Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
AmirioTheMuzzy

Seriously Mohammed Hijab?!?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

On 4/18/2019 at 1:04 PM, Mohammadi_follower said:

Secondly it is good to remember that alawites are not Shias according to most Shias so again it is nothing less that stupid to portray what is happening in Syria as a "Shia Sunni conflicts" when alawites are not even considered as Shias and most of syrian soldiers a

All scholars in Iran know Alawites specially as Shias but they say they need to return to real teaching of Shia Islam but scholars don’t try to force their ideas & teachings to them also if you travel to Najaf & Karbala you will see many Ismaili bohras in these two cities that they come for pilgrimage & everyone knows them as Shia Muslims how we can say Alawites are not Shias !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/19/2019 at 4:46 PM, Ashvazdanghe said:

All scholars in Iran know Alawites specially as Shias but they say they need to return to real teaching of Shia Islam but scholars don’t try to force their ideas & teachings to them also if you travel to Najaf & Karbala you will see many Ismaili bohras in these two cities that they come for pilgrimage & everyone knows them as Shia Muslims how we can say Alawites are not Shias !!

True, even their Salah is pretty similar...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

All scholars in Iran know Alawites specially as Shias but they say they need to return to real teaching of Shia Islam but scholars don’t try to force their ideas & teachings to them also if you travel to Najaf & Karbala you will see many Ismaili bohras in these two cities that they come for pilgrimage & everyone knows them as Shia Muslims how we can say Alawites are not Shias !!

Brother, Alawites were historically condemned by our prestigious ulama, just to name the Shaykh Tusi (may Allah be pleased with him). It was only since the 1970’s when for the sake of an Islamic unity, some (not all) politically active ulama declared them to be Shias (not Twelvers, but Shia Muslims in general). Take a look at this. They have beliefs that drastically differ from ours, hence why they are considered a ghulat sect. It’s a completely independent religion with its own clergy, theology and beliefs. This is one of the reasons why the ulama in Najaf forbid Iraqi Shi’ite militias from engaging in Syrian conflict. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/20/2019 at 12:08 AM, OrthodoxTruth said:

Brother, Alawites were historically condemned by our prestigious ulama, just to name the Shaykh Tusi (may Allah be pleased with him). It was only since the 1970’s when for the sake of an Islamic unity, some (not all) politically active ulama declared them to be Shias (not Twelvers, but Shia Muslims in general). Take a look at this. They have beliefs that drastically differ from ours, hence why they are considered a ghulat sect. It’s a completely independent religion with its own clergy, theology and beliefs. This is one of the reasons why the ulama in Najaf forbid Iraqi Shi’ite militias from engaging in Syrian conflict. 

Salam it something from past but now they are turning back to Shia Islam teaching more than before it's just a matter of time that they will fix their distorted beliefs

Date :Saturday, March 30th, 2019 | Time : 07:41 |ID: 87243 |
17609e17074e4247ab167ee8c5740e32-1-1.jpg
 
original link in Turkish : https://tr.shafaqna.com/archives/75900

Sayyed Sinan Buztepe: All Alevis are Shias and all Shias are Alevis/ “Alevism without Imam Ali ((عليه السلام))” is a plot -Interview

/in All NewsFeaturedFeatured 2Featured 3InterviewsMiddle EastNEWS BRIEFSOther NewsShia Islam /

SHAFAQNA- Alawites or Alevis are one of the religious groups in Turkey known to be followers of the Twelver Shia branch of Islam. Alevi communities spread across Turkey but they mostly live in the east and central-west of the country. Sayyed Sinan Buztepe is the religious leader of the Alevis in Cerkezkoy district, northeast ofTurkeyShafaqna has had an exclusive interview with him about his community, their traditions and problems.

Shafaqna: What is the Alevism and who is an Alevi?

Buztepe: Alevism means following Imam Ali ((عليه السلام)), our definition of Alevism surrounds the personality and character of Imam Ali ((عليه السلام)). He was born in Ka’aba and martyred in Mihrab (alter) while praying and he spent his life between Ka’aba and Mihrab. Alevism is between Ka’aba and Mihrab, too.

 

 

Shafaqna: How about the religious studies of your community leaders (dedes), is their religious studies at acceptable levels?

Buztepe: In our history, the 1514 Battle of Chaldiran between Iranian Safavid dynasty and Ottoman Turks is seen as a turning point. Before that battle, Alevi leaders used to visit and study at Sheikh Safi al-Din Ardebili’s school in Ardebil, Iran. After that battle, Ottoman Turks prevented Alevis from visiting Iran or attending madresas there. They foreclosed schools and anything related to Alevis in central Turkey and sent many religious leaders into exile. Although Ottoman Turks failed to remove the love of Ahl al-Bayt from the hearts of Alevis, they managed to create a distance between Alevis and religious studies particularly the school of Ahl al-Bayt.

Shafaqna: What do you think of Shia Islam? Is Shiism equal to Alevism or they are different from each other?

Buztepe: These claims come from the advocates of “Alevism without Imam Ali”; they want to create a rift between Alevism and Shia, they have tried vastly to reach their end. Alevism means Shia; it supports Shia Islam, Shia also means Alevi or an advocate of Imam Ali ((عليه السلام)). Those who try to separate between Alevis and supporters of Ahl al-Bayt claim “Alevis are different from Shias” or “We are Alevis of Anatolia”.

(I ask you) is there a difference between Alevi in Iran, Syria or Iraq? (No), there isn’t any difference. An Alevi is always an Alevi regardless of where he or she lives. Supporters of Imam Ali ((عليه السلام)) are always the same. Based on old documents, about 350 years ago Alevis in Anatolia region were called “Shias”. Ottoman Turks even described Shias as Alevis. At the same time, the word “Alevi” is given to someone who is a descendant of Imam Ali ((عليه السلام)). Trying to part away Alevism from Shiism is a “plot” and a “trick”. Alevi youth who visited holy shrines in Iraq met with lovers of Ahl al-Bayt coming from across the world and they noticed that fact (that there is no difference between Alevism and Shia religion). To me, all Alevis are Shias and all Shias are Alevis.

Alevi community leaders who met with Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani in Najaf cite him as describing Alevis as “The doves of Imam Ali’s Shrine”. The grand Ayatollah told them “They flew you away from this holy shrine, isn’t it the time for you to return?”

It’s getting late…. Real and old traditions of Alevism believed in God, the Prophet Mohammed and Ahl al-Bayt ((عليه السلام)). We have to continue this path otherwise; our next generation will not inherit anything from us. All our religious traditions would be lost and we would leave this world empty-handed.

