/islam/ - 8kun Masjid

>>23585

I agree as long as we reject the vast bidah of Ibn al-Qayyim and reject most, if not all, of the works of Taqī ad-Dīn Ahmad ibn Taymiyyah. These two have caused great division and harm with their bidah.

Question: How does a given Household become accepted as "Sunni Leaders"?

At some historical point every current "Sunni Leader" Household overthrew a previous "Sunni Leader" Household. So if rebelling against a Sunni Household is illegitimate and a nullifier of one's membership in the sunni jaamat then are not all of these regimes of today similarly illegitimate? If not, then why not?

>>23590

That's not really the topic. Nevertheless, I'm not salafi. But my problem with the modern "anti wahhabis" polemicists is that they become anti-Arab and anti-Saudi Arabia. So they let politics take over the discussion, even though both salafis and asharis should agree on politics since they both claim to be ahlussunah wal jamaa, even though they exclude on another when it comes to the subject of sifaat.

>are not all of these regimes of today similarly illegitimate? If not, then why not?

That's not the reality we deal with so it's not relevant. The modern leaders achieved power after foreign occupation(specifics differ between countries). But the key point like I said was that we do not condone or support rebellions against the muslim leaders.

>>23592

second part directed to >>23591

>>23585

Hmm. Well, I follow the jurist and mufassir Abd-Allah ibn Ibadh. All this politics mess gives me a headache.

>>23595

>muh madkhali boogeyman

Sorry but you're arguing against the established orthodox sunni view. The Madkhali tribe does not come into the picture.

>>23592

I have no idea what you're talking about tbh

>>23598

That pic gave me a chuckle.

>>23595

>people who use the khawarij boogeyman so much

Well maybe if the khawairj stopped resurfacing we could stop having to write it into our aqeedah texts like Al Tahawi did 1200 years ago.

>better be backed by some dalil

Congratulations you know about the word dalil. Perhaps now you should try to figure out what it means. I'll give you a tip, I provided "dalil" when I quoted as proof a 1200 old text accepted by every sunni scholar since then.

>>23592

>That's not the reality we deal with so it's not relevant.

I think it is relevant, because if a state celebrates its own Revolution every year but then says Revolutions are haram, that is not a satisfactory argument.

>The modern leaders achieved power after foreign occupation(specifics differ between countries).

Unless these foreign occupiers were non-sunnis I don't think that makes any difference from a Sunni fiqh perspective.

>But the key point like I said was that we do not condone or support rebellions against the muslim leaders.

How does a given Household become accepted as "Sunni Leaders"?

What does "unless they order to commit sins" mean in your quote? Does this mean they can turn the country into a pig farm and brewery but so long as they don't forcefeed people khmar and khanzeer everything is fine?

The criticism I have seen from Mamlaka Saudiyyah of modern day khawarij state building projects is:

1.) They hide their face when performing hadd punishments.

This is done in south east asian muslim countries and was never an issue before.

2.) We don't know where the leaders live.

This smacks of the Mamlaka not accounting for the weapons of modern warfare. There argument is basically "tell the people you are fighting how to kill your leaders."

3.) They will "lose."

This becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy if muslim states not only refuse to help muslims, but actively cooperate with countries like Iran, America, and Russia that support Shia war against Sunnis.

I do wish that America gave most of Iraq to Saudis. But that wasn't what happened, America gave the country to Iran. And yes, Mamlaka Saudiyyah complained about it, but there was no action taken. Absolutey no Sunni country to this day entered Iraq and shielded our brothers who were being bombed and starved for the past thirty years.

The Sunnis of Iraq were loyal to Saddam Hussein despite his volatile unjust rule. Why have all the neighboring Sunni countries abandoned the Sunnis of Iraq to be destroyed by rawafid armies? Why is there no accountability here for the Sunni households that were content for the Iraqi people to be so desperate they accepted a radical group?

>>23600

The text is not what i'm disagreeing with and the dalil i'm asking for is about Al Saud not the scholars of this Ummah, besides if you want to extract and direct ruling from these texts you must realise that there are always exceptions, exceptions which Al Saud has broken many times.

My skepticism resides within you and how you apply this rule not what the scholars have said.

>>23601

>The criticism I have seen from Mamlaka Saudiyyah

None of what you mentioned is the primary issue. The khawarij in question make takfir of the rulers accusing them of hukm bi ghayr ma anzal Allah(ie the definition of the khawarij) and murder muslims(civilians, border guards, police officers, etc.) meanwhile a lot of their leaders are sitting protected by the mushrikun in the west.

>to be destroyed by rawafid armies?

The only ones fighting the rawafidh today are Saudi Arabia.

>>23603

>(ie the definition of the khawarij)

That's not the definition of a khawarij lol, the khawarij make takfir for great sins.

And it's unironically what the "leaders" of the Muslim world do today except maybe for Saudi Arabia and countries who similarly apply shari'a.

By completely abolishing the shari'a and imposing man made laws they become kuffar by the consensus of scholars.

>>23602

>The text is not what i'm disagreeing with

Clearly you are.

>is about Al Saud

They are the aimmah(leaders) of saudi arabia, ie a large portion of sunnis. Khuruj is haram as per sunni belief end of.

>there are always exceptions

Nothing valid to sunnism.

A historical fact we must not forget is that Aal Saud is far less oppressive than early leaders were in the time sunni creed was codified. So where's the exceptions? Nowhere.

The only way you can argue for khuruj against Saudi Arabia is to use the EXACT same LITERAL argument used by the khawarij to whom the refutation of al Tahawi was mentioned in the first place! As in, hukm bi ghayr ma anzal Allah. So tl;dr you are using the dalil of the khawairj not those of ahlus sunnah.

>>23605

>the khawarij make takfir for great sins.

The definition of khawarij is that they rebelled against the muslim leaders. This was called "kharaja 'ala" -> thus they are called khawarij.

You mentioned rawafidh but then you ignored it after I pointed out that the only ones fighting them is Saudi Arabia. That's because ht, isis, al qaeda etc are all empty rhetoric when it comes to kuffar, and are only interested in murder muslims.

>>23605

>By completely abolishing the shari'a and imposing man made laws they become kuffar by the consensus of scholars.

This applies to you as well:

>The only way you can argue for khuruj against Saudi Arabia is to use the EXACT same LITERAL argument used by the khawarij to whom the refutation of al Tahawi was mentioned in the first place! As in, hukm bi ghayr ma anzal Allah. So tl;dr you are using the dalil of the khawairj not those of ahlus sunnah.

So to summarize:

The original khawairj made takfir of the muslim leaders using the justification that they rule by other than what Allah revealed. As a response to this the Sunni scholars wrote in their aqeedah text REFUTING this saying we do not make KHURUJ on the aimmah.

Fast forward to the 21st century and what do we have? """"sunnis"""" using the exact literal argument by the khawarij to stipulate an "exception" to the REFUTATION OF THAT VERY ARGUMENT BY SUNNI SCHOLARS 1200!! years ago.

>>23607

>You mentioned rawafidh but then you ignored it

Check userids please.

