" chant is a political chant which has history associated with it - something which means a lot to the Irannians who fought for freedom. I think we as foreigners never understand what Irannians went through and as long as America continues to be evil, then the "Death to America" chant is totally understandable.

Tatbir is something Sadiq Al Shirazi labels as "recommended" meaning he is linking it to religion with no basis - we are to be rewarded if we engage in tatbir. Majority of our great scholars have a strong stand against it and it surely sets a bad image for Shias, as people think it has a religious basis.

I completely understand the "Death to America" chants from removing Musadeq to putting Shah the dictator in control to the 8 years of Iran-Iraq war. They are justified.

All I am saying is that ibagree with Ammar that ”Death to America" doesn't work outside the borders of Iran.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
34 minutes ago, Hussaini624 said:

Sayed Ammar sure has good intentions, slips here and there but that's not the main thing.

Him taking a picture with Imam Tawhidi, is this acceptable?

Why would he EVER associate with the likes of him?

I don't think he knows about Tawhidi to be fair to him. Tawhidi has pictures with a lot of people, including scholars. On the surface he looks like a humble, educated and sensible individual, wearing that garment and looking as he does. Obviously he isn't. This doesn't absolve Sayed Ammar of the need to perform background checking, but if he knew and he might do now, he wouldn't associate with him. 

9 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

I completely understand the "Death to America" chants from removing Musadeq to putting Shah the dictator in control to the 8 years of Iran-Iraq war. They are justified.

All I am saying is that ibagree with Ammar that ”Death to America" doesn't work outside the borders of Iran.

I incline to agree with you. While the message is powerful and any honest minded human being should appreciate it and even support it, the fact is, the media twists things and such words are taken in the wrong way into the minds of brainwashed or ill-intentioned people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...