9e78df2f29f04d78be6dc367ae76f4d1-540x630 

f27753879b0f40cfa78faa5cac9952bf-800x630

 

a995e2c61fa44063b92b8ddb23f4f1be.jpg

https://en.shafaqna.com/87243/sayyed-sinan-buztepe-all-alevis-are-Shias-and-all-Shias-are-alevis-interview/

original link in Turkish : https://tr.shafaqna.com/archives/75900

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

Salam it something from past but now they are turning back to Shia Islam teaching more than before it's just a matter of time that they will fix their distorted beliefs

Brother, I know that Sunnis consider everybody a Shia, that goes for Alawites, Alevis, Druze, and meridian of other ghulat sects. I don’t go by that, but by what our ulama rules. However, I asked you about the Alawites (of Syria and Lebanon), not the Alevis (of Turkey). Alawites and Alevis are not the same people. Shaykh Tusi (may Allah be pleased with him), including other past and present scholars, ruled Alawites to be non-Muslims and heretics due to their weird and deviant beliefs. As for the (Turkish) Alevis, I personally (I may be mistaken) believe that they are closer to the mainstream Twelvers than the Alawites (of Syria and Lebanon). Alevis (of Turkey) accept all the Imams, commemorate Ashura Day etc. They just need to start praying daily, their women need to scarf on a daily basis, and they need to abandon following people such as Haji Bektash Veli. They supposedly also drink alcohol. I read somewhere that the (Turkish) Alevis used to be like mainstream Twelvers but over the time they developed distinct beliefs. Inshallah they will come back to the mainstream. Alawites are completely different story, in Lebanon they don’t even attend Twelver mosques preferring to meet in their own communities. They themselves don’t even have mosques. That’s my point. 

Edited by starlight
Edited out looooooong quote

Share this post


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

Shaykh Tusi (may Allah be pleased with him), including other past and present scholars, ruled Alawites to be non-Muslims and heretics due to their weird and deviant beliefs. As for the (Turkish) Alevis, I personally (I may be mistaken) believe that they are closer to the mainstream Twelvers than the Alawites (of Syria and Lebanon). Alevis (of Turkey) accept all the Imams, commemorate Ashura Day etc.

anyway they are turniong back to twelver shiism & ruling of shaykh Tusi (رضي الله عنه) was about their condition at his time but in our time they are slowly are backing to their true roots also if a dominant group of them them like as Turk branch can fix their problem with new group that doesn't pray & have weird belief with their connection to other Alawit  communities in Syria & Lebanon they can back them to true Shia teaching inshaAllah but we must have patience & don't reject them by an old Fatwa like as Wahabist that do Takfir on Shias by fatwas of Ibn Taymiah (la) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

All scholars in Iran know Alawites specially as Shias but they say they need to return to real teaching of Shia Islam but scholars don’t try to force their ideas & teachings to them also if you travel to Najaf & Karbala you will see many Ismaili bohras in these two cities that they come for pilgrimage & everyone knows them as Shia Muslims how we can say Alawites are not Shias !!

What is the link between ismaili and Alawites brother? These two groups are very different. About the Alawites they are very misguided and their beliefs are wrong in many ways. It is really difficult to recognize them as Shia. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, OrthodoxTruth said:

Alawites and Alevis are not the same people. 

Yes it's a common, but strange, but still common misconception/confusion and I don't really know where people get the misconception/confusion from. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The guest user makes a good point. People make posts about how ignorant these youtubers are but when they are asked to back up their claims they claim not to have time (despite posting on this forum around the clock) or that these youtubers are insignificant (in which case there shouldn't have been a 3-page topic about them in the first place). 

It would be better not to comment at all rather than to post comments which can't be backed up. 

Wallahu a'lam 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

anyway they are turniong back to twelver shiism & ruling of shaykh Tusi (رضي الله عنه) was about their condition at his time but in our time they are slowly are backing to their true roots also if a dominant group of them them like as Turk branch can fix their problem with new group that doesn't pray & have weird belief with their connection to other Alawit  communities in Syria & Lebanon they can back them to true Shia teaching inshaAllah but we must have patience & don't reject them by an old Fatwa like as Wahabist that do Takfir on Shias by fatwas of Ibn Taymiah (la) 

Brother, I think our small misunderstanding arose from the fact that you confuse Alawites and Alevis as one and the same. Those are two distinct groups of people with differing beliefs. I’m more than happy to see Alevis in Turkey slowly rejoining the fold of mainstream, orthodox Islam. However, Alawites reject doing so in the past and present. Before 2011, Iran sent ulama to Alawites to teach them proper Islam and Assads rounded them up and deported back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

What is the link between ismaili and Alawites brother? These two groups are very different. About the Alawites they are very misguided and their beliefs are wrong in many ways. It is really difficult to recognize them as Shia. 

if you read the article you will find out new generation belief heavily infected by people like as Fatullah Gulen that is very anti Iranian & Anti Shia & is supporting by United States & Isreal but some people between Alawites are trying to strengthen their ties with Twelver Shiism & Iran but its still a very week group that need support & time also people like them were amongst Shias from time of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) but all Imams were tolerating them & just was dissociating from their leaders but in other hand they highly stand against Ismaili sect & were against their leaders & their followers althought they weren't from Qulat but they dissociated from Imamate way but   Alawits are just suffer from lack of proper teachings & they can back better than Ismailis to true way.

 

11 minutes ago, HakimPtsid said:

Yes it's a common, but strange, but still common misconception/confusion and I don't really know where people get the misconception/confusion from. 

 in time of ummayids & Abbasids they were calling Shias that were accepting three caliph as legitimate rulers & after that were believing to Imamate of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) & his sons as Alawits or Alevi that it's just a misconception in accent in different region  & they were considering Shias that were rejecting three caliphs as rejectors (Rawafids) that currently is mainstream Shia branch as Twelvers but in time of ummayid & Abbasids Alawits or Alevis were mainstream 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mahdavist said:

The guest user makes a good point. People make posts about how ignorant these youtubers are but when they are asked to back up their claims they claim not to have time (despite posting on this forum around the clock) or that these youtubers are insignificant (in which case there shouldn't have been a 3-page topic about them in the first place). 

It would be better not to comment at all rather than to post comments which can't be backed up. 