>That's because ht, isis, al qaeda etc are all empty rhetoric when it comes to kuffar, and are only interested in murder muslims.

HT is rhetoric, that's all they ever claimed to be. The other groups do fight shia, you are not informed to say otherwise. AQ fights Shia in Syria and ISIS fights them in Iraq and Syria. We need facts straight.

This is an academic website that shows media releases from all these extreme groups.

www.jihadology.com

You can even search it by the group and it shows who is fighting who.

And yes, I give Saudi and some other countries credit for trying to help in Syria. Saudi was fighting Shia there too. I wish they'd done that in Iraq.

>>23610

Listen here you I didn't come to make the blind see or the deaf hear, but to point out that you and your ilk are as sunni as the "sunni" who makes takfir of Abu Bakr(ra).

I have summarized it well here, the idiocy of the modern day crypto-sunni khawarij >>23611

>>23613

>We need facts straight.

The facts are that muslim countries have weekly murders by these groups meanwhile iran is safe. Ashidda'u a'la al-mu'mineen.

no personal insults of other muslims

>>23617

>Listen here you مارق ملعون, I didn't come to make the blind see or the deaf hear, but to point out that you and your ilk are as sunni as the "sunni" who makes takfir of Abu Bakr(ra).

What a spotless refutation

>NO personal insults / flames.

>REPORT ad hominem, do NOT respond. This is a MASJID.

My point is that shoehorning anyone that uses the non appliance of shari'a as proof against the rulers of today's iman is into this khawarij boogeyman is not smart.

Making takfir on the non-application of the shari'a for even one rule is halal and any Muslim who does so is 100% within their right, people conflict it with kharijism because it's so widesepread today so they suddenly stand back in fear insulting anyone who has enough courage to do so (takfir in this case).

Though i try to stay consistent and as i've said the non-appliance of shari'a is not what people hate Al Saud for, you're the one who went there.

>>23621

>What a spotless refutation

I've written seven posts against you. All you're doing at this point is ignoring me and repeating your same argument copy pasted by the khawarij.

>>23616

I do not envy you this task, brother.

>>23585

saudi arabia is not legitimate they are slaves of usa and israel and should be replaced by a true islamic state inshallah

madkhalis pls go

Any ruler that does not rule by the Shari'a is a kafir full stop. Unfortunately, a lot of Muslim majority countries are not ruled by Shari'a, Tunis, Egypt, Jordan etc.

Re: Kurdistan

Anything that takes away territory from Iran and Iraq should be be supported by Sunnis. A Kurdish state may start out as some gay murray bookchin zionist anarchist state but could become a religious sunni state in the future inshaAllah.

>>24072

But aren't we hoping that Iraq will also become a religious sunni state in the future?

>>24075

There are pockets of Sunnis around baghdad but they have been massacred and deported from our medieval capital of Baghdad. Baghdad is now jointly administered by USA and Iranian 12'er rafidis in Greenzone and Muqtada AsSadr's rafidi slum city known as Sadr city.

Iran and USA are too powerful in the region for sunnis to take back control in near future. Best thing would be a split of the country since it is basically a colony given to Iran by its secret friend, USA.

Three years ago I had hoped ISIS would be able to maintain peace with commie Kurds. But within a year the peace fell through. If commie kurds and Isis had ceasefire it would have been best. But USA promised big money to kurds to start fight with Isis.

So at this point there would have to be a split of the north of Iraq (kurd) and the rest (sunni) from the southeast controlled by USA and Shia death squads since they welcomed the invasion.

>>24075

Short answer: not possible until al-ahzab Air Forces leave. This is Sunni vs al-ahzab not just sunni vs those who curse Companions and Wives of Prophet saw.

>>24072

No, a state founded on falsehood can never succeed nor become a state of haqq.

It is based on secular democracy, the KDP is the largest party. Islamist parties have little traction and with the rise of nationalism there is little chance kurdistan will be islamist.

There is a reason why westerners support kurds, because they are secular, pro "womens rights" and pro lgbtq rights

>>24081

The Ottoman khilafah became a gayjew secular state. And now the soviet friendly sykes picot and colonized states have become more conservative in many ways. Things can change.

I don't think the "founders" (really zionist beggars) of Kurdland will become practicing en masse, but rather that their bizarre belief system of homosex and anarchy will have no traction in reality - therefore collapse - inshaAllah.

>>23673

>>23655

Since you don't have the attention span to read the thread I'll quote the summary

>The only way you can argue for khuruj against Saudi Arabia is to use the EXACT same LITERAL argument used by the khawarij to whom the refutation of al Tahawi was mentioned in the first place! As in, hukm bi ghayr ma anzal Allah. So tl;dr you are using the dalil of the khawairj not those of ahlus sunnah.

>>24087

This is wishful thinking, dont you know that if you give them part of iraq and iran they will want part of syria and turkey (sunnis) also? Pic related, how the americans plan to divide the middle east>>24087

>>24076

>to Iran by its secret friend, USA.

I have remarked on this before and it shows how naive the average sunni is. The american media, or rather the entire world, is focused on how the evil Saudi Arabia is spreading "wahhabism" and supporting al qaida(whose main objective is to get rid of Aal Saud), but meanwhile Iran's freaking OFFICIAL(!) foreign policy is to export terrorism in the name of "the islamic revolution" and irani military officials are on tv saying that they've conquered the four sunni capitals and are re-establishing their persian empire as we speak, but no one gives a sugar about this because Arabs are evil etc etc israel something something and that's how it goes.

>>24102

Idc about territorial integrity of Syria because it was created by France and is ruled by Alawi and 12'ers and Russia.

Idc about Turkey's territorial integrity because Erdogan is a giant fake out that didn't do anything good for the Ummah.

That being said I'm way more sympathetic to Turkish borders than Syrian ones, obviously.

>>24104

http://syrianobserver.com/EN/Features/33314

you sound like a kurdish nationalist tbh

you want civil war among sunnis then you have bad intentions for sure

>>24108

short term yes, but long term is the starvation of kurds and destruction of their cities

this will only bring more sunni deaths

>>24109

I see your point. Let us both make dua that the muslims can emerge from this rafidi-salibi nightmare.

It's hard to think longterm when the rawafid are bringing in rafidis from around the world to fight in their death squads. Meanwhile naive Sunnis are terrified of their own mujahideen and governments are torturing them. Once again it is incumbent to ask: how did we get here? Total failure of sunni leaders worldwide who are paid off by Iran, Russia and America.

>>24110

The sunni leaders are the only ones doing anything concrete to keep of the irani threat. If by "mujahideen" you mean the khariji groups then they are too busy murdering sunni security guards. al qaida etc will never ever be able to take on iran let alone america or russia.

Assalamualaikum brother i hope you are in good health.

Regarding on Al Saud government. Didnt the leader of the government of the prophet Muhammad (SAW) be chosen by musyawarrah (by discussion between votes of society and/or representatives)?

1) Since Saudi Arabia is a monarchy, wouldnt that be a deviation from the fundamental Islamic government?

Forgive my lack of references, but doesnt the prophet Muhammad (SAW) taught us to not fight anyone as long as it does not break the rules of Islam?

