Sahabi's Body Exhumed in Syria

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22741588

i personally hate bashar, the rafidi hizbush-shaytan and iran with a passion; but the equally dejected jahil wahabi and israeli agent qaradawi's call, and the increasing Friday sermons and daily duas against bashar and iran (mentioning both bashar and iran by name openly) in mosques across the khaleej are indicators that a regional war is brewing. every kid knows that no imam in the khaleej can pray like that, talk about any political issue or criticize any government without directives from the authorities. they carefully pray for Quds, and against yahood; and for the Muslims of Syria, against bashar and iran;

where were these same prayers for the Muslims of Afghanistan or Iraq back in 2003? where was the call for Sunnis to stand up against the rafidi thugs of moqtada as-sadr and the occupiers? (or perhaps there might have been a few) where were the duas against the nasaaraa and amreeka?

no sir, they were absent then, and as obama sets out to supposedly make good with the Muslim world by his latest speech, thinking that people would have forgotten 2000's by now, these people start with these sermons and duas.

this is very reminiscent of the times of the Afghan war against the soviet union. for those who have a good memory, 'murrica actually loved and promoted 'gee-haad' in those days as did its puppets.

i think with the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq secure by direct engagement, Pakistan by mere support and bribery of corrupt idiots who can't speak Urdu, and the Arab spring having played out just as they wanted with newer puppets installed, this is the manner by which they will take control of the shiite-powered areas like iran, syria and lebanon, by their wahabi murids doing the engagement for them and fighting their war by recruiting innocent sheeple, to exert complete control and hegemony over the region.

history will probably repeat itself once more, and this time the afghan war will come home to the middle east - so i think.

i used to be under the illusion or confusion that maybe the syrian revolution might have been genuine or started off as being genuine, but now it seems there's more to it

 

Raqqah and Deir az Zor, and southern half of hassakeh, are very important provinces. They are largely peaceful, but they are under the direct control of extremists, even though their population is overwhelmingly Sunni, with ties in 'Iraq. Again, how did these regions, constituting a third of Syria, go so easily to wahabi control?

While at the same time, Kurds in northern Hassakeh seem to have an active resistance against wahabi control of their areas. And this resistance was comparatively immediate.

Clearly, someone is playing a chess game here.

 

There can be a rule of some wahabi group like the ikhwani, but the people will remain Sunni. Why do you think that the wahabi were so successful in the provinces of Deir az Zor, and Raqqah [ or those provinces were handed over to them by someone] ? When it is a fact on the ground that the largest extent of active Tasawwuf is actually among the arab tribes of those two provinces. And adjacent to them, Iraq is still Sunni despite all wahabi this or wahabi that and blowing up of tombs and tekkes. The Mufti of Iraq is a Rifa'i Sufi Sayyid Sunni. And almost all major scholars in that country, who are sincere.

It is comparatively easy to convert a wahabi into a sunni, as they are a fluid group of sects. Moreover, they use the same literary base as Sunnis, and they live among us. By nature, they are a group made to disappear in the future. History is proof of this. Present times also support this fact.

but resistance is inherent in shiism, which is a separate group of nations, and shiism persists for millenia, in mountain hide-outs. They cannot be converted without a Salahuddin Ayyubi or Uthmani to conquer and subsequently reason with them. History is proof of this.

The strongest, most united Sunnis in Arabia are the Iraqi Sunnis. Only they make armies to actively support the Sunni cause.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22669230

the rafidi head of hizbushaytan is seriously enjoying the conflict and wants to make an all out regional war out of it, and that's what probably will happen. i think some middle eastern national boundaries are about to be re-defined in the near future, either to rafidi advantage or maybe to wahabi advantage. it doesn't matter how Sunni or legitimate the rebels were/are, if at all. what is virtually certain is that should they (non-rafidi rebels) be victorious, any post-bashar government that comes to power, will most probably be wahabiized, and in cohoots with the khaleeji wahabi powers (lest Imam Mehdi's arrival is due). the alternative (rafidi influence) is even uglier. the Sunnis of the region are really stuck between 'Iraq and a hard place', as some local politician once remarked

considering the political damage to Sunni life and property in our times, between the two evils of wahabis and rafidis (or rafidi inclined pseudo-Sunnis), rafidis are an uglier and much more greater evil, so i feel.

 

a point of view: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nE2kMWNJomo

this is some news: FSA to stand by regime if israel attacks:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRNADB7UWdw

perhaps, FSA at least is not fighting for the imperialists.

Omar Bakri: Grave exhumed by syrian regime:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ymq3NTVWfaY

(btw, this is the most substandard 'debate' i've ever seen! Chandan, 'analyst' from london, is either paid or inexperienced. he appears in most all of these so called 'debates' on press tv and starts off with character assassinations and name-calling. along with the host who doesn't mind 'tch..tch..'-ing, they make omar bakri look civil!)