Wallahu a'lam 

I understand that this is a reference to my person. The concept of any forum is to comment and exchange views and ideas. What’s more, why would we here watch Wahhabi anti-Shia propaganda for 2 hours and spend more hours on “refuting” their propaganda? Our scholars already did it countless of times. Our life as a Shia Muslims doesn’t resolve around justifying our beliefs to the group of people bend on destroying us from the start. Do you truly believe that they want a scholarly and sound response to their propaganda? It’s enough to check the “Sunni Defense” channel or “Anti-Majoosi” to understand what kind of people are they. The same ones as were around 50, 100, 150 years ago and even before that. Shaykh Tusi (may Allah be pleased with him) moves from Baghdad to Najaf because the People of Ignorance burnt his vast library and threatened to kill him. We can spend forever in defending ourselves from them. If you think it is necessary to answer them, you are more than welcome to do so. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

in time of ummayids & Abbasids they were calling Shias that were accepting three caliph as legitimate rulers & after that were believing to Imamate of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) & his sons as Alawits or Alevi that it's just a misconception in accent in different region  & they were considering Shias that were rejecting three caliphs as rejectors (Rawafids) that currently is mainstream Shia branch as Twelvers but in time of ummayid & Abbasids Alawits or Alevis were mainstream 

Yes, I know about the Alawites and Alevis myself (I find them interesting) but your answer does bring clarify, in a sense, why the average Sunni that doesn't understand much about Shi'ism would conflate something like us Twelvers with them. But then, there was a period when Ismailis were larger than us, yet they seem to have drifted off into obscurity (within Sunni discourse I mean). But yeah, when it comes to the Shirk topic Sunnis gobbling up Wahhabi/Salafi propaganda about us using misunderstandings of Alawites and Alevis treated falsely as synonymous (in the historical development your quote highlights) does make sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/20/2019 at 1:25 AM, OrthodoxTruth said:

I understand that this is a reference to my person. The concept of any forum is to comment and exchange views and ideas. What’s more, why would we here watch Wahhabi anti-Shia propaganda for 2 hours and spend more hours on “refuting” their propaganda? Our scholars already did it countless of times. Our life as a Shia Muslims doesn’t resolve around justifying our beliefs to the group of people bend on destroying us from the start. Do you truly believe that they want a scholarly and sound response to their propaganda? It’s enough to check the “Sunni Defense” channel or “Anti-Majoosi” to understand what kind of people are they. The same ones as were around 50, 100, 150 years ago and even before that. Shaykh Tusi (may Allah be pleased with him) moves from Baghdad to Najaf because the People of Ignorance burnt his vast library and threatened to kill him. We can spend forever in defending ourselves from them. If you think it is necessary to answer them, you are more than welcome to do so. 

Amen! Your post is so true. 

Also, I came across a video from the "Sunni Defense" myself actually, a few days ago, it was an antiShia video. I couldn't make heads or tails of it, it was literally a great example of Poe's Law. I read somewhere else they (Sunni Defense) were Wahhabis, so the amount of hostility (and in the comment section) was far less than a surprise. 

Some people are just full to the brim with Ego and prejudice though, it's sad to see but it's the world we live in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/20/2019 at 1:25 AM, OrthodoxTruth said:

We can spend forever in defending ourselves from them. If you think it is necessary to answer them, you are more than welcome to do so. 

it's not just for defending but also for finishing Hujjah on them that in judgment day they don't have excuse to say that they didn't know about true path also it's a policy from our Imams that they were debating with people or were educating students for this task , it's a famous story that in Sffin battle Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was fighting beside Malik Ashtar (رضي الله عنه) & malik killed more enemies than Imam Ali (عليه السلام) in end of day but Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was paralyzing some Muawiah (la) soldier & was letting them to be remain alive & Malik aske from Imam why you didn't kill them Imam responded that during of battle with them I was seeing 6th or 7th generation of them will become Shia so I was just paralyzing them to preserves the future generation of Shias , maybe current people be very anti Shia but there is still hope that some people from these debates  find the truth but it's not necessary that all of us to engage ourselves in discussion although we have enough debaters & we can do other activities based on our abilities to help Imam Mahdi (aj) & Shia Islam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/20/2019 at 2:07 AM, Ashvazdanghe said:

it's not just for defending but also for finishing Hujjah on them that in judgment day they don't have excuse to say that they didn't know about true path also it's a policy from our Imams that they were debating with people or were educating students for this task , it's a famous story that in Sffin battle Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was fighting beside Malik Ashtar (رضي الله عنه) & malik killed more enemies than Imam Ali (عليه السلام) in end of day but Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was paralyzing some Muawiah (la) soldier & was letting them to be remain alive & Malik aske from Imam why you didn't kill them Imam responded that during of battle with them I was seeing 6th or 7th generation of them will become Shia so I was just paralyzing them to preserves the future generation of Shias , maybe current people be very anti Shia but there is still hope that some people from these debates  find the truth but it's not necessary that all of us to engage ourselves in discussion although we have enough debaters & we can do other activities based on our abilities to help Imam Mahdi (aj) & Shia Islam.

Brother I agree with you completely, I’ve been doing it entire life. I’m just referring to the likes of Mohammed Hijab, Ali Dawah and the rest of Western born Wahhabis that do not engage in scholarly debates but slanders and lies against us. Their goal from the onset is to make us either become as them, or become silent. It is all deception and unscholarly one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Itsme
8 hours ago, OrthodoxTruth said:

Brother I agree with you completely, I’ve been doing it entire life. I’m just referring to the likes of Mohammed Hijab, Ali Dawah and the rest of Western born Wahhabis that do not engage in scholarly debates but slanders and lies against us. Their goal from the onset is to make us either become as them, or become silent. It is all deception and unscholarly one. 

Believe me, I like you feel upset when I see people attacking our Madhab and scholars. However, should we not entertain the possibility that people like Mohammed Hijab, who may be misguided, aren't simply trying to deceive but may themselves be deceived? He regularly goes to Hyde park, debates non-Muslims, has tried as much as a Salafi can to call to some sort of agreement between Shias and Sunnis against the Atheists, and he seems convinced his view and path is the right one. I have engaged in dialogue with the people he takes from, and I really am of the view they are deluded, but there may not necessarily be an intention to try to deceive outright. 

Why are they deluded? Perhaps they have not honestly examined the evidence, or set their own criteria, and perhaps out of a sincere but ultimately misguided pursuit of what they feel is true, they have formed their own views they build their belief on. 

Our job is to focus on the issues , what is it they are saying and how can we academically address it, without trying to judge their intentions and attack their characters. 

What every Shia needs to do are one of two:

1. Remain silent if we can not address the video, lest we speak out of knowledge and ignore it or bring it to the attention of those with the ability to refute it. 

2. Help address parts of it  or the whole of it, if it is within our competency. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest ASunniGuy
On 4/18/2019 at 3:34 AM, Mohammadi_follower said:

I watched a little more the video and I have two other points to say.

