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

I told you all! (Situation in Pakistan)

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Pakistanis living in Pakistan tend to have a very difficult time hearing about sectarian issues within Pakistan. This is understandable, as white Americans have a hard time accepting they live in a prejudiced country as well.

Anyway, not even my own parents believe me when I tell them that "Muslims" in Pakistan hate Shias and want them exterminated. These rallies, death threats, pelting of stones at imam bargas is nothing new. We just have social media to document it now. Pakistan has failed its minorities because of the fundamental nature of its government: Democracy is punitive and oppressive, however, due to Pakistan being a cousin of British colonialism (India), Pakistanis swallow the democracy = freedom and equality cool aid.

 

If the Shia of Pakistan want to continue existing, they must abandon the notion that, "if we elect <x>, things will get better". Instead, they must work around alternatives. Think about the Shia of Awamiya for example. Saudi Arabia isn't a democratic society, so the Shia knew right away, from birth, that the ruling class is a dynasty that has been at war with the Shia. They do not think about "working within the system to resolve things". Colonizers cannot handle Muslim tactics, and Shia Islam is true Islam. If the maulvis in Pakistan really want to be put in their place, the Shia must use Muslim tactics that we see in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Awamiya, and Bahrain.

Lastly, I'll close by repeating a point I've made over and over again. The Shia of Pakistan need to work as a stateless entity. The Pakistani government works with terrorists in Afghanistan, Yemen, and Bahrain. It is haram to be associated with such bloodshed. It's disgusting to see this kind of patriotism in Pakistani Shias because I don't see it in Shias of any other group. Even the ones in Dearborn will tell you straight up, that their government oppresses them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Unless you are posting that from the kingdom of heaven you should be the first drop of rebellion. Practice what you preach. The Shia of the world should prioritize survival, be at peace, until the Imam reappears. Its from hadith. "Be like the newborn camel so none can milk you nor put a seat over you to ride you". Thankfully, our ulama and many of us know very well exactly what is going on in Pakistan and why and which forces want what. It were the Shia who created this country, the ones hating us that particular ideology driven mullahs voted for Gandhi. This is our country and with Allah's blessing we will fix it like always. Meanwhile get your stick ready and march out to attack the police outside free man.

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

Anyway, not even my own parents believe me when I tell them that "Muslims" in Pakistan hate Shias and want them exterminated.

With all due respect, this is extreme hyperbolic claim that Pakistanis want to “exterminate” Shi’ah.

The rise of sectarianism in Pakistan is due to the irresponsible behavior of a class of Shi’ite preachers who openly curse the most revered Companions of Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم

I recall Mufti Hanif Qureshi saying that we Sunnis could care less if the Shi’ah start sacrificing dogs on the streets and eating them. We will live and let live. But Sunnis can’t tolerate such blatant cursing and blasphemy against the Sahabah رضى الله عنهم

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

Think about the Shia of Awamiya for example. Saudi Arabia isn't a democratic society, so the Shia knew right away, from birth, that the ruling class is a dynasty that has been at war with the Shia. They do not think about "working within the system to resolve things". Colonizers cannot handle Muslim tactics, and Shia Islam is true Islam. If the maulvis in Pakistan really want to be put in their place, the Shia must use Muslim tactics that we see in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Awamiya, and Bahrain.

As I understand it, the Shi’ah of Saudi Arabia and Bahrain do not openly and publicly curse the Sahabah رضى الله عنهم, which is why there are few sectarian riots and rallies against the Shi’ah in those countries.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
18 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

As I understand it, the Shi’ah of Saudi Arabia and Bahrain do not openly and publicly curse the Sahabah رضى الله عنهم, which is why there are few sectarian riots and rallies against the Shi’ah in those countries.

How many times do you need to hear this? Ziyarate Ashura has been read for the past 74 years. Why is it this time you have an issue with it?

And yes There have been MULTIPLE suicide bombings in Suadi Shia mosques and Kuwaiti Shia moque. Not riots just blood bath bombings. Cursing has nothing to do with it. Just in Karachi there have ben TENS of Shia Mosques bombed. 