2) Hence in any kind of government, wouldnt it be logical to fight (not through physical abuse) a leader that does corruption or anything that breaks the rule as an honest Muslim?

>>24112

wa aleykum assalam

1. No. There's nothing inherently unislamic about monarchy. Kingship is mentioned in the Quran as being the sunnah of some Prophets, and it was what the caliphate became quite early on, in the time of the sahaba(ra) even. If you say Aal Saud is wrong then you have to start invalidating the entire muslim history.

And as for the term khalifah itself then it has not come predefined with a bunch of law books. Linguistically a king can be a khalifah. And you see in hadiths mentioning khalifah, in some variations of the same hadiths it says ameer instead, which means the narrators did not undersand khalifah as being something inherently different.

The idea that only the one who has authority over the entire muslim world himself is the legitimate leader leads to circular reasoning if you think about it. Because who is the one who controls the muslim world then? The one to whom everyone gives bayah to. But who does everyone give bayah to? Well the one that controls the muslim world. But since no such one single person exist, and the only way for such a person to even come about is by one faction giving bayah before the rest of the world does, which again would make him illegitimate, it all invalidates itself and crumbles.

And we must also be a little bit realistic here. Because someone will perhaps bring a fatwa out of context, which is from a completely different time. And that person might say "well uhh the law of Allah does not change so it shouldn't matter" well no, but politics change, and the reality of the world changes. So political opinions and fatawa can not be just taken out of context. That's what isis are doing with ibn Taymiyya's fatwa which was specific to that circumstance so it's clearly a misuse.

2. There are explicit hadiths about not fighting a muslim leader even if he is oppressive, because it will just lead to even greater fitnah, and this was also the position the salaf took. Even though there were a lot of fitnah during that time the four imams for example did not call for wars and fight, and they prayed behind those oppressive leaders in salaat nonetheless without making takfir etc.

This is as far as rebellion goes. I'm not sure what you mean by without physical abuse. Instigating fitnah is just as bad.

>>24111

>The sunni leaders are the only ones doing anything concrete to keep of the irani threat.

If sunni leaders want to help they would mobilize like they did during atheist invasion of afghanistan. Without the $﷼ from the leaders our mujahideen become "terrorists", because terrorism is the war of the poor, and war is the terrorism of the rich. What drove the wedge between rulers and mujahideen was threats and $﷼ from Imperialist powers.

30 years - no help for our brothers in iraq.

Iran has internationally recruited irregular shia militias, why don't we have ONE sunni country with ONE internationally recruited irregular militia?

Give me legit answers, open up, or i write you off as arguing in bad faith.

>>24113

>But since no such one single person exist, and the only way for such a person to even come about is by one faction giving bayah before the rest of the world does, which again would make him illegitimate, it all invalidates itself and crumbles.

>invalidates itself and crumbles

Weew.

Not an invalidation, whatsoever that some make bayah before others. Please read Osmanish history. Whole sunni world was never under Ottoman control, still the legitimacy grew and became widespread - from very humble origins!

>>24114

>Give me legit answers

You're basically asking me how come Saudi Arabia doesn't mobilize a war against israel, america, iran, russia at the same time. Jeez I dunno man, tough question. Maybe because it would be suicide? But hey, that is what al qaida want, a complete mayhem in the muslim world since this according to them will bring forth al mahdi and you know how that narrative goes. But I think muslims should live in the real world and not the fantasy that HT and co. has set up.

As for shia then they're supported by the entire world and all shia are loyal to their leaders meanwhile sunnis compete with each other in who can display the most hatred for Arabs. The average sunni has bought into the shia propaganda.

>>24115

>Not an invalidation

You clearly did not understand my point. Re-read what came before that which you just quoted. I'm arguing against those who say that the only legitimate leader is the one who controls the entire muslim world, and since no such person exists, that must mean that none of the leaders of today are legitimate -> everyone should murder everyone in the muslim world. If you admit that you do not need to have the authority over everyone to be a legitimate leader the the discussion is over since there's nothing anymore to invalidate the legitimacy of the sunni leaders we have.

>>24116

>You're basically asking me how come Saudi Arabia doesn't mobilize a war against israel, america, iran, russia at the same time. Jeez I dunno man, tough question.

No, I'm very aware of the reality of USrael dominance. I don't expect suicide from saudi, but do expect some fronts against Iran, Russia. That was a strawman then, brother.

>As for shia then they're supported by the entire world

True since their entire history is stabbing Islam in the back.

>and all shia are loyal to their leaders

Dude the last 40 years has seen the shia overthrow literally all their leaders and some of ours too. Syria: nusayri coup against UAR; Lebanon: they are loyal to a militia not the country's leaders who they assassinate; Iran: overthrew Shah; Yemen: revolution; Iraq collaboration with US and Iran to overthrow….

They are loyal only now since their leaders are revolutionaries dedicated to the cause of ruining Islam.

>The average sunni has bought into the shia propaganda.

Sadly true, ikhwan al-muflisoon is responsible for this shiaization of aswj too.

>>24117

>but do expect some fronts against Iran, Russia.

I'm not sure what exactly you mean. But from experience most I talk to who say these kinds of things like "uhh saudis are puppets man they support israel blah blah" I ask them ok what should they do and they can't say anything concrete. They just expect miracles basically. But anyway I agree with your post.

The ikhwan muslimeen did nothing wrong

I have a quick question. Is Syrian Grand Mufti a sugare or sunni?

>>24127

on paper he is sunni but most likely a shii or alawi doing taqiyya

here he is doing shia propaganda, ahlbayt tv is iranian sponsored

>>24127

He claims to be "sunni and shiite". In other words, he's a toolbag that trades in nonsense. And he's a criminal apostate that fights muslims.

>>24128

I'm sure he has joined ithna ashariyya rawafid.

>>24131

commie kurds are bad news for everyone, in the long run it will hurt turks more than iran or iraqi rawafidh

reason im against kurdistan is the instability it will bring

saudi is next dont think the usa will stop there

wow new low

>>24133

>1

Do you curse the sahaba?

Do you curse the wives of the Prophet saw?

Do you think the 12 imams were created before Adam pbuh?

Do you think that being an imam is a better station than being a prophet?

If you answered yes to any of these questions you are not a muslim. If you answered no to any of them you are not a shii.

>>24137

I literally said I'm not shia though.

>>24133

Iran cooperates with USrael in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are junior allies with Israel, Russia, US, etc. If you don't see that then you probably think pro-wrestling is real. Naive sunnis like you are the problem.

>>24134

The concept of "Turkey" is turkness. I don't see that as a desirable, justifiable, or even viable basis for organizing a state. Turkey can't come out on top as an ethnic state, if it wants to make itself relevant and serve as an alternative to commie kurds it must offer an islamic solution - an islamic raison de etat.

>>24139

Their beef is with Israel, not the US specifically, though they either don't understand that US interests are beholden to Israeli ones or that they are adamant about making the distinction between the two, considering the US's superior military might. They've always been willing to negotiate with the US on political matters. I don't believe the same could be said for Israel.

And it seems that their involvement in Afghanistan was minimal at best. Staying out of the way and talking a bit with Massoud's men hardly seems to be a gamechanger to me.