1) about the scholars saying that people who don’t follow the Imams (عليه السلام) are not real Muslims. Well YEAH THIS IS TRUE. If you don’t follow them according to Shia Muslim theology you don’t follow Allah and Prophet orders so you reject some parts of the religion so you are de facto not a real Muslim. However some "Sunni" Muslims are very ignorant about that so we can’t blame them. By the way we have a lot of similarities with "Sunni" Muslims so we could always collaborate even if their faith is not valid in many points and I think even ayatollah Khamenei don’t think differently of what I said.

2) about the "proofs" of tentative of changing demographics of Syria for changing Syria to a Sunni country to a Shia country. First it is good to remember that the sources used for that are some anti Iran stuffs (like guardian) or excuse me for the term very stupid medias (again like I said previously how could we seriously take breibart as a reliable source ? It is even worst when we remember that the persons who did these stupid propaganda video present themselves as good Muslims) so here there is already many suspicions to have toward such claimings. Secondly it is good to remember that alawites are not Shias according to most Shias so again it is nothing less that stupid to portray what is happening in Syria as a "Shia Sunni conflicts" when alawites are not even considered as Shias and most of syrian soldiers are Sunnis ! Thirdly "real Shias" in Syria are something like 0,5 or let say 1% of the population ! Seriously how do you expect that 0,5 % percent of a population become the majority of the population of a country ?? Even if we take millions of Shias that would never happened like that. Fourthly it is more anecdotical than anything alse but I lived a little to Lebanon close to Syria where I met some syrians and I even met during a conference a syrian which was part of anti-government group and had an important position on his group. Believe me or not but I asked him already at this time if that was true that such "demographic changes" really happen in Syria. Well again believe me or not but even if he was really anti-assad and anti-Iran he said that that was stupid and this is even the opposite which is happening (alawite regions becoming in majority Sunnis even if again we don’t really consider alawites as Shia Muslims).

So this is for such reasons I really don’t take seriously at all such propaganda videos and I don’t really want to lose my time with such nonsense.

Cool man, that's good. Finally someone to talk to about it properly.

1) Why would we Sunnis want to collaborate with people who think we aren't real Muslims? Think of it from my perspective. I'm the 90%.  A group who is the 10% wants to work together (or preaches unity like Khamenei does) but they believe me and other 89.9999999999% are not real Muslims. Why would I want to collaborate or unify with them? 

2) the guardian is a liberal paper in england, it opposses Saudi arabia as much as it opposes Iran. Its a very reliable paper. Breitbart isn't reliable but I can probably find you many other papers which will say the same thing for this particular incident. 

Alawites are not Shia, yes, but they claim to be a sect of twelver shiaism. They also are supported in Syria by foreign Shia groups ranging from hezbollah in Lebanon to the iranians and the Shia militiamen from across the world including 10,000+Shia men from afghanistan and Pakistan. For someone who isnt a Shia, Assad gets worldwide support from Shia groups and ordinary people (some of you call him the lesser of the evils and support him that way whilst trying to dissassociate yourself from his crimes). So it makes sense for Assad to import foreign Shia and place them in areas that are key to controlling the country or simply to replace Sunni populations which have fled because assad can count on Shias for loyalty. This may not be happening in the millions but it is more than likely it has began to happen in the thousands or low tens of thousands at the very least. 

I really doubt that most of assad's forces on the ground are Sunni at this very moment. Sure at the start of the war they were. That's simply because the vast majority of the army was made of Sunnis with alawites taking up most of the higher up officer ranks. A tonne of his army deserted and formed much of the opposition. But now it seems that his man power fighting for him is full of either conscripts, some of the original Sunnis who didn't betray him and then big chunks of foreign Shia fighters. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest ASunniGuy
On 4/18/2019 at 11:16 AM, Lebanese313 said:

Even if we did. A lot of Sunnis, most if then are the ignorant ones that never talked to a Shia, do kufr against us. And seeing that your opinions about Shi’ism got far worse, I think you might be as well amongst the Salafi’s that spend their time together to do kufr on those bad Shias that are so bad that we need to do kufr on them because they’re bad.

I don’t know what you mean by " do kufr against you"

Not a salafi. Just because my opinion of shi'ism got worse does not automatically make me a salafi. 

If you call people a salafi when they disagree with you or say something negative then sooner or later people will just say that you call anyone who disagrees with you a salafi. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/22/2019 at 3:24 AM, Guest ASunniGuy said:

Alawites are not Shia, yes, but they claim to be a sect of twelver shiaism.

Alawits are Shia , Alawits are Shia Alawits are Shia 

On 4/22/2019 at 3:24 AM, Guest ASunniGuy said:

So it makes sense for Assad to import foreign Shia and place them in areas that are key to controlling the country or simply to replace Sunni populations which have fled because assad can count on Shias for loyalty. This may not be happening in the millions but it is more than likely it has began to happen in the thousands or low tens of thousands at the very leas

it's just an accusation by Israel & America & british channels like as BBC anyway by barbaric actions of wahhabist in Syria many Sunni Muslims had to leave Syria & migrated to group that a portion of them converted to Christianity for permanent residing & other ones are struggling with this issue but none of them will return Syria again or they at least will live ther for one generation in Europe that new generation won't back to Syria  

On 4/22/2019 at 3:24 AM, Guest ASunniGuy said:

I really doubt that most of assad's forces on the ground are Sunni at this very moment. Sure at the start of the war they were. That's simply because the vast majority of the army was made of Sunnis with alawites taking up most of the higher up officer ranks. A tonne of his army deserted and formed much of the opposition. But now it seems that his man power fighting for him is full of either conscripts, some of the original Sunnis who didn't betray him and then big chunks of foreign Shia fighters. 

if he want to change his officers to a Shia group , he had this opportunity during war but he kept all of Sunnis but now all Sunni , Shia & Alawits officers become one hand against wahhabism

 

On 4/22/2019 at 3:33 AM, Guest ASunniGuy said:

If you call people a salafi when they disagree with you or say something negative then sooner or later people will just say that you call anyone who disagrees with you a salafi.

Hijab has cristal clear resume as a Salafi his simplest quote that starts his day with it is Taqyia , Taqyia , Taqyia ,Shias are doing Taqyia :hahaha: 

Edited by Ashvazdanghe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/21/2019 at 5:54 PM, Guest ASunniGuy said:

Cool man, that's good. Finally someone to talk to about it properly.

