"Syrian armed opposition are terrorists"- Imran Hossein

[Fofomag]

"Syrian Armed Opposition are Terrorists" Sheik Imran Hosein - YouTube


Let us hope this video will stop the flow of endless chain posting of his videos speaking about the dajjal system the mahdi being among us and whatever he spits out. Disgusting.

[abumuwahid]

Its quite sad actually that he has said this.

[abu hadeed]

not really surprised as i anticipated this sort of thing from Imran Hossein a long time ago.

He is very pro Iran.

[خالد العسيري]

Salaam Aleikum.

1) He talks of "barbarous agenda in Bahrain" and "ruthless oppression of the Shi'a majority in Bahrain." Firstly Shi'as were the troublemakers in Bahrain. Secondly has he never heard of the Hama massacre (real barbarous agenda) and hasn't he seen what Bashar and his army are doing to Ahlus Sunnah in Syria? Is that not ruthless oppression? What happened in Bahrain is nothing compared to what is happening in Syria. He sticks up for the Shi'as in Bahrain, yet ignores Ahlus Sunnah's plight in Syria and calls its mujahideen "terrorists."
2) FSA is fighting against Taghut. Bashar al-Assad is a kafir, not only due to his actions (ruling by other than what Allah has revealed) but primarily due to his Alawi beliefs.
3) The majority of FSA are directly fighting against soldiers. How is that terrorism?

This is what happens when you delve too deeply into conspiracy theories. I'd like to see a follow-up from Imran Hossein, so he can at least explain to us why he considered FSA to be terrorists.

[Wild Wild West]

Its quite sad actually that he has said this.

Sad is not the word...

I guess he really is pro-shia and pro-Iran after all.

[Maiwand Al-Afghani]

Walaikom salam
Well he makes a big mistake if he means the whole Syrian opposition as terrorists.If he would only mean those secularists and allies of the kufaar, then we could understand, or those who blow up bombs in the markets or kill innocents, like happened a few days a go. But it's a big mistake and stupid to call them all terrorists and to defend that Nusairi dog and taghut. You see that this man is not infallible and he makes mistakes and we should refute and criticise him on these points. But if he says haqq, then we should accept it, he is still a good scholar, with spendid analysis about current affairs, history and islamic eschatology. But he is not an angel nor a prophet, nor masoom (infallible).

And by the way brothers and sisters, if I say he is a good scholar, that does not mean we should take everything what he says as the truth and blindly follow him. We should do that with no one, except the prophet (peace be upon him) and the Quran. We can listen to him, but at the same time be aware, acute, critical of what he says. If he says that which is according to Quran and sunnah and according to the reality and fiqh al waqi we can accept it, but if not, we should reject it and criticise him for that and make others away. So as not to be mislead or lead others astray.

[Maiwand Al-Afghani]

This is the complete interview, I think it would be fair to listen to the complete interview before making any judgement:

[abumuwahid]

Walaikom salam
Well he makes a big mistake if he means the whole Syrian opposition as terrorists.If he would only mean those secularists and allies of the kufaar, then we could understand, or those who blow up bombs in the markets or kill innocents, like happened a few days a go. But it's a big mistake and stupid to call them all terrorists and to defend that Nusairi dog and taghut. You see that this man is not infallible and he makes mistakes and we should refute and criticise him on these points. But if he says haqq, then we should accept it, he is still a good scholar, with spendid analysis about current affairs, history and islamic eschatology. But he is not an angel nor a prophet, nor masoom (infallible).

And by the way brothers and sisters, if I say he is a good scholar, that does not mean we should take everything what he says as the truth and blindly follow him. We should do that with no one, except the prophet (peace be upon him) and the Quran. We can listen to him, but at the same time be aware, acute, critical of what he says. If he says that which is according to Quran and sunnah and according to the reality and fiqh al waqi we can accept it, but if not, we should reject it and criticise him for that and make others away. So as not to be mislead or lead others astray.

Masha Allah , I am really happy you said it Maiwand.

Would it not be better, in light of his pro iranian , pro shia stance to not take anything from him with regards to Al Mahdi , since his beliefs might just be tainted with shia thought, I don't know brother, it is difficult to leave as scholar that you have admired for a long time but at the same time the truth will prevail over the falsehood.

[Maiwand Al-Afghani]

Masha Allah , I am really happy you said it Maiwand.

Would it not be better, in light of his pro iranian , pro shia stance to not take anything from him with regards to Al Mahdi , since his beliefs might just be tainted with shia thought, I don't know brother, it is difficult to leave as scholar that you have admired for a long time but at the same time the truth will prevail over the falsehood.

Well you can listen, as long as he sticks with the ahadith that are authentic and the Quran about different subjects, then it is not a problem to listen to him. But one should also study the subject by himself and read the Quran and ahadith. But you don't have to take his unorthodox beliefs and concepts over. He makes mistakes, like all scholars. But that does not mean we should completely boycot him. I listen to all scholars, besides studying Quran, ahadith and books of scholars.

[abumuwahid]

Well you can listen, as long as he sticks with the ahadith that are authentic and the Quran about different subjects, then it is not a problem to listen to him. But one should also study the subject by himself and read the Quran and ahadith. But you don't have to take his unorthodox beliefs and concepts over. He makes mistakes, like all scholars. But that does not mean we should completely boycot him. I listen to all scholars, besides studying Quran, ahadith and books of scholars.

What about scholars that are wicked and treacherous. Bear in mind brother, that more than 10 000 Muslims in Syria have been brutally slaughtered, tortured and raped and this man still shows loyalty to the shia who are Assads main supporters.

If the shia in Afghanistan had to do the same to the Pashtun or whatever tribe you're from, and Imran Hussein supported the shia, would you still follow him or would you boycott him?