No Pakistani Shia is dumb enough to curse the Caliphs. 

Edited by pakistanyar
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, pakistanyar said:

How many times do you need to hear this? Ziyarate Ashura has been read for the past 74 years. Why is it this time you have an issue with it?

The issue is with a TV station publicly broadcasting it and its recitation in public over loudspeaker, provoking the sentiments of Sunni Muslim majority.

Also, I don’t think that particular incident was the spark of the strong reaction. The real spark were the statements of Hamid Raza Sultani and Asif Alvi, along with dozens of local incidents in which Shi’ite preachers and laity were booked for blasphemous statements against Sahabah رضى الله عنهم through social media (Facebook, Twitter).

I believe the long term solution for rising sectarian friction in Pakistan is for the Shi’ah community to practice their particular rituals in private or in purely Shi’ite areas where there is no significant Sunni presence.

Why do the Shi’ites go out of their way to take out processions that pass before Sunni mosques and predominantly Sunni areas? This is similar to how the Protestants mischieviously provoke Catholics in Northern Ireland with their street processions to mark the 17th century victory of William of Orange at the Battle of the Boyne. The Protestants go out of their way to ensure their processions march through predominantly Catholic areas of Belfast. That has usually been the spark for sectarian violence in Ulster, and likewise, the Shi’ite processions in Muharram are usually the spark for sectarian violence in Pakistan.

Edited by Cherub786
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, pakistanyar said:

And yes There have been MULTIPLE suicide bombings in Suadi Shia mosques and Kuwaiti Shia moque. Not riots just blood bath bombings. Cursing has nothing to do with it. Just in Karachi there have ben TENS of Shia Mosques bombed. 

Those attacks are not carried out by mainstream Sunnis, but by Kharijites (AQ, IS) whom we don’t even regard as Sunni. And these bloody Kharijites target Sunnis too, as well as other sects (Ahmadis, Isma’ilis, Sufis). Remember the 2017 Sinai mosque attack, that was a Sunni mosque. Likewise, don’t forget the outrageous and sacriligeous 2016 suicide bomb attack on the Prophet’s Mosque in Medina. Kharijites have no shame, they will attack any Mosque, even the Prophet’s Mosque.

Quote

No Pakistani Shia is dumb enough to curse the Caliphs. 

The atmosphere of strong Sunni reaction and rising sectarianism in Pakistan is in response to cursing and defamatory remarks about sayyidina Abu Bakr رضى الله عنه by some of your popular preachers (Hamid Sultani, Asif Alvi).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

It's quite sad that Muslims still call other Muslims kaffirs, ready to often kill them at times for it. Clearly illustrating the moral and social decay of Pakistan in this era. 

I stand with my Shia brothers and sisters, and pray that this affair ends so that they can continue to live peacefully. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
19 hours ago, Cherub786 said:

 

The rise of sectarianism in Pakistan is due to the irresponsible behavior of a class of Shi’ite preachers who openly curse the most revered Companions of Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم

رضى الله عنهم

That's called, blaming the victim.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 9/14/2020 at 6:30 PM, Cherub786 said:

The issue is with a TV station publicly broadcasting it and its recitation in public over loudspeaker, provoking the sentiments of Sunni Muslim majority.

Also, I don’t think that particular incident was the spark of the strong reaction. The real spark were the statements of Hamid Raza Sultani and Asif Alvi, along with dozens of local incidents in which Shi’ite preachers and laity were booked for blasphemous statements against Sahabah رضى الله عنهم through social media (Facebook, Twitter).

I believe the long term solution for rising sectarian friction in Pakistan is for the Shi’ah community to practice their particular rituals in private or in purely Shi’ite areas where there is no significant Sunni presence.

Why do the Shi’ites go out of their way to take out processions that pass before Sunni mosques and predominantly Sunni areas? This is similar to how the Protestants mischieviously provoke Catholics in Northern Ireland with their street processions to mark the 17th century victory of William of Orange at the Battle of the Boyne. The Protestants go out of their way to ensure their processions march through predominantly Catholic areas of Belfast. That has usually been the spark for sectarian violence in Ulster, and likewise, the Shi’ite processions in Muharram are usually the spark for sectarian violence in Pakistan.