1) Why would we Sunnis want to collaborate with people who think we aren't real Muslims? Think of it from my perspective. I'm the 90%.  A group who is the 10% wants to work together (or preaches unity like Khamenei does) but they believe me and other 89.9999999999% are not real Muslims. Why would I want to collaborate or unify with them? 

2) the guardian is a liberal paper in england, it opposses Saudi arabia as much as it opposes Iran. Its a very reliable paper. Breitbart isn't reliable but I can probably find you many other papers which will say the same thing for this particular incident. 

Alawites are not Shia, yes, but they claim to be a sect of twelver shiaism. They also are supported in Syria by foreign Shia groups ranging from hezbollah in Lebanon to the iranians and the Shia militiamen from across the world including 10,000+Shia men from afghanistan and Pakistan. For someone who isnt a Shia, Assad gets worldwide support from Shia groups and ordinary people (some of you call him the lesser of the evils and support him that way whilst trying to dissassociate yourself from his crimes). So it makes sense for Assad to import foreign Shia and place them in areas that are key to controlling the country or simply to replace Sunni populations which have fled because assad can count on Shias for loyalty. This may not be happening in the millions but it is more than likely it has began to happen in the thousands or low tens of thousands at the very least. 

I really doubt that most of assad's forces on the ground are Sunni at this very moment. Sure at the start of the war they were. That's simply because the vast majority of the army was made of Sunnis with alawites taking up most of the higher up officer ranks. A tonne of his army deserted and formed much of the opposition. But now it seems that his man power fighting for him is full of either conscripts, some of the original Sunnis who didn't betray him and then big chunks of foreign Shia fighters. 

Even if we don’t consider you as real Muslims at least we always have some similarities and common goals so we could always collaborate for some circumstances. In general you don’t need to be very similar with someone for being allied with him and achieve some works.

Guardian is not at all a paper I take seriously and this is the kind of newspaper which love to do "buzz" and love to do "scandal" but publishing such works and again from my experience from Middle East I just can’t intellectually take seriously such non sense.

Also alawites are not at all an homogenous group, some of them claim to be Shias while in the next villages some of them not at all. In general when we analyze their beliefs and their practices most Shias will hardly consider them as Shias or even Muslims. If many Shia armed groups came to Syria it is because the tiny Shia minority living here was threatened by radical groups and the holy shrines also and Assad was the only person who was not a danger for them and have also the force to take power so they don’t really have other choices. By the way there had been not only Shia foreign fighters who came to Syria. Many palestinians and Arab nationalist fighters (seculars or mainly Sunnis) came to Syria for fight with Assad but strangely we don’t hear so much about them.

Now you are just speaking without proofs even the most anti assad opponents admit that most of his soldiers are Sunnis. In fact most "secular Sunnis" prefer Assad to the opposition and if you just see a little the composition of the government you would observe that most of the ministers are Sunnis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/12/2019 at 2:12 AM, AmirioTheMuzzy said:

4 hours ago, Mohammed Hijab shared/promoted a new documentary via his youtube channel under the "community"1 section. The 2 hour documentary is by "The Sunni Defense".  It is a layman channel that makes bogus claims and misrepresents Shi'ism.

Hijab said: "An excellent documentary about some abuses by religious clergy"

This is not the first time Hijab has promoted/supported/taken part in layman anti-Shia videos and websites.

Also, if you watch any of his videos on shi'ites, you will see everything but intellectual honesty. It is innapropriate for him to interpret Hadith, but he does it anyway. Sometimes him and his friends are so dishonest that they cut off hadith to prove a point. 

I remember he had one long [EDIT] video with an ex-Shia, which I wasted my time watching, where the ex-Shia provided no good reason for becoming a Sunni, despite this being the topic of discussion. His only claims for Shi'ism being bad was "religiosity is uncommon amongst Shias, especially the youth", "at fajr the mosques in Iran were closed despite playing adhan", "all the mosque had names of Imams", "wallahi, once you read Qur'an and understand Tawhid, you will see that Sunni'ism is the right path",

All anecdotal or unfounded statements.

The only fiqhi thing he mentioned was: "yes, the Prophet would pray on clay, but what they don't tell you is he would pray on his clothes too".

Which, as Shias we agree with... he didn't even know the hierarchy of what you can make sujood on in Shia fiqh! Wow. And he kept talking about how he is so accredited and worked in a Shia youth program at the local mosque for many years.

.......

Anyways, I got sidetracked.

We need to come together and make a response ASAP. We need to figure out a way to contact Islamic Pulse to debunk the claims being made.

.......

Thanks for reading.

Some The commenters on his post are so misguided, it's kinda hilarious yet angering.

JazakAllah Khair.

Video: 

 

Wooohooo Islamic pulse responded

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol, I always disliked him. Even my Sunni friends dislike him. I remember he bullied an Egyptian lady because she doesn’t want to wear hijab. He was acting like a toddler. I can’t believe people love a man who is a bully and close minded. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/22/2019 at 12:54 AM, Guest ASunniGuy said:

Cool man, that's good. Finally someone to talk to about it properly.

1) Why would we Sunnis want to collaborate with people who think we aren't real Muslims? Think of it from my perspective. I'm the 90%.  A group who is the 10% wants to work together (or preaches unity like Khamenei does) but they believe me and other 89.9999999999% are not real Muslims. Why would I want to collaborate or unify with them? 

2) the guardian is a liberal paper in england, it opposses Saudi arabia as much as it opposes Iran. Its a very reliable paper. Breitbart isn't reliable but I can probably find you many other papers which will say the same thing for this particular incident. 

Alawites are not Shia, yes, but they claim to be a sect of twelver shiaism. They also are supported in Syria by foreign Shia groups ranging from hezbollah in Lebanon to the iranians and the Shia militiamen from across the world including 10,000+Shia men from afghanistan and Pakistan. For someone who isnt a Shia, Assad gets worldwide support from Shia groups and ordinary people (some of you call him the lesser of the evils and support him that way whilst trying to dissassociate yourself from his crimes). So it makes sense for Assad to import foreign Shia and place them in areas that are key to controlling the country or simply to replace Sunni populations which have fled because assad can count on Shias for loyalty. This may not be happening in the millions but it is more than likely it has began to happen in the thousands or low tens of thousands at the very least. 

I really doubt that most of assad's forces on the ground are Sunni at this very moment. Sure at the start of the war they were. That's simply because the vast majority of the army was made of Sunnis with alawites taking up most of the higher up officer ranks. A tonne of his army deserted and formed much of the opposition. But now it seems that his man power fighting for him is full of either conscripts, some of the original Sunnis who didn't betray him and then big chunks of foreign Shia fighters. 