Wallahua'alam.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdTCiGfQhvg

James Fetzer, a professor emeritus at the University of Minnesota:

At 9:00 mins: Syria war is part of US-Israel plan to destabilize arab states, was on boards since 9/11.

At 16:00 mins:

Syrian war completely contrived. Nothing to do with freedom and democracy. At the onset where entire villages were being wiped-out, it was clear handiwork of mercenaries, to garner popular support for the war.
West's plans have been foiled. Israel has committed a major blunder by giving Putin an excuse to arm syria with missiles. Assad is to stay. After Afghanistan and Iraq the West has finally found a match in Syria so they're on back-foot.

-------------------------------------------

Louay al-Mokdad, the political and media coordinator for the FSA:

At 12:00 and after 16:00:

The West not intervening. should be ashamed. they've left us under brutality for two years, setting red-lines after red-lines which Assad keeps crossing. Heart-eating incident being used to portray the revolution as a civil war.

We have mobile-phone of this solider, he's recorded all these brutal murders and tortures he's done to women and children. It's after watching this that abu-saqqar was driven to commit this inhuman act.

At 22:00: How wahhabis leveraged the helplessness of syrian people. When you are under jet attack and scud missiles and someone comes to you offering to protect your house and children from military and mercenaries you don't ask him what's your belief? are you pro-ayman zawahiri?

-------------------------------------------------------

Rania Abouzeid, the Middle East correspondent for Time magazine:

6:00:
Syrian war can be called a Youtube-War. Its dehumanizing. Often, fighters are quite close and exchange insults before bullets.

West dithering about arming the rebels due to Jabhat-al-Nusra. FSA unorganized except locally.

----------------------------------------------


Back in 2011, a friend who was in damascus, was in touch with a student of shaykh buti (rahimahullah). He told me that people asked the shaykh about the atrocities being commited by the regime and his support for it and he replied that in due time you'll realize the correctness of my position. The real faces behind this revolution. Perhaps this is that time.

 

not arguing for or against anything. just pointing out that there used to be people who withheld from takfir of bashar (not alawis, just bashar) as apparently according to some reports, his father had converted himself and the family to Sunni Muslims

 

Sorry if it sounds odd or rude starting the post with 'And'. Initially I posted this response in the earlier Syria update thread post but later split it up to place this portion in this thread. Forgot to edit and remove the 'And'.

 

This issue is more complex than it is being made out to be.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GstDPRQ5GdI

People who previously refused to do takfir of Bashar or the Alawites now use that card. The Alawites were kafir before the revolution.

 

And I don't recall 'beating you down' previously. If I remember correct,I don't believe I was nasty or personal. I'm entitled to respond to any claims and defend what I believe is the truth. Anyway as I recall I avoided responding directly and it was another user who responded.

Brother M Sakti, there was no 'silence' from me. God is my witness. Alhamdulillah. There are plenty of others from whom a response could come from. Keep checking Free Halab blog or Shaykh Yaqoubi's facebook/twitter for example.

http://www.sunniport.com/masabih/showpost.php?p=42272&postcount=128

 

non-Sunnis do not have humanity generally among them, when they loose their senses. It is a historic fact. And it is an overwhelming fact.

Sunni Muslims still do overwhelmingly, and they are the kindest, and most considerate, and patient of all nations. There are still abuses from their side that are EXTREMELY FEW, this heart eating being just one case. But generally they do not kill women and children. It generally not in their capability, it is a historic fact and i can give you so many examples.

But, christians, alawites, druze, secular, extremists are known to be genocidal in nature. They do not distinguish between women, girls, babies, and grown men.

Sunnis do. It is definitely the love of RasulAllah salAllaho alaihi wa alihi wa sallam that is in our hearts that we have so less such cases of jahiliyya.

For example, during the crusades, the Crusaders ate Muslims alive. But Muslims did not eat Crusaders alive. Even if a Sunni Muslim ate a crusader here and there, but generally, no one ate their women and children, even though the Crusaders ate Sunni Muslim women and children, and left the ismailites and other shiites free roaming in the Levant.

The barbarity of the Shiites of Lebanon and Syria is a historic fact. They hate the Muslims the most. They are the biggest enemies of Sunni Muslims.

Homs is destroyed, but not the alawites areas in it and in their heartland. This is overwhelmingly against Sunnis, and this barbarity is still one sided, despite the fasad of the wahabis. This is my observation.

 

evil rafidi-shia dogs will seize any chance they get to bark their profanities towards any companion disregarding the acceptance of Islam at the Prophet's blessed hands...... right nawazuddin?

 

Reminds me of the famous inhuman barbaric act of Hind; when she did the same to our master Hazrat Ameer Hamza(a). seems like a continuation of that path.

 

This is not about Sunni and Shia. It is about ignorance and humanity. Nothing justifies these crimes from either side. People have lost their humanity..

Here is the actual video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIEBH2Kln1U&feature=player_embedded

This man apparently leads 'Sayyiduna Umar radiyAllahu anhu' brigade!!