>>24138

You also said you're not sunni just "muslim" so it's impossible to take you seriously. This is not kindergarten, we have to deal with the fact that there are deviant groups that ascribe themselves to Islam and distinguish ourselves from them.

Please don't take any offense, it seems like your heart is in the right place. Let me put it this way: if youre not sunni or ibadi then you should come clean and we can try to help you get back on track… More likely than not you are a self-hating Sunni who has been conditioned to disparage and doubt his own existence. We can help you if that's the problem too.

>>24140

>beef is with israel not US

>They've always been willing to negotiate with the US on political matters

So what's with all the "Death to America" chanting, "Great Satan" stuff? Just hollow propaganda? Exactly.

>not a gamechanger

It wouldn't be if they didn't pretend to hate America as they help them conquer countries.

>>24141

I don't ascribe to a particular denomination or sect of Islam because the Prophet (pbuh) did not do so. The people who followed Muhammad (pbuh), and knew him personally referred to themselves as muslimeen and mumineen, not "sunnis" or "ibadis" or even as ahl as-sunnah.

>>24142

Israel is the real threat, America is merely their puppet in that regard. Same as most of Europe, same as the Saudis/Gulf states, same as the Kurds.

>>24144

>How do you make salah?

As it is described in sahih hadith (bukhari and muslim)

>>24143

>The people who followed Muhammad (pbuh), and knew him personally referred to themselves as muslimeen and mumineen, not "sunnis" or "ibadis" or even as ahl as-sunnah.

Yes and the companions(ra) transmitted what they knew to the next generation and to the next and the people who inherited this legacy became known as the four imaams in fiqh who make up ahlussunnah.

>As it is described in sahih hadith (bukhari and muslim)

You mean you read through the hadiths on prayer yourself and then wrote up how to do it? Seems more likely you learned it through fiqh manuals.

>>24147

The report from ibn Abbas(ra) is not authentic from what I've read. But it doesn't matter, ahlussunnah is used to ascribe oneself to the muslim community. But it appears he doesn't want that, which is understandable if he thinks that the entire muslim world is nothing but kuffar-puppets(which he's gotten from the irani propaganda machine). So talking about aqidah and salat isn't really going to change anything if he's on a political level with the rafidha.

Wait, so you reject a term for not being from time of prophet but accept ahadith from Imam Muslim and Imam Bukhari, Ahl as sunnah Imams that were born 200 years after Hijrah?

>>24148

I guess he's religiously orthodox (sunni) but politically shia. That'd be fine if this was 1400 years ago, but the Shia used the tragic fitna as a chance to change the religion - that's the problem. The mutazila used logic to change Islam and the shia used emotionalism to change Islam. The shia have been much more successful since emotionalism is inherently manipulative and caters to the lowest impulses of the people.

>>24139

1. turkey isnt based on ethnicity, kurds, arabs, laz, greeks, assyrians all live in turkey and are considered turks

2. turkey does have an islamic solution they are becoming more islamic,

3. kurdistan does NOT offer 1 islamic solution, they will be even more secular than turkey

>>24156

The way I see it both saudi and iran are working for the interests of USA and Israel. Iran does it more covertly and in secret.

Saudi hosts american bases and helps them bomb muslims. The fact that al saud support kurdistan is not a good thing, in fact israel also supports kurdistan.

Obviously our support means nothing, but I think you are not seeing the full picture here. Its not as easy as kurd vs iran

its kurd + israel + saudi vs iran vs turkey and syria

I would include syria as a sunni state not shia even if its controlled by the rawafilth, the ppl who will suffer under kurdish commies and are right now are SUNNI ARABS not nusayris or majos pagans

>>24158

Saudi doesn't have any american bases

>bombs muslims

You mean irani backed houtis in Yemen?

>>24147

>What do you reject from Sunni Islam besides the term?

Functionally nothing

>>24149

>I guess he's…politically shia.

I wouldn't say that exactly. It's just that, as far as I can see, Iran's foreign policy is actually painting them simply as the least of all the evils in this conflict.

They helped out our brothers in Bosnia with their jihad against the Serbs.

They're the only ones Israel seriously considers a threat.

They're trying to unite themselves and the shia under one bloc while everyone else is busy killing themselves and fermenting further conflict at Israel's behest.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/01/austrian-burqa-ban-comes-force/?entry1=push&entry2=auto&uc_msg=gcm%271735521053049360384%270

Absolutely disgusting.

May Allah guide and protect us all.

>>24160

Hey what happened to this:

"I was a staunch defender of the kingdom irl and online for many years but this is has finally broken my back. I'm done forever carrying water for them and support the death of House of Saud." ?

saudi and iran are equally bad, saudi represses sunni islamists movements and iran kills sunnis

saudi also helped usa against iraq and they do host bases until now

I can never side with israel, I would fight israel if it means siding with hezbollah

>>24191

what was the pic

>>24128

Can you prove it or are you talking out of your ass?

>>24208

Thats funny, because it's the sunni countries that are pro-america

>>24209

It's amazing how people will lie to themselves just to maintain their own false narratives. Alright you've torn the face off your strawman. No one ever said SUNNI PUPPETS are anti-US. Iran is not either - it's just indifferent towards the zionist project and hypocritical for its harsh PR against it. In Iran the war against Israel is just an abstraction like the "War on Drugs", it's a campaign issue at home and pablum for its client states & shia slums of the Arab world. We can denounce sunni puppet states all day for being US lapdogs but most countries in the world are, including Iran. Remember when Iran mourned 9/11 and helped US invade two countries???

Israel is the political iron lung for Tehran. The Shia are degenerates that love to use Palestinians in their passion play for political points.

Every muppet knows that southern Iraq is basically controlled by Iran. Why would America hand out Iraq and Afghanistan (to some extent) to Iran?

The answer: America NEEDS Iran. America needs secterian heretic Shias who will serve as a meat canon of shrieking self-mutilating idolators against a Sunni uprising. Iran has been used against Sunnis for hundreds of years. The Ottomans that selflessly sent shipments of food to starving Irishmen had to contend with the same problem that we face today.

Shias and Anti-American cheerleaders of the Shias will always point out how America puts sanctions on Iran, shot a nuclear scientist, etc. These facts and the empty rethoric of Iran (speech without action i.e. 'Marg bar Amrika') make it seem (especially to laymen and conspiracy freaks) that Iran is indeed the enemy of America. While the ongoing collaboration between these countries against Sunnis debunks it.

So the only correct stance to take is the middle path, which is that although the old guard Iranians might sincerely hate America and that Neocon scum is not keen on the mullahs, it is a dysfunctional relationship rather than truly hostile. They are like an abusive husband (USA+ISRAEL) and a bitch wife (Iran) that are going to stay together for the sake of the kids(Shia statelets in the sunni heartland).

Alliances between states do not require meetings, ambassador exchanges or declarations of support. Mutually understood interests that the parties act upon are sufficient. Clearly the relationship between Iran and USA is undeniable now on the ground so the theatre has become absolutely absurd…. remember when Netanyahu was in Washington DC talking about another "holocaust" and this time with "Persian bazaars" LOL.