:salam:

When a country from the 10% minority has helped and supported an oppressed 1% of the 90% majority (aka Palestine) for 40 years when the remaining 89% were closing their eyes and kissing the oppressors hands, then maybe you could wonder if the opinion of westerners living on YouTube videos is relevant in 2019.

I humbly suggest we do not judge based on partiality, as ordered in Qur'an.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/12/2019 at 4:26 AM, realizm said:

:salam:

When a country from the 10% minority has helped and supported an oppressed 1% of the 90% majority (aka Palestine) for 40 years when the remaining 89% were closing their eyes and kissing the oppressors hands, then maybe you could wonder if the opinion of westerners living on YouTube videos is relevant in 2019.

I humbly suggest we do not judge based on partiality, as ordered in Qur'an.

 

Iran doesn't support Palestine because it cares about Palestinians, it supports them because it's a great political tool. You say something pro-Palestine and the masses automatically think you're a good guy. Erdogan does something very similar, he's very pro-Palestine in his speeches but the reality is that Turkish trade with Israel has grown during the years. 

Iran's funding to Hamas went really low after the start of the Syrian war due to Hamas's objections to what Assad was doing in Syria. So there's not much support going on anymore. Anyway, how many Israelis has Iran killed in the past 10 years? Then compare that to how many Sunnis have died at the hands of Iranian allies or Iranian funded sectarian militias. 

It is dishonest of you to say the other 89% of Sunnis close their eyes, the vast majority of Palestine supporters are Sunnis. The Arab rulers may have abandoned Palestine but the masses certainly haven't.

There's nothing wrong with watching a western Muslim youtuber, your problem with him is that he shared a video that was very critical of shiasiam and Iran. Amirio & Ashvazdange have both liked your post but literally above your post they both are enthusiastically welcoming a video response made by a Shia guy. That Shia guy, albeit living in Middle East, has a western accent. He's probably just as western as Mohammed Hijab. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/23/2019 at 8:23 AM, Mohammadi_follower said:

Even if we don’t consider you as real Muslims at least we always have some similarities and common goals so we could always collaborate for some circumstances. In general you don’t need to be very similar with someone for being allied with him and achieve some works.

Guardian is not at all a paper I take seriously and this is the kind of newspaper which love to do "buzz" and love to do "scandal" but publishing such works and again from my experience from Middle East I just can’t intellectually take seriously such non sense.

Also alawites are not at all an homogenous group, some of them claim to be Shias while in the next villages some of them not at all. In general when we analyze their beliefs and their practices most Shias will hardly consider them as Shias or even Muslims. If many Shia armed groups came to Syria it is because the tiny Shia minority living here was threatened by radical groups and the holy shrines also and Assad was the only person who was not a danger for them and have also the force to take power so they don’t really have other choices. By the way there had been not only Shia foreign fighters who came to Syria. Many palestinians and Arab nationalist fighters (seculars or mainly Sunnis) came to Syria for fight with Assad but strangely we don’t hear so much about them.

Now you are just speaking without proofs even the most anti assad opponents admit that most of his soldiers are Sunnis. In fact most "secular Sunnis" prefer Assad to the opposition and if you just see a little the composition of the government you would observe that most of the ministers are Sunnis.

Don't you see the problem with always talking about unity and brotherhood and then going on to say things like "well we may not consider you real Muslims" and then expect Sunnis to not think of you really negatively. For me personally, that behaviour comes across as really deceptive and I would really question working together with a group of people whose ideology has deceptiveness in it. Don't even ask us Sunnis how we feel about that - ask yourselves, imagine that scenario in your mind and someone talked about unity and brotherhood to your face but behind your back he didn't think think you to be real Muslim. 

The guardian is a respectable newspaper. The buzz and scandal newspapers are ones like The Daily Mail, The Sun, The Mirror etc...

Okay so you make the argument that your fighters came because your minority felt threatened. That's logical. But in doing that, you ended up allying with a man who's regime raped 10,000s of Sunni women & killed nearly 100,000 alone in torture camps and not to mention the barrel bombs and all the other war crimes. Oppressing the majority so mercilessly is not going to win you many fans in the wider Muslim world. How do you expect religious Sunnis who look at this to think we can in any way ally ourselves with Shia? Would Imam Hussain (رضي الله عنه) send Shia militas to go help the shaytaan of Syria? 

Secular arabs and Arab nationalists came to fight alongside you. That doesn't help your case. Those guys hate Islam and practising Muslims. I've seen many Pakistanis who are deep into the secular nationalist hole and they are horrible people with horrible views towards Islam and Muslims. But let's be honest, whatever their number - they pale in comparison to the number of Shias who went to fight for Assad. 

His soldiers were mostly Sunni because Syria as a whole is a majority Sunni nation. His army drew recruits from the Sunni population but it had the policy of the officers being mostly alawites. At the start of the war, many of these soldiers deserted and formed various rebel groups, unfortunately other zalims stayed with Assad. Without Russian and Iranian support, his army would've been long destroyed by the Sunni opposition forces. 

As I mentioned before, secular "Sunnis" supporting Assad works against you because those people are normally irreligious, they do not represent most Sunni Muslims. 

This whole argument of "but Assad has xyz Sunni..." is like when a person says something racist racist and follows it up with "I'm not racist, I have black friends...". 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/11/2019 at 10:33 PM, AmirioTheMuzzy said:

I'm sooo HAPPY!

Can you tell me what you like about the video or what points you think he refuted well?

I watched it a few days and it wasn't very good. He made two points about translations but then he followed it up with 20 minutes of mostly emotional jargon eventually ending up with him giving his support to Shia militias... 

I'm sorry but some of you can say that I'm bias/partial in this matter but I cannot watch that Islamic pulse video without facepalming at it? All he does is try to use humour to make up for lack of any clear cut refutation (about from the two translations). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/22/2019 at 10:54 AM, Guest ASunniGuy said:

Cool man, that's good. Finally someone to talk to about it properly.

1) Why would we Sunnis want to collaborate with people who think we aren't real Muslims? Think of it from my perspective. I'm the 90%.  A group who is the 10% wants to work together (or preaches unity like Khamenei does) but they believe me and other 89.9999999999% are not real Muslims. Why would I want to collaborate or unify with them? 

Can a Muslim persecute, kill and genocide Prophet’s family and their followers? No. You lot do it since 1400 years and even had built entire religious theology on the people who tormented those closest to the Prophet himself. 