And there are sick and disgusting massacres at Baniyas and Homs at the hands of the other group who have lost their humanity...Syria has been taken back to the days of ignorance when people would do such acts during war..

 

that is nothing compared to what the Shiite shabiha are doing. i have a picture of a baby girl, from a Sunni family, who was raped, and then her abdomen and legs burned, not even a 2 year old. mom was killed nearby, and siblings shot in the face and head, all girls

its from baniyas, on the syrian coast

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22523804

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22509646

any Muslim or Sunni revolution, if at all one existed, is officially over

the empire has taken over the revolution (if it wasn't covertly or overtly involved right from the start), and what ever comes next will only be bigger and better puppets unless the arrival of Imam Mehdi is due.

anyone (shaykh or not) who fools himself into thinking that any good will ever come out of kafir "support" can continue living in fairy floss land, but the reality is that nothing good will come for Islam or Muslims from the christian world

 

Conclusive evidence showing that the supposed picture of Sayyiduna Hujr bin ‘Aadi (Radi Allah ‘anhu) is in fact a princtscreen of a video produced by the opposition. The man in the video was martyred by regime warplane 2013-05-01:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFyst7A-AGo

Taken from:

http://seekerofthesacredknowledge.w...m-of-sayyiduna-hujr-bin-aadi-radi-allah-anhu/

 

nawaz said:

no i did not. i was quoting from dhahabi's siyar.

indeed, i have seen that in mustadrak and also in iSabah - but i did not want to rake up a quote which causes confusion for common people. people with a taste for reviling sayyiduna mu`awiyah will try to dig and post anything against him. we try to abstain because apart from what is documented, a lot of things are left undocumented. and the true picture of the entire event cannot be formed by one or two quotes.

for example, what was sayyiduna mu`awiyah's response after the rebuke of umm al-mu'minin?

-----------------------------------------------------------
perhaps you overlooked [or did not see] this from mustadrak of Hakim:

حدثني علي بن عيسى الحيري ، ثنا الحسين بن محمد القباني ، ثنا إسحاق بن إبراهيم البغوي ، ثنا إسماعيل ابن علية ، عن هشام بن حسان ، عن ابن سيرين ، أن زيادا ، أطال الخطبة ، فقال حجر بن عدي : الصلاة ، فمضى في خطبته ، فقال له : الصلاة ، وضرب بيده إلى الحصى ، وضرب الناس بأيديهم إلى الحصى ، فنزل فصلى ، ثم كتب فيه إلى معاوية فكتب معاوية : أن سرح به إلي ، فسرحه إليه ، فلما قدم عليه قال : السلام عليك يا أمير المؤمنين قال : وأمير المؤمنين أنا ؟ إني لا أقيلك ، ولا أستقيلك ، فأمر بقتله ، فلما انطلقوا به طلب منهم أن يأذنوا له ، فيصلي ركعتين ، فأذنوا له فصلى ركعتين ، ثم قال : لا تطلقوا عني حديدا ، ولا تغسلوا عني دما ، وادفنوني في ثيابي فإني مخاصم قال : فقتل . قال هشام : كان محمد بن سيرين إذا سئل عن الشهيد ذكر حديث حجر

​

sayyiduna Hujr acknowledged sayyiduna mu`awiyah as amiru'l mu'minin.

in another narration of Hakim:

رأيت حجر بن عدي وهو يقول : ألا إني على بيعتي لا أقيلها ، ولا أستقيلها سماع الله والناس
​

it is a well-known fact that imam Hakim had sh'iyi leanings.

=======================
​

but strangely:

for some reason i think the translation is not accurate, pardon my meagre knowledge of arabic.

however, the conversation does not end there - sayyiduna mu`awiyah asks her: 'how do you find me in other issues' and the mother raDiyallahu ta'ala `anhaa says: 'you are good' and he replies: 'then leave this issue between Hujr and myself in the presence of Allah ta'ala.'

-----
it should also be known that the isnad of this hadith is weak and interrupted. as ibn lahee'ah is a weak narrator [vide ibn kathir in his bidayah wa'n nihayah].

-----
also in bidayah of ibn kathir:

it is also reported that abd al-Rahman ibn al-Harith told mu`awiyah: "did you have Hujr ibn al-adbar killed?" mu`awiyah replied: "i found it better to have him killed rather than kill a 100,000 along with him."

ibn jarir [al-Tabari] and others have mentioned that Hujr ibn `adi and his company would speak ill of `uthman [ibn `affan] and would say unjust things about him - and would criticise other authorities [or rulers] and were foremost in rejecting or opposing them and were extreme in this. and they were close to the shiah of `ali and would take extreme positions in religion. [yatashaddaduna fi'd din]
​

-----
Allah ta'ala has vouchsafed our sinful hands from their blood - and we should keep our sinful tongues away from it.

Allah ta'ala knows best.