The Ummah will never forget the crimes of these closeted sperms of Sassanian Majoos.

#SyriaGasAttack
#Shia
#Iran
#Majoos https://t.co/4n8ukn436M

Did you know?

Thanks to the aggressive and backfiring Neo-Safavid expansionist policies of Iran, one of the very very few Shia majority Shia countries is on its way to become majority Sunni. They can deny as much as they went, our team alone knows a number of Ex-Shia Azeris, heck the notorious www.gift2shias.com blog is run by an Ex-Shia from Azerbaijan!

http://www.eurasiareview.com/28022017-is-baku-transforming-azerbaijan-from-a-shiia-to-a-sunni-muslim-country-oped/

#Azerbaijan
#Sunni
#Safavids
#RiseOfSunnism
#Iran
#Rafida
#Shia
#Baku

PS: Bakri thanks to the king of Batris, Khamenai :)

Khomeini insults Imam Mahdi
#shia #mahdi #khomeini #iran
Who is Ayatollah Khomeini? What is Wilayat ul Faqih?

The Shia say that Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) seized the Caliphate wrongfully. The Shia say that a leader cannot be elected by men, but rather must be appointed by Allah. We wonder: why then was Ayatollah Khomeini elected as leader? Was he not also elected by men?
Ayatollah Khomeini and the rest of the Shia Ayatollahs exploit the teachings of Shi’ism in order to further their own power and status. The Ayatollahs elaborate on the concept of Infallible Imams, and by doing so, they indirectly boost their own position and status since they are the interim Imams. To put it bluntly, the Ayatollahs are telling us that since the Hidden Imam could not make it to work today, Ayatollah Khomeini is going to be filling in for him.
This concept is called Wilayat ul-Faqih. In the absence of the Hidden Imam, the Shia decided that they would elect a popular leader, or deputy Imam. This deputy Imam, such as Ayatollah Khomeini, would be the “representative” of the Mahdi while he is in occultation.
Under this system of Wilayat ul-Faqih, Ayatollah Khomeini became the supreme leader of the Shia of Iran. In 1969-70, the late Ayatullah Khomoeini further elaborated on the concept in his work “Islamic Government” and the notion of Wilayat ul-Faqih was enshrined in the Iranian Constitution in 1979. Ayatullah Khomeini declared that the deputy Imam is endowed with the same authority as an Infallible Imam, encompassing all spheres of life. Ayatollah Khomeini declared himself to have Wilayat ul-Mutlaqa, or Absolute Authority from Allah. Ayatollah Khomeini said in one of his speeches that the Wilayat-ul-Faqih can even order Muslims to stop reading prayer if he finds that reading the prayers could harm Islam.
The Shia scholars have quoted the Infallible Imams as calling themselves Ayatollahs (the Signs of Allah). We are not surprised to find that Khomeini also took this title. We wonder: how exactly is Khomeini a “Sign of Allah?” In fact, his entire name–Ayatollah Ruhallah Khomeini–is a perplexity. Ruhallah translates to “Spirit of Allah.” Are the Shia really claiming that Khomeini is the Spirit of Allah? Likewise did the Christians do with their Prophet. The Shia also say that their Infallible Imams were the Hujjat (proof) of Allah, and we are then not surprised to find that Ayatollah Khomeini also declared himself Hujjat of Allah.
Using the concept of Wilayat ul-Faqih and Mutlaqa, the Shia Imams have quickly brought themselves to such a lofty position as rulers and monarchs of Iran. This Wilayat ul-Faqih is the biggest fraud in the world; these Shia Imams have hoodwinked so many millions of people into being subservient to their rule.
Khomeini and the rest of the Shia leaders have used and abused the Shia doctrine of Imamah in order to boost their own political power by using the concept of Wilayat-ul-Faqih. The Shia Ayatollahs have become so powerful and politically influential that they have millions of Shia adherents posting up pictures of the Ayatollahs as if they were pop idols.
The Shia Clergy have used their power to get immensely wealthy. They are quite literally swimming in money, thanks to the concept of Khums. Of the Khums payment (which is 20% of a man’s income), half of it must be given to the deputy Imam. In this manner, the Ayatollahs and Imams of the Shia have become billionaires in Iran.
It is altogether degrading how the Shia Imams exploit their religion to fool the incredulous masses who do not bother to question the exalted status of their leaders.

Would Shi'ism EXIST without Grave Worship?

We have seen in previous articles how the Shia believe that the Imams are infallible and posses many attributes of Allah.|

But the Shia don’t stop there; they have taken it to the next level. The Shia have erected shrines over the graves of their Imams.

#Millions of Shia from all over the world visit these #shrines in #Iran and #Iraq to pray in them.

The Ahlus Sunnah is stunned by this pagan practise of creating shrines and grave-worshipping.

The Shia will argue that they really aren’t praying to the deceased, but that really doesn’t make any sense.