If you wouldn’t engage in anti-Shia genocide, we would of been more than a magical “10-15%”. Bahrain used to be 100% Shia, in 1941 it was 83% (official regime’s census data released on 22 January 1941), and in the 21 century the number stands at 55-70%, because of foreign Sunni regime’s genocide. I wrote magical because that number is simply untrue, the Shia demographics is on purpose lowered in all censuses carried out in Sunni majority countries. For example, in Egypt Shias are 2-3 million strong, yet Wahhabis claim there is only few thousands Shia Egyptians, which is simply untrue. The same thing happens in Pakistan where Shias make up 20-25% of population, yet censuses show discrepancies of 5-25%. 

Accepting the mythical “85% vs 15%”, what kind of argument is that? During the Nazi era of 1933-1945, the Nazis and their sympathisers made up overwhelming majority, does it mean that they were right and the minority that stood up to them was wrong? 

I personally don’t want to “unite” with you lot at all, I just want you to leave us alone everywhere in every aspect of reality. If we aren’t “true Muslims”, then why are you so afraid of Shia Islam? 

On 4/22/2019 at 10:54 AM, Guest ASunniGuy said:

Alawites are not Shia, yes, but they claim to be a sect of twelver shiaism. They also are supported in Syria by foreign Shia groups ranging from hezbollah in Lebanon to the iranians and the Shia militiamen from across the world including 10,000+Shia men from afghanistan and Pakistan. For someone who isnt a Shia, Assad gets worldwide support from Shia groups and ordinary people (some of you call him the lesser of the evils and support him that way whilst trying to dissassociate yourself from his crimes). So it makes sense for Assad to import foreign Shia and place them in areas that are key to controlling the country or simply to replace Sunni populations which have fled because assad can count on Shias for loyalty. This may not be happening in the millions but it is more than likely it has began to happen in the thousands or low tens of thousands at the very least. 

I really doubt that most of assad's forces on the ground are Sunni at this very moment. Sure at the start of the war they were. That's simply because the vast majority of the army was made of Sunnis with alawites taking up most of the higher up officer ranks. A tonne of his army deserted and formed much of the opposition. But now it seems that his man power fighting for him is full of either conscripts, some of the original Sunnis who didn't betray him and then big chunks of foreign Shia fighters. 

Alawites are as Shia, as Ahmadis are Sunni. Ironically, the Ahmadi are basically Sunnis who accept one more Prophet, unlike Alawites who in their religion differ considerable from the mainstream, orthodox Twelver Shia Muslims. 

As for the rest, the issue in Syria is completely political, and not religious. Iran wants him in power because the arms flow from Iran through Syria to Hezbollah in Lebanon. The same Hezbollah that realistically fights Israel to a standstill since 30 years, unlike Sunnis who since the 1980’s all accept Israel and deal with it behind the closed doors. Sunnis couldn’t care less for Palestine and its slow disappearance. All your rulers are in bed with America and Israel, just so that they can stay in power and enjoy the luxuries of this life. 

To make matters more clear to you, not all Shias support Assad, not all went to fight in Syria. Majority of Assad’s footsoldiers on the ground are secularised, pan-Arab Sunnis from Syria and all over the Arab world, not Shias or Alawites. If Assad wouldn’t be supported by a constant flow of Syrian Sunni recruits and help from local Sunni communities, he would of ended up like Qaddafi. You point out that he is supported by Iran, the so called opposition is supported by Israel, United States, Great Britain, other Western countries and their Sunni Arab puppets. Things to ponder about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, OrthodoxTruth said:

 

Alawites are as Shia, as Ahmadis are Sunni. Ironically, the Ahmadi are basically Sunnis who accept one more Prophet, unlike Alawites who in their religion differ considerable from the mainstream, orthodox Twelver Shia Muslims. 

As for the rest, the issue in Syria is completely political, and not religious. Iran wants him in power because the arms flow from Iran through Syria to Hezbollah in Lebanon. The same Hezbollah that realistically fights Israel to a standstill since 30 years, unlike Sunnis who since the 1980’s all accept Israel and deal with it behind the closed doors. Sunnis couldn’t care less for Palestine and its slow disappearance. All your rulers are in bed with America and Israel, just so that they can stay in power and enjoy the luxuries of this life. 

To make matters more clear to you, not all Shias support Assad, not all went to fight in Syria. Majority of Assad’s footsoldiers on the ground are secularised, pan-Arab Sunnis from Syria and all over the Arab world, not Shias or Alawites. If Assad wouldn’t be supported by a constant flow of Syrian Sunni recruits and help from local Sunni communities, he would of ended up like Qaddafi. You point out that he is supported by Iran, the so called opposition is supported by Israel, United States, Great Britain, other Western countries and their Sunni Arab puppets. Things to ponder about.

How many Israelis has Hezbollah helped kill/or killed since it's inception?

How many Sunni Muslims has Hezbollah helped kill/or killed in just the syrian war?

Probably far more Sunni Muslims than israelis easily. 

What group is the majority of Assad's personal ground forces? Probably conscripted Sunni Muslims, yh. Overall though, I wouldn't be surprised if the Shia militias and alawites and russians make up the majority of the ground forces. 

If Assad wasn't helped by Iran and Russia, then he probably would've ended up like Qaddaffi. Put him against the opposition and take away the opposition backers and the opposition would still probably destroy him in a few years time. Also Assad got lucky that ISIS showed up and attacked the rebels too. A lot of these things went to his way.

If the west truly supported the rebels like they do with the kurds, Assad wouldn't be alive. Throwing names like Israel and the US into the mix is just a way to deflect attention, sure once upon the Arab rulers and the US favour the rebels but that's long gone out of the window. And they never supported the rebels heavily in the way that Russia and Iran consistently do to Assad.

Not all Shia support him but the majority I've met surely do. Of course all Shia alive went to Syria because that's just common sense? No one even said that. But what is also true is that 10,000s of Shia militia were recruited by Iran and sent to Syria. Hezbollah likewise sent thousands to fight on behalf of Assad. 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


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

Can a Muslim persecute, kill and genocide Prophet’s family and their followers? No. You lot do it since 1400 years and even had built entire religious theology on the people who tormented those closest to the Prophet himself. 

If you wouldn’t engage in anti-Shia genocide, we would of been more than a magical “10-15%”. Bahrain used to be 100% Shia, in 1941 it was 83% (official regime’s census data released on 22 January 1941), and in the 21 century the number stands at 55-70%, because of foreign Sunni regime’s genocide. I wrote magical because that number is simply untrue, the Shia demographics is on purpose lowered in all censuses carried out in Sunni majority countries. For example, in Egypt Shias are 2-3 million strong, yet Wahhabis claim there is only few thousands Shia Egyptians, which is simply untrue. The same thing happens in Pakistan where Shias make up 20-25% of population, yet censuses show discrepancies of 5-25%. 