Tldr: Iran's strategy is to give enough support to shia militias to destabilize sunni communities, pay lip service to being anti-Zionist AND leave enough funds for tacky dresses, nose jobs, and transgender surgeries.

Also, Iran was historically a sunni scholarly bastion and for political reasons 500 years ago their religion was forcibly changed. Since then they have no islamic intellectual value, their 'religion' is sugar-tier.

>>24211

Also don't forget how Iran never participated in a single war against Israel.

Saudi even risked putting an Oil embargo against US (literally the only country that has put any kind of sanction against US) and its allies, knowing that US could invade it. Still Saudi is the villain that even so-called Sunnis criticize all the time, and suddenly Iran which hasn't done jacksugar for Islamic cause apart from fueling civil wars in Sunni countries is the "best" muslim country.

>>24211

>>24212

Hmm. What about their use of Hezbollah as a proxy in Lebanon?

>>24216

The very people - Iranian clients - that have been in geographic/materiel position to attack Israel for decades are waging war on their sunni citizenry. If Bashar hadn't been a (for lack of better term) abject wuss he would have opened a way for volunteers to establish a front against Israel at some point during his long tenure. Turning the Golan heights into an exurb of Gaza City would have made him a popular leader throughout the entire world. In large part he was simply not sufficiently anti-zionist for Muslims or zionist enough for Jews.

Syrians will tell you what would happen to them if they were to try taking arms and fighting Israel: the regime would arrest them. So if you were a Syrian, Assad was the first obstacle you encountered on the path to Jerusalem. Bashar is panicked enough since the uprising to import fighters from around the world… Why he didn't do that earlier against Israel just shows he's unfit.

Hezbollah only fights Israel when Israel enters Lebanese territory. Which means they haven't fought Israel in 11 years and when they did it was just a week-long skirmish. That's it. The main purpose of hezbollah is to kill sunnis in Iraq and Syria. Mainstream and well-known formerly pro-Hezbollah islamic scholars like Yusuf Qaradawi have admitted that they were wrong to support Hezbollah.

For your own sake and for the ummah you must not be naive. You must not be deceived by the totally exposed taqiyyah of the 12'er rawafid.

Shia slaughtering Sunnis in Syria.

Shia slaughtering Sunnis in Iraq.

>>24222

Israel isn't exactly weak; it's no wonder there hasn't been a serious effort against them since the 70's: They've used all those American tax dollars and AIPAC lobbyists over the decades to great effect. Assad and every other country is more concerned with preserving their own slice of clay over fighting Israel.

But really, this just reinforces the idea for me that there is no "good side" in this crapheap of a conflict. I'm just settling for anyone that even marginally opposes Israel at this point; something Iran at least has the appearance of doing unlike Daesh, the Salafi oil barons and their assortment of US funded and CIA-trained militias.

>>24233

Proto-Isis actually sent some people to attack Israel almost a decade ago and they were killed by hezbollah. That's when Zarqawi called them the border guards of Israel. No one is saying that there should be a conventional war against Israel at this point in time. Assad should have just let volunteers come to open irregular fronts.

Qatar and Turkey support HAMAS…..And the argument that isis doesnt do anything against Israel falls pretty flat when you look at a map. "The Arab rulers shoot you in the back before the Israeli shoots you in the chest."

It seems like you're more anti-zionist than pro-muslim. And it also seems like you'll justify how shia talk big against Israel and then don't attack. Also, besides USA the biggest zionist country is Russia. Russia will never let its shia pets touch Israel.

>their assortment of US funded and CIA-trained militias.

You mean the FSA? The tiny militia with no anti-aircraft capabilities that has been wiped out? You're really going to compare that to the SAA, Iranian military, and shia militias that span the whole middle east? You're not genuine, whatsoever.

Tufayli, Founder of Hezbollah: Hezbollah Now is Just Border Guards for Israel

Tufayli exposes Iran and America using shia as useful idiots against muslim.

Elsewhere he has said Shia need to stop killing Sunnis on Russian and American behalf or Sunnis will eventually wake up and wipe them out. He's right.

>>24234

>Proto-Isis actually sent some people to attack Israel almost a decade ago and they were killed by hezbollah. That's when Zarqawi called them the border guards of Israel.

When exactly did Al-Qaeda ever attack or try to attack Israel?

>And the argument that isis doesnt do anything against Israel falls pretty flat when you look at a map.

How so? They're too busy blowing up civilians of all religions, fighting literally every one besides Israel and getting handily btfo'd in the process. That's what the maps say.

The Daesh Khawarij and Al-Qaeda are the same dog, it's just that one still has it's leash.

>Also, besides USA the biggest zionist country is Russia. Russia will never let its shia pets touch Israel.

Proof? Honest question, Is Russia supplying billions of rubles worth of money and materiel to Israel?

>It seems like you're more anti-zionist than pro-muslim.

I see two major barriers preventing a unified ummah. The zionists are one. Unfortunately, muslims themselves are another. We don't have our priorities straight. Lines in the sand, drawn up a hundred years ago by British and French oath breakers at the behest of their zionist friends. Cutting deals with any disgruntled sheikh or would be king, carving up the corpse of the Ottoman empire to secure oil for themselves and land for the rich zionists embedded in their governments. That's where the real loyalties lie. Not to Allah swt, not to the deen or to further the station of our brothers.

Hell, at least the Israelis have the excuse of not being muslim. Saudi and the rest of the gulf states don't even have that excuse. All that oil money, squandered on hotels and beachfront properties and expensive cars and making Masjid al-haram look like something out of a dystopian sci-fi novel, while muslims elsewhere starve and suffer. But they certainly have enough cash to spare to drop bombs on masjids and hospitals in Yemen and fund their lackey groups to do the same everywhere else.

Iran and Assad may not be the answer, but you cannot convince me that the Sauds are any better.

But you know what? That's not even the Sauds fault that muslims find themselves in this situation. It's the culture. It's a new era of jahilliyah and backwardness.

Where does the practice of Bacha bazi fit in Islam? Of retaliatory rape of a criminal's family? Of honor killings?

>Indeed, Allah will not change the condition of a people until they change what is in themselves. And when Allah intends for a people ill, there is no repelling it. And there is not for them besides Him any patron.

It's easy and accurate to blame the zionists and the west for our troubles, but they wouldn't even be an issue if we still had our deen.

Rawafidh still keeping up with the taqiyya.

>>24273

He could be a poltard. To quote a wise brother from here who made an observation:

''We tend to get /pol/acks pretending to be Shi'a because they've latched on to Shi'a as allies to the West while Sunni are the enemy. They have no idea how it really works and, when pressed enough, they expose themselves as knowing nothing about Islam except what they've learned

from memes.''

Speaking of memes.

>bacha bazi

Outlawed by Taliban, encouraged by American-Shia government.

>honor killing

From European colonial law, antithesis of sharia trial and haram from sahih hadith.

>retaliatory rape

Alleged to have happened twice. No proof, likely fake news.