LOL at comparing the loyalists to the Shias when Shia struggles are closer to the IRA side from all angles. [Lol], yer a wizard Cherub786

Edited by Hameedeh
[edit]
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/15/2020 at 1:42 PM, MuhammadFreeman said:

LOL at comparing the loyalists to the Shias when Shia struggles are closer to the IRA side from all angles. [Lol], yer a wizard Cherub786

I only compared the provocative loyalist marches to the Shi’ite processions, it’s not a broad comparison but a very restricted one. The loyalists/unionists are by and large good people. Loyalty is a coveted quality.

And I’m shocked that you have praised the struggle of the IRA, a struggle of terrorism, separatism and sectarian violence, and tellingly compared it to the “Shi’ah struggle”.

Edited by Hameedeh
[edit] in the quote.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
16 hours ago, Cherub786 said:

I only compared the provocative loyalist marches to the Shi’ite processions, it’s not a broad comparison but a very restricted one. The loyalists/unionists are by and large good people. Loyalty is a coveted quality.

And I’m shocked that you have praised the struggle of the IRA, a struggle of terrorism, separatism and sectarian violence, and tellingly compared it to the “Shi’ah struggle”.

I don't know why you think Ashura processions, juloos, or other Shia gatherings can be compared to militant marches in Ireland/Occupied Ireland. The point of Ashura is that it's a religious duty, Shias are taught that it is a day of mourning as early as possible. It has the moral equivalence of prayer. You obviously don't have a clue about either struggle. The struggle of the IRA was to get Britain to leave, because Britain imposed a cruel reign of terror. Bobby Sands won a democratic election while being interned in a concentration camp. The Irish Republicans understand Muslim tactics. because they straight up used them and I revere them greatly for it: hunger strike, prayer, remembering their martyrs and writing/singing anthems about them, and being afraid only of their creator.

Your views really do match those of Muslims in the United Kingdom, which is shame, because even the most influential Muslim leaders want nothing to do with British Muslims, they got the most colonized minds I've ever observed in a person of color.

I presume the reason Pakistani Sunnis in political authority feel threatened by the Shia is because they turn out crowds about four times the size of their political rallies that pay people to attend them 

https://twitter.com/republicansf/status/1213562698631397376

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
2 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

No, they are sayyidina Abu Bakr as-Siddiq, Umar al-Faruq, Uthman b. Affan and the Ummahat al-Mu’minin رضى الله عنهم

Unfortunately, Some people openly curse them. 

Most Marja's say its Haram to do it openly. So we can maintain the peace between each other and when (I have seen these people) a Shiite curses Abu Bakr, etc, The Person will counter and Curse Imam Ali (عليه السلام) (Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) forbid me and every person from doing such a thing). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MuhammadFreeman said:

I don't know why you think Ashura processions, juloos, or other Shia gatherings can be compared to militant marches in Ireland/Occupied Ireland. The point of Ashura is that it's a religious duty, Shias are taught that it is a day of mourning as early as possible. It has the moral equivalence of prayer. You obviously don't have a clue about either struggle. The struggle of the IRA was to get Britain to leave, because Britain imposed a cruel reign of terror. Bobby Sands won a democratic election while being interned in a concentration camp. The Irish Republicans understand Muslim tactics. because they straight up used them and I revere them greatly for it: hunger strike, prayer, remembering their martyrs and writing/singing anthems about them, and being afraid only of their creator.

Your views really do match those of Muslims in the United Kingdom, which is shame, because even the most influential Muslim leaders want nothing to do with British Muslims, they got the most colonized minds I've ever observed in a person of color.

I presume the reason Pakistani Sunnis in political authority feel threatened by the Shia is because they turn out crowds about four times the size of their political rallies that pay people to attend them 

https://twitter.com/republicansf/status/1213562698631397376

I don’t believe any kind of marching or procession has been made a religious duty in Islam. I don’t even think any major Shi’i scholar or “marja” has ruled that taking out a procession is wajib.