Accepting the mythical “85% vs 15%”, what kind of argument is that? During the Nazi era of 1933-1945, the Nazis and their sympathisers made up overwhelming majority, does it mean that they were right and the minority that stood up to them was wrong? 

I personally don’t want to “unite” with you lot at all, I just want you to leave us alone everywhere in every aspect of reality. If we aren’t “true Muslims”, then why are you so afraid of Shia Islam? 

 

Do you think Sunnis are taught to kill and genocide the Prophet's ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) family and their followers? 

Well realistically genocide or no genocide, I don't think you would number any greater. I don't mean this in a rude way but you aren't a low number because people have killed you, you're a low number because shiaism isn't really a good belief system. Sure I'm a Sunni and I would say that and you're going to obviously disagree which is fine. 

Well I doubt Bahrain has been killing you off in massive numbers (10,000s), it's more likely that they implemented either a policy where more Sunni Muslims moved in or caused Shia to leave. 

Well I don't know the specifics about Egypt since but in Pakistan, it's likely you are actually between 10-20%. 

You've gone into a random tirade about the specific percentages and numbers. My point was this, we are the vast majority, why should we unite with a smaller group who do not think we are 'real Muslims'? It makes no sense. 

Well I can agree with you on that, we are better left far away from each other. 

Well I am not afraid of your belief system, I never said I was. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I think Shias should fight back against this, we have it hard enough already because we are the minority and on top of that these propaganda videos are produced against us. This videos will brainwash Sunnis and other sects (maybe even other religions all together) against Shia's and will build hate for us... Therefore its seems the best thing to do is expose these videos and show how baseless they really are. 

I have had a Sunni ""friend"" and he watches that Naik guy, he's completely brainwashed. I've know him for 12 years and we're kind of drifting apart now. 

The bottom line is, if these videos make us look bad, we have a responsibility to expose the fake image these people are giving us!! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Propaganda_of_the_Deed said:

 

And I suppose ISIS just appeared out of a vaccuum like this

DPSSg6H.gif

No external support or funding, unlike Assad.

Well in Iraq they formed from already present factions such as Al Qaeda and many ex-baathists also filled their ranks. Plenty of their equipment was literally taken from fleeing Iraqi soldiers there and it's not exactly like weapons were scarce in Iraq even before then.

I'm not sure what your point is though? I feel as if you're going to blame Israel and America for funding them and try and have some sort "gotcha" moment against my post. I also remember reading ISIS may have received money from lone Arab individuals (not states) etc...

But anyway whatever funding ISIS or support ISIS received from foreigners, it pales in comparison to the support that was provided to Assad by Iran, Russia & Hezbollah. 

I don't mean this in a bad way but Shias who happily support Iran's involvement in this war have literally no moral ground to stand on. ISIS is evil but so is Assad and so are your militias. Assad is the worst of the bunch with the most number of murder & rapes on his hands and that's unfortunately the man who Khameini meets happily like some long lost brother and who most Shias on this website and in the world back. 

 Do you think Imam Hussain (رضي الله عنه) would support Khameini's decision to involve Shias in this war? Do you think he would supporter a murderer and rapist? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

7 hours ago, Berke said:

How many Israelis has Hezbollah helped kill/or killed since it's inception?

Hundreds, considering Israel occupied Lebanon for years. 

Quote

How many Sunni Muslims has Hezbollah helped kill/or killed in just the syrian war?

Probably far more Sunni Muslims than israelis easily. 

Well, with the help of Syrian Sunnis, indeed Hezbollah killed lots of Wahhabis who were spilling into Lebanon with attacks and bombings. 

Quote

What group is the majority of Assad's personal ground forces? Probably conscripted Sunni Muslims, yh. Overall though, I wouldn't be surprised if the Shia militias and alawites and russians make up the majority of the ground forces. 

You constantly keep up with the version of reality that you create, not the way reality is. 

Quote

If Assad wasn't helped by Iran and Russia, then he probably would've ended up like Qaddaffi. Put him against the opposition and take away the opposition backers and the opposition would still probably destroy him in a few years time. 

It’s debatable considering the fact that hundreds of thousands of Sunni Syrians fight and die for him. Many Sunni tribes also support his rule openly because they benefit from it. But let’s say he wouldn’t be supported by any, considering the fact that they are supported by a constant flow of foreign Wahhabis, neverendless cash and arms flow from the Gulf countries, United States, United Kingdom and Israel, then indeed, no ruler could withstand that. That’s why he found allies in Iran and Russia, the game has to be fair. 

Quote

If the west truly supported the rebels like they do with the kurds, Assad wouldn't be alive. Throwing names like Israel and the US into the mix is just a way to deflect attention, sure once upon the Arab rulers and the US favour the rebels but that's long gone out of the window. And they never supported the rebels heavily in the way that Russia and Iran consistently do to Assad.

Because? Again, you said so? It is proven by Wikileaks that the US destabilised Syria long before 2011 and sought Assads’ departures because they refused to sign a peace treaty with Israel, that occupies Syrian Gillan Heights. 2011 is not more or less than another regime change on behalf of foreigners. 

On the other note, you people are such a hypocrites. When Bahrainis rose up against al Khalifas, who are not even native to the island and who truly change Bahrain’s demographics from Shia to Sunni, there was virtually a news blanket in Arab media on reporting about it, what’s more, Saudis crushed the peaceful protests with tanks. You all only talk about justice when it comes to you staying in power. I realised it long time ago. Unlike the “Syrian” opposition, the Bahraini one wants a fully democratic country with elected officials and freedom of religion for all, that includes Sunnis. 

Quote

Not all Shia support him but the majority I've met surely do. Of course all Shia alive went to Syria because that's just common sense? No one even said that. But what is also true is that 10,000s of Shia militia were recruited by Iran and sent to Syria. Hezbollah likewise sent thousands to fight on behalf of Assad. 

And all the Sunnis I met supported al Qaida and Taliban, and many were fascinated by Daesh and still are. You non-stop bring it up. Thousands of secularised, pan-Arab Baathist Sunnis from all over Middle East also went to Syria to fight for the Syrian Baathist Party. Some Shia militias act on behalf of Iran, others went there solely to protect the resting places of the Prophet’s family that were threatened with desecration and destruction. Show me a fatwa of a prominent alim from Najaf who issued a call to jihad in Syria. In contrary, the Najaf ulama ruled it not allowed for Shias to fight in Syria and many Iraqi militias did not go. It is not a religious conflict for us, but a mere political one. 

Edited by OrthodoxTruth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...