>our deen

Says the guy who refuses to call himself sunni. What deen are you even talking about? Some people think deen means cursing sahaba, worshipping infallible imams made of light, damning wives of prophet to Hell, praying 3x a day, and making temporary marriages. And you are happy to stand among those people, fine, don't be expected to be taken seriously.

And I'm anti-12'er. Some shia are fine like the Zaydis. They just had a political disagreement with ahl us sunnah. That's cool. They didn't use politics as a chance to change the deen like the 12'ers did.

12'ers made up their own definition of ahl ul bayt where they reject the wives despite clearly in Quran the wives are ahl al bayt. And they reject most of the progeny of Hassan and Hussein. For instance where did the evil rawafid split from zaydi shia?

Zayd ibn Ali ibn Hussein Ibn Ali was abandoned by his fighters because he told them to stop cursing the sahaba and how much he loved the sahaba. They said he was no longer Imam and left him to die alone. That's how rawafid 12'er shia treat ahl ul bayt. Then they said they took a new Imam, Jaafar. They lie and didn't claim him until after his death. His grandfather was Abu Bakr! They believe their Imam cursed his own grandfather to hell. And this is when they began wholesale fabrication of their religion and Jaafar's students like Imam Malik and Imam Hanifa warned the people against them and their lies and considered them outside Islam.

>>24271

>I hate liberal sunni countries

>I hate conservative sunni countries

>I hate radical/extreme sunni fighting groups

>>24161

>I reject functionally nothing from Sunnism

Umm ok.

>>24271

>I only care about Israel, I wish it was the 90's again.

>I don't like the clocktower in Mecca, the saudis should give away more money. But if they give away money they're just spreading their evil version of Islam… evil saudis always evil!!

>>24272

>I'm anti-sykes picot, the radical sunnis who are also anti-sykes picot are dogs!!!

And Russia is not so wealthy to support Israel as liberally as US does with cash but they do it in other ways. In raw bodies. 1 million plus Israelis are full RUSSIAN CITIZENS. Russian is #2 language in country. Israel is Club Med for American and Russian Jews, wake the Hell up. Even Goddamned Iran forced Russia out of their Iranian airbase lastyear because they hardly trust Russia.

This name fag admittedly a cool islamic mongol name just screams poltard.

>deen

Wow. To some "Deen" means waiting outside a cave in Iraq with Vimto and dates for some hiding Imam in a cocoon… that's their deen. You need to describe matters in precise terms or refrain from discussing this issues.

>>24271

>Hell, at least the Israelis have the excuse of not being muslim. Saudi and the rest of the gulf states don't even have that excuse. All that oil money, squandered on hotels and beachfront properties and expensive cars and making Masjid al-haram look like something out of a dystopian sci-fi novel, while muslims elsewhere starve and suffer. But they certainly have enough cash to spare to drop bombs on masjids and hospitals in Yemen and fund their lackey groups to do the same everywhere else.

>Iran and Assad may not be the answer, but you cannot convince me that the Sauds are any better.

this

>>24274

>Some shia are fine like the Zaydis

then why do u supporting bombing them in yemen? arent they considered muslim civilians ?

>>24306

Because they have accepted 12'er leadership becoming a proud proxy and many have become 12'ers. And if they weren't fought in yemen they'd be sent to syria and iraq to fight sunnis there just the same as how Iran sends poor shia from india and elsewhere to kill sunnis in those lands.

Just because we consider the zaydis to be a kind of muslims doesn't mean we let them take over a sunni government. Why don't you ask them to extend sunnis the same courtesy?

>>24307

seems like your making up excuses to justify killing MUSLIM civilians

I agree that houthis are terrorists but still, it sounds a lot like what assadists say

>>24274

>Outlawed by Taliban, encouraged by American-Shia government.

>From European colonial law, antithesis of sharia trial and haram from sahih hadith.

honor killing was around since the time of jahilliyah? I'm not disagreeing that it's haram, I'm just pointing out that it's become a part of the culture

>Alleged to have happened twice. No proof, likely fake news.

I dunno, Reuters seems like one of the more reliable outlets to me

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-pakistan-rape/pakistani-council-orders-revenge-rape-of-16-year-old-girl-idUSKBN1AC1DL

Of course they were punished for it, but it's troubling that it was even culturally acceptable to begin with

>Says the guy who refuses to call himself sunni. What deen are you even talking about? Some people think deen means cursing sahaba, worshiping infallible imams made of light, damning wives of prophet to Hell, praying 3x a day, and making temporary marriages. And you are happy to stand among those people, fine, don't be expected to be taken seriously.

I disdain the label sunni because I see myself as simply muslim, not identifying with any sect. Although I disagree with the muslims that refer to themselves as shia on many matters, both political and theological, they are still my brothers in Islam. I don't see our differences as something worth killing each other over. I understand that sounds naive, but I sincerely believe that we as muslims should be better than to destroy ourselves over such petty squabbles. What's going on is no different than what happened to those before us. The christians had the same schisms, fought the same battles between themselves. As have others before them. Such labels only serve to divide us, weaken us, and strengthen our enemies.

>>24313

shias are untrustworthy but so are saudis imo

>>24275

>This name fag just screams poltard

Please don't lump me in with that white nationalist hugbox. Yes, I admit, I sometimes browse there and post on occasion, but that's only because I can't help saying something when I see something truly ignorant said about Islam. Besides, on rare occasions, (even rarer still since the US election) I sometimes see an actual intelligent and informed discussion.

>>24316

Please focus your posting here so we can grow the community. We have a commie thread, a trini thread, etc. We have a pol thread too somewhere.

I realize it takes all kinds to have an ummah so I'm not mad at you. What I will say is:

1) I don't think that Mecca projection is accurate at all, looks like agitprop, they'll probably do a lot more underground too. They need to keep expanding the masjid surely you agree.

I like the clocktower. And the Prophet saws would not want building mosques on top of graveyards which is what was going on in Baqi. No graves were disturbed, just the improper structures.

2.) Israel is not a centralized hivemind. There are currents in Israel that are pro-Assad and currents that are anti-Assad. Israel is at the end of the day highly opportunistic and there is a huge confluence of factors at play both in their land and abroad.

>>24370

BO please ban this kafir christian pork

What do Muslims think of the Frankfurt School and Cultural Marxism? Is it just another plot by Zionists to destroy our values?

>>24835

yes

>>24838

They don't even try to hide it.

Writing from a Chechen brother in Syria

http://www.chechensinsyria.com/?p=25526

>>25006

haqq cannot mix with batil o madkhali deviant

>>25028

The next time someone declares a khilafah in a flat open land I hope to Allah swt they have peer or near peer air defense capability and they are rational actors, not provocateurs. I hope they focus on local issues, diplomacy, and defense - not attack literally large part of world at same time! And war is very violent yes… new idea: don't film every single time you execute a prisoner! HasbunAllah wa niimal wakeel.

Might be another problem with Alacrity. Making this post since, for some reason, it seems to fix those problems.

>>25035

>pretending to not realize the absurdity of this

It's not that absurd. The only reason Saudi doesn't fund ISIS is because they went independent after their break with Al-Qaeda, who do receive funding from them. Again, the Daesh Khawarij and Al-Qaeda are the same dog, it's just that one still has it's leash.