On the other hand, these processions are comparable to the marches in Northern Ireland because they provoke sectarian sentiments and usually descend into communal rioting. Just as the Loyalists make it a point to march through Catholic areas in order to celebrate their triumph over the latter, the Shi’ites make it a point to have the route of their procession pass Sunni mosques and get as much public exposure as possible.

Regarding the struggle of the IRA, it was based on terrorism, indiscriminate bombing, and target killing of “collaborators”, British military officers, and Protestant political figures opposed to them. Keep in mind, the Protestants were, and perhaps still are, the majority of Ulster. The majority of the people of that country are loyal to the Crown and are unionists. They are some of the most loyal British citizens. They have no desire to unify with the Republic of Ireland and I don’t blame them. So on what basis can it be said that the struggle of the IRA was (the main faction and Sinn Fein have given up violence long ago) legitimate?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Just now, Cherub786 said:

No, they are sayyidina Abu Bakr as-Siddiq, Umar al-Faruq, Uthman b. Affan and the Ummahat al-Mu’minin

Who was Umar married to? two women from the bani Umayyah. Who was it that placed abi Sufyans children in positions of power? I think he was called Uthman, wasn't he?
I might toss in an excuse for abu Bakr. He was a person that was easily swayed as in the case of Fadak where he at first admitted that the prophet(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) gave the land to his daughter Fatima Zarah(عليه السلام) but as soon as Umar heard of that he put an end to that. Abu Bakr was pretty much under the influence of Umar.
How did Umar convert? was he sincere in his heart? well He was in with the abi Sufyan lot and he had decided to kill the prophet(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) :dwarf:    :woot:   But what happened then? He met someone, Nu'aym ibn Abdullah, who had converted in secret and when Umar told him where he was going and what he was going to do, the man told Umar that he better go back an check with his own family. Umar rushed back only to learn that his sister and brother in law had converted to Islam. Umar was furious and beat up his sister, but he stoped by the sight of his sisters blood. The he gave it a thought and decided to convert also. Umar did not convert out of conviction, but out of loyalty to his family. This is all in Ibn Ishaq, so I am not making it up.

Abi Sufyan had been against the prophet from the very beginning. He was instrumental in the conflicts of Badr, of Uhud and the trench. abi Sufyan and his sons did not convert until the Muslim armies conquered Mecca. Only two years before the death of the prophet. So how convinced do you really think they where when they converted? They did not have any other choice unless they would have chosen martyrdom which they wouldn't. They had a lot of property in Sham that they didn't want to lose. Umar later send them to conquer Al Sham because they had property there and connections and they build it into their power base from where they would later rule the Khalifa.

You may revere the Rashidoon Caliphs, but Umar and Uthman was in cahoots with abi Sufyan and conspired with abi Sufyan and his children to grasp power, use the Muminin as "cannon fodder" and create their empire. I will give you so much that this may have been necessary in order to spread Islam, but that doesn't change that those who ran the Khalifa except for Imam Ali(عليه السلام) was not good Muslims. In fact they was the polytheists of Mecca.

The Ahl Ul Bayt on the other hand was different. Ali ibn abu Talib(عليه السلام) was the first male convert to Islam and the most pious an knowledgeable after the prophet(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) Fatima Zarah bint Mohammad(عليه السلام) was the second convert after her mother Khadija and the most pious and knowledgeable of the Muslim women. She even gave Khutba's and she was teaching Islam. What better lineage could there be to transmit the Sunnah of the prophet? It is through their of spring the Sunna of the prophet(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)  has been preserved. Without the Ahl ul Bayt there would have been no Islam.

The 2x great grandson of Iman Ali(عليه السلام) and Fatima Zarah and the 3x great grandson of the prophet(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) Imam Jafar Al Sadiq(عليه السلام) is the source of both Sunni and Shia Fiqh. He founded the Jafari Madhab. It was pupils of his, Imam Abū Ḥanīfa and Imam Malik ibn Anas that founded the two Sunni madhabs Hanifi Madhab and Maliki Madhab. A third student of his Sufyan al-Thawri went on to found his own Madhab, that didn't really catch on. A fourth student of his Grand Shaykh Mawlana Tayfur Bayazid Bastami went on to found the Naqshbandi Sufi Tariqa.
The two remaining Sunni Madhabs, the Shafi Madhab and the Hanbali Madhab evolved from the Maliki Madhab. So even Sunni Islam owe it's fiqh, theology and mysticism to the progeny of the prophet(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم).