Why then do they #travel all the way to Iran to do prayer? Surely they believe there is some benefit of praying next to the body of a deceased #Imam?

Otherwise, why would they come from so far to do it?

#Shrines are completely #Haram (forbidden) in Islam because they are #paganistic and #polythiestic in nature.

Historically, Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) destroyed all the shrines in Mecca. This point cannot be stressed enough: the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) shed blood of the Sahabah in order that Mecca be cleansed of shrines, and this was one of the Prophet’s first legislative acts after the Muslims conquered Mecca.

How is it that the Shia do not realize that what they are doing is completely antithetical to the entire mission of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) who was sent to guide a shrine-worshipping people?

The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) repeatedly condemned grave-worshipping in the authentic Hadith:

“Beware of those who preceded you and used to take the graves of their prophets and righteous men as places of worship, but you must not take graves as mosques; I forbid you to do that.” (Sahih Muslim)

“May Allah’s curse be on the #Yahood for they built the places of worship at the graves of their Prophets.” (Sahih Bukhari)

“May Allah curse the Yahood and Nasaara for they built the places of worship at the graves of their Prophets.” (Sahih Bukhari)

“If any religious man dies amongst those people they would build a place of worship at his grave and make these pictures in it. They will be the #worst creature in the sight of Allah on the Day of Resurrection.” (Sahih Bukhari)

“Do not sit on the graves and do not pray facing towards them.” (Sahih Bukhari)

How did Shirk #Start?! #History #Lesson

The first time in human history that people commited the sin of idol-worship was around the time of Prophet Nuh (عليه السلام).

A very pious man passed away.

Shaytan whispered in the ears of the tonwnspeople: he urged them never to forget this pious man lest the townspeople abandon his example and be lost to sin. Once Shaytan had convinced them of the necessity to revere the memory of this pious dead man, he then then convinced them to erect a shrine over the grave of this man.

Eventually, the people started praying in the shrine, and soon thereafter Shaytan convinced them to pray to the deceased man.

It was in this step by step fashion that Shaytan was able to misguide people into Shirk. He convinced them that they were doing a good thing by respecting a pious man, and he allowed them to add one Bidah (evil innovation) after another, infusing polythiestic practise in their belief.

Likewise do the Shia believe that they are being pious by visiting shrines but in reality they have been fooled by Shaytan.

Of course, the Shia will make the futile argument that they really aren’t praying to the deceased person. It just so happens that they pray next to the grave and supplicate. Indeed, this argument sounds very similar to what modern-day Hindus claim.

#Hindus say that they don’t really worship the idol itself, that they really are worshipping God, and that they are just facing the idol. We see there is very little difference between what the Shia say and what the Hindus say.

The Islamic ethos deplores all idol-worshipping and is very strict in forbidding it.

There is absolutely no point in praying next to someone’s grave. There is no benefit in it, and grave-worship is consi

#qassamsoleimani #qasemsoleimaini
#SevereRevenge #hardrevange #Iran #DeathToAmerica

I wish to take this opportunity to refute a famous reply of shia!
#Iranian #General #Iran #Rafidha #Refutation #Shia
When Shia are asked: Where is the Concept of 12 divinely imams in the Entire Quran?, Shi'a respond with the following reply:
"Where in the Quran is it said that Abu Bakr should be the first Caliph? "

Response to this #Doubt: Firstly, it is not appropriate to answer a question with a question.

We oftentimes see Shia responding to questions with questions, as if the Ahlus Sunnah also being wrong somehow justifies the Shia to be wrong.

If the Ahlus Sunnah said that 2+2 is not 6 as the Shia believe, would it be valid for the Shia to respond that 6 is correct since the Ahlus Sunnah say 2+2 is 5 and this too is incorrect?

Both 5 and 6 are incorrect answers.

The point is that it is not a valid methodology of justifying one’s faith by finding errors in someone else’s faith.

Having said that, this question raised by the Shia only shows the misunderstanding of some people about the belief of the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah.

>>Believing in the Caliphs is not a fundamental element of Islam.

According to the Ahlus Sunnah, there are only 6 Articles of Faith and 5 Pillars of Islam; believing in the Caliphate of Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) is not part of either of them.

>>This is altogether unlike the Shia faith in which Imamah is an article of faith and is the most important one.<< i.e.

Any group of people tends to select someone as their leader. And the rational and most reasonable way to do so is by election.

This is a routine social/political practise. Certainly, no system of public election was established at that time and the election of Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) was done through Shura of those people present at Saqifah.

Someone could argue that Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) was not a good choice or that not all qualified people were present at the time; this is an individual opinion, but it has nothing to do with looking for evidences in the Quran about it. It is simply a routine social practice that was and is and will be done in any society and no logical mind would expect a divine evidence for that.

Let us not compare apples with oranges. The doctrine of Imamah is a fundamental belief of Shi’ism, whereas election or selection of Caliphate is just a routine and common socio-political practise. It’s like comparing the election procedure of President of the USA (i.e. Caliphate) to the divine appointment of the Pope by the Vatican (i.e. Infallible Imam).