And that's not discounting the possibility that there may be individual sympathizers/covert funders within the Saudi establishment, even despite the border clashes they've had with Daesh.

>>25046

What post are you even replying to and why don't I see it? Just a delayed reply?

>It's not that absurd. The only reason Saudi doesn't fund ISIS is because they went independent after their break with Al-Qaeda, who do receive funding from them.

Wrong. Not even Qatar helps AQ or IS and they are the most liberal in their funding. This is Syria-girl level thinking ie " any sunni with a beard who is against Assad is AQ or ISIS ". Saudi (and Turkey) are favorable towards FSA and Ahrar al-Sham. That's it. They war against Daesh and they scheme, plot, and disrupt against HTS.

>Again, the Daesh Khawarij and Al-Qaeda are the same dog, it's just that one still has it's leash.

There is no central AQ for more than a decade, just some guys who have basically been absorbed into various national-based uprisings/insurgencies. You think you're being clever by using buzzwords like Daesh and AQ but you're clearly against any kind of legitimate Sunni military outfit such as Saudi Coalition in Yemen, Taliban, FSA, HTS, Ahrar al Sham etc. So… what's the deal? Do you even understand that even USA government officially says that AaS and Taliban are not "terrorists"?

You're an ignorant parasite who takes his religion from the shuyukh and imams of ahl as sunnah yet in matters of war takes the opinions of the rejectionist enemy. So the teachings passed on through ahl as sunnah and our ulema are haqq but our lives and property are worthless. I spit on your face, worthless dog.

Key points:

1) Saudi and Turkey are open about who they fund, stop watching Alex Jones and browsing /pol/ like Berke admitted he does

2) Ahrar and Daesh have fought eachother now for 3 years because ISIS was just another sunni fighting group but became khawarij when they made takfir on all muslims who refuse to make bayah to their day old caliphate. Saudi and Turkey would not fund two groups that fight one another. Notice how Berke admits this but then gives his own rhetorical spin to "well they would fund them if…." It's a totally bogus statement - that amounts to "if they weren't khawarij then they'd be funded…" WELL NO sh*t!!! They are khawarij, spare the rhetorics about "leashes."

3) Notice how Berke regurgitates mainstream/social media tropes and acts like "AQ" (kek) and Daesh are the only ones fighting Assad. There are many sunni groups in Syria that are good practicing muslims and have the backing of mainstream Sunni countries/scholars. Fighting jihad is not "radical" or "terrorist" it is part of Islam. What the khawarij do when they attack non-combatants and other muslims is fasad and dhulm not jihad. We can condemn the khawarij and distance ourselves from them and clarify the difference. That doesn't mean jihad stops.

Beware this ignorant worm named Berke! Guard your religion against him. He is a slavegirl of the Hezbollah and Russian Airforce.

>>25047

>>25048

>There are many sunni groups in Syria that are good practicing muslims and have the backing of mainstream Sunni countries/scholars. Fighting jihad is not "radical" or "terrorist" it is part of Islam. What the khawarij do when they attack non-combatants and other muslims is fasad and dhulm not jihad. We can condemn the khawarij and distance ourselves from them and clarify the difference. That doesn't mean jihad stops.

Every single one of the groups of "good practicing muslims" you mentioned also attack non-combatants and other muslims. To be fair, so do Hezbollah and Assad. I see all these different groups claiming that they're practicing Jihad, but there's no unity or order to show for it, just more (haram) suicide attacks and more bodies.

Also, as a rule of thumb, I'd be wary of any group that colludes with the CIA.

Crypto-khariji ”sunnis” refuse to denounce isis, HT etc. as khawarij and instead only want to use the words ”terrorist” or ”fasiq”. Regarding the latter then it's because the word fasiq has been devalued to the point of meaning absolutely nothing, and this is unfortunately to be blamed on a lot of sunni scholars themselves. They(crypto-khariji ”sunnis”) want to place people murdering muslim parking enforcement officers on the same level as your neighbour Ahmed who grooms his beard in order to keep a job and feed his family.

As for the former label then it's due to popular western discourse. The khawarij who pretend to be sunnis in order to get a following don't see anything wrong with isis khariji ideology, but since these people live in the west and rely on their protection in order to wage war on the muslim countries, they can't very well support isis, so they denounce them as terrorists while believing that it's not actually a sin in Islam(meaning they are practicing taqiyya to win favour with mushrikuun).

So here you can see who the kuffar actually supports. The muslims who call themselves salafis who are loyal to Saudi Arabia are the most active in condemning isis etc., yet they are criticized by kuffar the most who invent conspiracy theories that it's actually saudi arabia and these salafis that fund isis(pretending to not realize the absurdity of this), meanwhile the crypto-khariji ”sunnis” are left free to propagate isis ideology. It's not surprising then that HT etc. have their headquarters in the west. Ironically, these mariquun try to use this as an argument against their opponents, saying that it(ie their not being tolerated in the Sunni countries) constitutes ”proof” that the muslim countries are more oppressive than the west, when in fact it only betrays their own allegiances. The fact of the matter is that Saudi Arabia and the modern Sunni countries are far, far more gentle against political dissidents than Muslim leaders have been in the past.

As for the arguments that no doubt are going to be presented by false sunnis then it's already been demonstrated above that their only argument is the exact same one used by the original khawarij which caused Sunnis to denounce them in the first place.

>>25046

>pretending to not realize the absurdity of this

Clearly the point went over your brain-matam induced-dead head. The main enemies to isis and al qaida are the Sunni countries who are apostates according to them. Only shia and kuffar(the most appropriate term for disbelievers as becomes painfully evident in cases like this) pretend it makes any sense for saudi arabia to fund them.

>>25050

>Every single one of the groups of "good practicing muslims" you mentioned also attack non-combatants and other muslims.

ههههههههههههههههههههههه

>To be fair, so do Hezbollah and Assad. I see all these different groups claiming that they're practicing Jihad, but there's no unity or order to show for it, just more (haram) suicide attacks and more bodies.

Now you say it's haram to do that kind of attack. You took that opinion from the Saudis who you accuse of secretly helping Daesh. You are very opportunistic in your criteria and harsh against Sunnis and especially mujahideen so perhaps you should go to Saudi or Egypt and teach the scholars about jihad. Or perhaps you should go to a frontline and show the brothers who fight what they are doing so wrong?

Either the entire Ummah is in error and you are the solution, or you should stop embarrassing yourself with your ignorance and attitude. Go back to /pol/.

>>25053

yes I deleted it myself so don't blame him. I re-posted it though after sleeping on it.

>>25055

I only bring it up so that the staff is not accused.

>>25052

Are you implying that suicide attacks aren't haram?

>>25060

Unlike you I'm not a Sheikh to make sweeping fatawah. So I would say there is ikhtilaf on the subject and it involves other factors. Attacks on civilians and women are always haram - but the legality of a so-called martyrdom attack against a military target is something scholars disagree about. Again, I don't know since I haven't studied the matter - if you want to know then ask a sheikh. Your Iranian masters support suicide bombing, that's for sure. They stopped temporarilly because they have the Russian Airforce.