Edited by Revert1963
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
23 hours ago, Cherub786 said:

No, they are sayyidina Abu Bakr as-Siddiq, Umar al-Faruq, Uthman b. Affan and the Ummahat al-Mu’minin رضى الله عنهم

There is no Islamic basis for requiring Muslims pay respect to those people. They were fallible human beings who made some questionable decisions as military tacticians, and not as Muslim leaders.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
23 hours ago, Cherub786 said:

I don’t believe any kind of marching or procession has been made a religious duty in Islam. I don’t even think any major Shi’i scholar or “marja” has ruled that taking out a procession is wajib.

On the other hand, these processions are comparable to the marches in Northern Ireland because they provoke sectarian sentiments and usually descend into communal rioting. Just as the Loyalists make it a point to march through Catholic areas in order to celebrate their triumph over the latter, the Shi’ites make it a point to have the route of their procession pass Sunni mosques and get as much public exposure as possible.

Regarding the struggle of the IRA, it was based on terrorism, indiscriminate bombing, and target killing of “collaborators”, British military officers, and Protestant political figures opposed to them. Keep in mind, the Protestants were, and perhaps still are, the majority of Ulster. The majority of the people of that country are loyal to the Crown and are unionists. They are some of the most loyal British citizens. They have no desire to unify with the Republic of Ireland and I don’t blame them. So on what basis can it be said that the struggle of the IRA was (the main faction and Sinn Fein have given up violence long ago) legitimate?

A juloos does not descend into communal rioting in parts of the world where Sunnis are not the majority. For instance, the Dearborn Muslim community is of a Shia majority, which is why nobody has ever come in with the Shia kafir garbage. You're snitching on yourself if you don't condemn your fellow Sunnis congregating against Shias, calling for genocide, throwing rocks at mosques, etc, but you instead choose to call out fellow Muslims who wish to mourn the passing of the prophet's grandchildren, without saying a word about Sunnism (I've never heard a nauha, nat, or anything in Shia poetry to date which calls for extermination of Sunnis, or labels them kafir)

Also, in Pakistan it's impossible to take a stroll anywhere without passing a Sunni mosque, so I doubt it's a deliberate effort on the juloos' part. I'm terrified you have this ideology though, what's next, "don't pass by my house or I'll shoot you"?

The IRA exists as a reaction to the kidnapping and internment of their own nation. Why do you think a majority of Northern Ireland voted against Brexit? For the same reason they seem to want to stay in Britain: because they're afraid of resistance. The new IRA is not, and the British media refuses to listen to their perspective. Notice how comments are often disabled on BBC's coverage of the IRA and Northern Ireland.

Besides, it's not like the atrocious British empire would respect their desire to have their own nation anyway, a look at Palestine is a great example of this. They would go ahead and pursue their own interests in the region anyways.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 9/14/2020 at 6:42 PM, The Green Knight said:

Unless you are posting that from the kingdom of heaven you should be the first drop of rebellion. Practice what you preach. The Shia of the world should prioritize survival, be at peace, until the Imam reappears. Its from hadith. "Be like the newborn camel so none can milk you nor put a seat over you to ride you". Thankfully, our ulama and many of us know very well exactly what is going on in Pakistan and why and which forces want what. It were the Shia who created this country, the ones hating us that particular ideology driven mullahs voted for Gandhi. This is our country and with Allah's blessing we will fix it like always. Meanwhile get your stick ready and march out to attack the police outside free man.

I agree with your message. You don't know what kind of resistance or path that I'm on so don't make assumptions. Mentality matters a whole lot. Shias in Pakistan have tried to resist before. It was the moon sighting incident which you all downplay as "an Indian media spin"

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Development Team

The zakirs in Indo-Pak never openly curses but dig out history and expose enemies of Ahlulbayt (عليهم اسلام). It's their oratory which gets shias excited and sunnis riled up. Unable to stand the truth they target shi'as trying to silence them. All oppressor does this mistake. You cannot silence us. We have been targeted for centuries and here we are, in every part of the world, narrating merits of Ahlulbayt (عليهم اسلام) and doing Azadari of Aba Abdillah (عليه السلام). 