The President (or the Caliphate) doesn’t claim Divine Providence like does the Pope (or the Imam). If a certain person wants to claim religious right and divine appointment, then surely this person better bring the proof from the religious book!

On the other hand, does anybody ask for divine proof when one selects a President or even the Imam of prayers in our mosques?

Nobody would ask an MSA President to bring evidence from the Quran about his election, but if someone were to claim to be divinely appointed by Allah (عز و جل), then we ask for evidence from the Quran for this claim.

In any case, let us look at the present situation in Iran. Is there any divine command about how to establish a leadership in the occultation of Mehdi?

Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) was selected to lead much like Khomeini was selected to lead.

Let us remember that there were no religious system of governing for the Shia after the occultation of the Mehdi 1,000 years ago.

No divine ordinance came down to make Ayatollah Khomeini leader of Iran; in fact, there were many Ayatollahs who spoke out against Khomeini and they were subsequently jailed for treason.

It has turned out that the Shia ended up being in the same situation as the mainstream Muslims, namely that they had to elect a leader by themselves in the absence of any direct divine command or appointment.

Why are the Shia so much against Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) and yet they support Khomeini?

Told ya'll, #YaAliCantMadad

#Iran #CoronavirusOutbreak

Suicide bombing according to “Ayatollah” ‘Ali Sistani
#Iran #Sistani #Khomeini #Shia #Rafidhi #Suicide #Share
Question:

What is your opinion on suicide operations that rectify Muslim societies in occupied lands?

Answer:

If by them victory of Islam and Muslims is achieved there is no problem.

Source: Istifta`at of Sistanis, page 412, Question 1626
==================
س٢/ ماهو رأيكم بالعمليات الإنتحارية التي يقوم بها الشاب المسلم ؟

الجواب /
إذا كان فيها نصر للإسلام والمسلمين فلا مانع

استفتاءات- ‎#السيستاني- ص ٤١٢

رقم السؤال 1626

Screenshot shared in comments.

Indo-Iran Defense pact of 2003 specifically allows India the use of Iranian bases/facilities against Pakistan in case of an Indo-Pak war! #India #Iran #Pakistan #Shia #Rafidha #War

https://nation(dot)com(dot)pk/17-Apr-2018/the-indo-iran-syndrome-pakistan

https://www.cacianalyst(dot)org/publications/analytical-articles/item/7799-analytical-articles-caci-analyst-2003-2-12-art-7799.html

India would purportedly be given access to Iranian military bases in the event of a war with Pakistan

Donald L. Berlin, “India-Iran Relations: A Deepening Entente,” Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies Special Assessment, Honolulu, October 2004, p. 1.

Read more at:
http://www.indiandefencereview(dot)com/interviews/india-iran-defence-cooperation/
=======================
Surah 4:144



O ye who believe! Take not for friends (awliyaa) unbelievers rather than believers: Do ye wish to offer God an open proof against yourselves?



Imam Tabari states in his commentary:





وَهَذَا نَهْي مِنْ اللَّه عِبَاده الْمُؤْمِنِينَ أَنْ يَتَخَلَّقُوا بِأَخْلَاقِ الْمُنَافِقِينَ الَّذِينَ يَتَّخِذُونَ الْكَافِرِينَ أَوْلِيَاء مِنْ دُون الْمُؤْمِنِينَ , فَيَكُونُوا مِثْلهمْ فِي رُكُوب مَا نَهَاهُمْ عَنْهُ مِنْ مُوَالَاة أَعْدَائِهِ



And this is a prohibition from Allah on the believers that their character should not be like the hypocrites who take the disbelievers as allies instead of the believers. So they (the hypocrites) will become like them (the disbelievers) if they do what God forbade them, which is allying themselves with the disbelievers. (Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, Jami' al-bayan fi ta'wil al-Qur'an, Commentary on Surah 4:144, Source)

So God is warning the believers to not act like the hypocrites because the hypocrites would secretly aid the disbelievers against the Muslims. It is clear in the context of the passage that it is referring to the hypocrites when you read the next verse:

Surah 4:145

The Hypocrites will be in the lowest depths of the Fire: no helper wilt thou find for them;-

The Arabic word awliyaa used in the verse could mean "patrons, friends, allies, etc." and it seems most appropriate to say that the word means ally in this verse.

So the verse really means that we cannot aid the disbelievers against the Muslims.

In Shi'ism Ali (ra) is the Lord of the Heavens!

Imamism is a religion of shirk, some of their followers (especially converts) experience moments when their Fitrah kicks in only to be taught more Shirk.

#Iran #Ayatollah #Kufr

Cucks of the Kuffar from day one, backstabbers from day one, the principle enemies of Islam and its people, the Rafidah (لع), the Mushrikeen.

#Shia #Sahabah #Iran #Qom