>>25060

>implying (lol)

>concern trolling

>contributing nothing to board except the above

>being a namefag

You're taking a break.

>>25051

>who are apostates according to them

hurr obey leader durr

>>25068

What an intelligent response.

>>25064

>being a namefag

That right there is enough for me.

>>25136

Spare us your rafidhi propaganda it's already been dealt with here.

>>25139

>I'm not a fan of houthis BUT…

Right.

>>25139

What's happening in Yemen is literally nothing compared to what is happening in Syria and Iraq against Sunnis. Yemen is a brushfire conflict, that's it. And it is manipulated by you RT/PressTV types to justify crimes against Sunnis and insurrection against Sunni leaders. You don't have a leg to stand on now stop.

>>25148

>quotation marks around his own claim of being sunni

>repeating >>25146 unironically

go troll somewhere else

>>25148

99% chance you are a larp. 1% you are a traitorous beer-chugging Assadist sunni cuck or some druze weirdo from syria pretending to be sunni. Either way, you're done here and if you violate ban all your posts will be wiped from board. Larpers here are shown no mercy, especially when they joke about being near a warzone involving muslims.

>>25149

Yeah, someone in friggin Syria is really upset about Yemen where like a handful of folks have died. Lol, bad larp.

>>25149

This faggot is now cheering barrelbombs and crying about Saudi attack on Houthis. All his posts have been wiped since he evaded his ban.

>>25155

good work

>>25155

So you ban me for "larping" which I reply to by evading my ban to prove that the ban was made on false accusations so you go ahead and delete all my posts which weren't that many because I'm a newfag that was trying to get more redpilled on islamic subjects.

You're basically admiting that you banned me for having a different opinion than the rest of the board. I dont think I broke any rule at this point but I guess this will be deleted as well. لا حول ولا قوة إلا بالله

>>25157

Evading a ban is worse than the original reason for your ban. If you are banned, then you are to appeal the ban.

If your ban appeal is refused, yet you feel the ban is still in error, then you can directly contact the Board Owner (islam@8chan.co) instead of evading the ban to further whine on the board.

>>25158

Apologies for being a newfag then. I Still don't get how to talk to the board owner though.

>>25159

The email address is in >>11001

islam@8chan.co

>>25157

Take a selfie with timestamp and we'll believe you're a sunni who just happens to be a poltard who just happens to be in Syria. And btw, this reaction you're experiencing is your redpill, dog.

>>25160

Thanks

>>25161

How about I give you my adress and name as well?

>>25157

>i came to get redpill

No you came to "redpill" us on the virtues of Assad. Go back to /pol/ you fake syrian fake muslim. Why don't you tell us about the religion of your idol? Oh wait, it's a secret like scientology so you can't.

>>25157

>I'm a newfag that was trying to get more redpilled on islamic subjects.

Well, I'll give you this hint: The regime of Bashar al-Assad isn't an Islamic subject.

However, since this is the politics thread and Assad is a political leader, it is fair game for discussion.

It is literally by Assad's hand that the Syrian migration crisis began. Since you're from /pol/, you are probably extremely anti-Syrian immigration into Europe - as is the standard /pol/ opinion - so why would you support Assad? Ignoring everything else - the politics of the region and everything - it is Assad who has driven millions of Syrians from their homes and into Europe. If you tow the /pol/ line, then you must be against Assad and his war against Muslims.

>>25157

you got exposed rafidhi…its over

>>25174

Why would Sunnis support an Ahmadiyya regime?

>>25174

> my political stance as a sunni isn't welcome here

This is the politics thread and ALL political viewpoints will be accepted in this thread - and only in this thread. It was created specifically for containment.

However, and before you continue playing the martyr, your political stance has nothing to do with being a Sunni. This board is predominantly Sunni with a smattering of Shi'a and an Ibadi. However, the Sunni majority are anti-Assad, so your political stance isn't "as a Sunni".

If you have an opinion, express it; but express it as yourself and don't try to hide behind Allah or play the martyr by crying "muh Sunni beliefs!" That won't work here.

>>25177

He said "la howla.." when he was banned on an imageboard, meanwhile millions are refugees and starving in his "home country…" this guy needs a lobotomy, it will improve his life.

>>25176

Actually, the nusayris are worse than the Ahamdis which are peaceful heretics (for now at least). The nusayris benefited from affirmative action and then attacked druze and christians and sunnis once they dominated the officer corps. They shattered the UAR which was an egyptian-syrian super state. And the ahmadis have an embarassing religion but they are relatively upfront about it, the nusayris have a fake religion that is so outrageous they're not allowed to talk about it. They run a spoils system/ patronage network and give money to corrupt ignorant and cowardly sunnis.

>>25180

>Nusayris

So, the Alawi? Ah, yes, those. I recall reading some time last year that the Alawites had distanced themselves from Assad's regime.

Ah, yeah, BBC article about it:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-35941679

I'm not sure how trustworthy the sources are, but there it is.

>>25174

>claims to live next to umayya masjid, be sunni

>ignores video in this thread of rafidis in umayya masjid cursing at sahaba

>>25060

Why'd I get banned for this?

>>25207

Low effort posting/concern trolling/being a namefag.

Sorry, I only believe in the Quran

>>25208

I'm not trolling though. And what's wrong with being a namefag?

>>25211

Namefags have always been treated with derision on the chans. It's a form of attention whoring.

>>25212

Yeah I get that, but I don't see how namefagging alone is worthy of a ban.

>>25215

It isn't. See: >>25064

I was just speaking my mind, not trying to lower the quality of discussion. I guess a ban is what goes for a rebuttal here.

>>25225

You now have a choice to make:

1] Try to continue discussion, expressing your opinions, rebutting to others.

2] Whine about your very, very temporary ban.

>>25460

uh

>rashidun

>majoos

whats the relationship again?

>>25461

Majoos aka shias hate/curse first 3 Rashidun Caliphes while Sunnis revere them.

We must secure the existence of our Ummah and a future for Muslim children

>>25682

Indeed

>>25682

We do not need to secure anything. The future and existence of the Ummah is already secured in the hands of Allah

>>25729

This comment is bad and you should feel bad.

The crypto-khariji ”sunni”:

>muslim countries don't represent islam, they're all illegitimate dictatorships!

>isis does not represent islam, can't you see how all muslim countries denounce them?!

http://www.muslimruler.com

>>26369

>>26370

key word "muslim" here, when a leader does kufr this doesn't apply

>>25389

the story of Alois Brunner is undoubtedly interesting, he became hunted by the Mossad for years evading capture, they sent him a mail bomb which detonated and took out one of his eyes and a hand. He died of old age in Syria, having lived there as a military advisor to the elder Assad.

>>26378

Who are your living scholars?

>>26378

see

>>23611

Bump

>>24104

>Idc about Turkey's territorial integrity because Erdogan is a giant fake out that didn't do anything good for the Ummah.

You are wrong. Its better for turkey to get rulled by Erdogan rather getting ruled by a kemalist.

>>37007

it's wajib if they apostate, khurooj is haram if it is a muslim leader