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

The IRA exists as a reaction to the kidnapping and internment of their own nation. Why do you think a majority of Northern Ireland voted against Brexit? For the same reason they seem to want to stay in Britain: because they're afraid of resistance. The new IRA is not, and the British media refuses to listen to their perspective. Notice how comments are often disabled on BBC's coverage of the IRA and Northern Ireland.

Besides, it's not like the atrocious British empire would respect their desire to have their own nation anyway, a look at Palestine is a great example of this. They would go ahead and pursue their own interests in the region anyways.

Ulster is not a nation that belongs to IRA. Like I said, the Catholics are a minority there, and not all of them are Irish nationalists or republicans either. If the British left Ulster and handed it over to the Republic of Ireland, it would be a huge betrayal of the people of Ulster. Might even lead to a bigger crisis of terrorism and political turmoil. The British don't just have a right to continue to govern Northern Ireland as part of the UK, but a moral obligation to do so.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
20 hours ago, Cherub786 said:

Ulster is not a nation that belongs to IRA. Like I said, the Catholics are a minority there, and not all of them are Irish nationalists or republicans either. If the British left Ulster and handed it over to the Republic of Ireland, it would be a huge betrayal of the people of Ulster. Might even lead to a bigger crisis of terrorism and political turmoil. The British don't just have a right to continue to govern Northern Ireland as part of the UK, but a moral obligation to do so.

Now you're talking about the British "right to govern", [edit], this is real rich coming from a Pakistani. Could make mad skits out of this mate

Edited by Hameedeh
Inappropriate langugage
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, MuhammadFreeman said:

Now you're talking about the British "right to govern", [edit], this is real rich coming from a Pakistani. Could make mad skits out of this mate

The British have a right to govern their country. Why would anyone object to that? What does being Pakistani have to do with anything?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 9/19/2020 at 12:09 AM, Cherub786 said:

The British have a right to govern their country. Why would anyone object to that?

 

On 9/19/2020 at 12:09 AM, Cherub786 said:

What does being Pakistani have to do with anything?

The traumatic partition of India into India and Pakistan is a British divide and rule strategy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
On 9/16/2020 at 2:36 AM, Cherub786 said:

Hamid Raza Sultani and Asif Alvi.

Asif Ghalvi declared in a court of law that he is not Shia when Shia ulema filed a complaint about him for speaking non-muslim things from the pulpit. Before his inflammatory speech in Islamabad that sparked reaction his visa for UK and tickets for a flight hours away were ready well in advance. He used to sell paan and cigarettes then became a 'zakir'. But personally I blame the incredible jahalat of Shia masses. If the calf of Samari was on pulpit saying what piques their interest they would revere and exalt it and follow it blindly. Since recent years some of us have been fighting this new fitna, this new religion/subsect, alerting people how foreign ambassadors gave briefcases full of money to individuals whose names are on paper and the whole plot, and now they are fulfilling the purpose it was created for.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Revert1963 said:

The traumatic partition of India into India and Pakistan is a British divide and rule strategy.

Actually, we Muslims demanded the British partition India and create Pakistan. The British would never have done so if nearly a hundred million Muslims didn’t demand it.

Divide and rule was a Godsend. If the British didn’t divide us, Muslims would have a weak religious identity and would be nearly Hinduized.

As for the IRA, they stand defeated for decades. The British presence in Ulster is welcomed by the majority of its people, who consider themselves British and are fanatically loyal to the Crown. Irish nationalists should move to the Republic of Ireland.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
21 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

The British would never have done so if nearly a hundred million Muslims didn’t demand it.

Actually it is Hitler, his bombs and his U-boats, the monumental paddling the empire took in WW2 which convinced them to withdraw in peace. More importantly, if given the opportunity and the economic elbow room the gora sahab would return as the master race once again. To be fair they should be commended for some things they have given the region too, in particular the railways and logistics systems and things the indians would have remained simply unable to build for themselves autonomously even by now. They did however leave behind their language in the education system which is still mandatory to learn, and other things like tea addiction, brown sahab, feudals and fake democracy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, The Green Knight said:

Actually it is Hitler, his bombs and his U-boats, the monumental paddling the empire took in WW2 which convinced them to withdraw in peace.

I wasn’t speaking about the British decision to quit India, but their decision to partition it. Had the Muslims not demanded Pakistan, the British would obviously have left India intact.

Therefore, it is totally unjust to blame the British for dividing India. We Muslims demanded such a division, and rightfully so. The British are to be commended for listening to us and giving us Pakistan.

Quote

if given the opportunity and the economic elbow room the gora sahab would return as the master race once again. 

And what’s wrong with that? British colonial rule was certainly superior to the regimes that rule our independent Muslim states today. If the British intend to ever return, I for one would welcome them with open arms. They would be our deliverance from the oppression and tyranny of our own rulers. What difference does it make if a ruler is indigenous to the country or a foreigner? What matters is the quality of rule.

Quote

They did however leave behind their language in the education system which is still mandatory to learn, and other things like tea addiction, brown sahab, feudals and fake democracy.

English is the language of the world. We South Asians have an advantage of the English language as a colonial legacy, as compared to those unfortunate other nations which were ruled by the French, Spanish, or any other thus not inheriting English. Look how handicapped the Chinese are because they can’t speak English.

Tea addiction, I don’t know what to say about that. The British didn’t force us to drink tea. If tea truly is something bad, we should control our own habits instead of blaming them for introducing it.

Feudalism and fake democracy, again, we have to blame ourselves for our own failure. We’ve been independent for over seventy years, how long will we blame colonialism for our own failure and stupidity?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
On 9/14/2020 at 5:45 PM, Cherub786 said:

With all due respect, this is extreme hyperbolic claim that Pakistanis want to “exterminate” Shi’ah.

The rise of sectarianism in Pakistan is due to the irresponsible behavior of a class of Shi’ite preachers who openly curse the most revered Companions of Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم

I recall Mufti Hanif Qureshi saying that we Sunnis could care less if the Shi’ah start sacrificing dogs on the streets and eating them. We will live and let live. But Sunnis can’t tolerate such blatant cursing and blasphemy against the Sahabah رضى الله 

This is akin to waiving the fake red bloodied shirt of Caliph Uthman and shouting "revenge for the murder of Uthman" at Jamal and Siffin.

Shias have been getting killed ever since Saqifah.

Moreover, Sunnis label the Moshin of Islam Hz. Abu Talib as kaffir (istaghfirullah). We don't go out killing sunnis for it. I guarantee this started well before any $2 shia zakir said anything.

Violence is in the nature of our Sunni brethren ever since the illegal Ridda wars.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ShiaMan14 said:

This is akin to waiving the fake red bloodied shirt of Caliph Uthman and shouting "revenge for the murder of Uthman" at Jamal and Siffin.

Shias have been getting killed ever since Saqifah.

Moreover, Sunnis label the Moshin of Islam Hz. Abu Talib as kaffir (istaghfirullah). We don't go out killing sunnis for it. I guarantee this started well before any $2 shia zakir said anything.

Violence is in the nature of our Sunni brethren ever since the illegal Ridda wars.

Why didn’t sayyidina Ali رضى الله عنه object to the Ridda Wars if they were illegal?

And here’s the final nail in your coffin: Never mind objecting to the Ridda wars, why did sayyidina Ali al-Murtada رضى الله عنه actually participate in these wars under the order and authority of his Imam, sayyidina Abi Bakr as-Siddiq رضى الله عنه?

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

how handicapped are they?

They’re losing the international media war for one thing – badly I might add.

I’ve seen Chinese people here in Canada struggle with speaking English, unlike South Asians. It doesn’t help that their mother tongue isn’t an Indo-European language either. This also explains why most Arabs have difficulty learning and speaking English too.

Edited by Cherub786
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.

×
×
  • Create New...