by email@example.com | Jul 20, 2010 | George Hassan Reports, Terrorism Update
Sunnis vs. Shiite
Grand Ayatollah Mohammad Kazem Shariatmadari
It is astonishing to hear a religious leader promote lie and telling you, ‘it is a part of your religion duty,’ and you are doing the right thing. Khomeini has said, “To promote Shiism taghiya is a gift from providence.”
Helping Ayatollah Khomeini achieve his goal of “Islamic revolution,” Grand Ayatollah Shariatmadari, (1905-1986) openly referred to Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi as ‘Taghoot’ or Iran’s Pharaoh. By doing so, they took the lid off taghiya that was up to then under a cloak of secrecy. Under the religion authority, the Shah was designated as “a person against Allah” and therefore they declared, the Shah’s life, his family; his personal wealth belongs to the indigents. The indigents was later defined as “the Treasury of the Islamic Institution,” and finally the booty of Arab ayatollahs.
It did not matter that Pharaoh called himself the “God,” while Mohammad Reza Shah, was a Muslim and carried out his Islamic duties.
The practice of taghiya raises the obvious question of ‘can the word trust Iran’s government in ant treaty?
Can the West sign any agreement with mullahs and not worry about its integrity?
“Nothing is more threatening to a hierarchical religion than the possibility of ordinary laypeople’s finding their own way into the presence of the gods.” 1
- Barbara Ehrenreich Dancing in the Streets (a history of collective joy) Metropolitan Book,
Persian -English dictionary defines:
Marja: institution, center, or a source
Taqlid: to copy, to echo, to emulate
Marja-taqlid “source of emulation” was intended as an institute of learning Islamic doctrine however, since changes were not allowed in Islam, in time it turned into an institute of copying the same teaching.
“Islam is probably the only monotheistic religion in which scholarly exploration is systematically discouraged, if not forbidden, since rational analysis would not serve the purpose of the despots,” says, Fatima Mernissi, the author of ‘Islam and Democracy.’
Since the option of exploration, debate or criticism was not on the table, the duty of teacher changed from educator to leader (Mojtahid) and learning to compulsory compliance. Most agreeable Iranian writers, often call it the place where the principal of ‘leave the driving to us,’ renders Iranians resource-less and hampers in the most important decisions. In time, marja-I taqlid turned into a mandatory place to observe and put into practice.
Sunnis do not practice or have marja-I taqlid. They learn as they go along.
Hassan Rahnavardi, in his latest book ‘The Establishment of Mafia style Religious Law in Iran”… writes, ‘marja-I taqlid took away the freedom of thinking and striped Iranian society of their rights and self-determination.’
Most agreeable Iranians often call it the place where the principal of ‘leave the driving to us’, renders Iranian Shiite resource-less and hampers in the most important decisions.
Historian Kasravi (1890-1946) 2 once said, “Our nation’s greatest enemy is religion institution whose actions are driven solely by law instead of facts, by blind faith instead of informed knowledge.”
- Historian, linguist, and reformer Ahmad Kasravi raised disturbingly accurate questions about the role of Taqlid and Taghiya and highlighted contradictions in Shria. A forceful voice, Kasravi defended the Iranian constitution that allowed some measures of freedom and democracy. His bold and informative fact-finding method, his straightforwardness, and his modern and democratic thoughts especially on paper, made him a target for illiterate clerics of his day. On the morning of April 29, 1945, as Kasravi, was walking to his office, two clergy approached and shot him. The assailants were Sayyed Nawab Safavi, a member of the Feda-e-yan-e Islam (Islamic martyrs). Kassravi survived two bullet holes and the stabbing around the neck and face on that day. However, on March 10, 1946, while he was answering charges of being a “enemy of Islam’ at the ministry of justice, in front of the horrified eyes of the judge and the court attendants the same people gunned him down
TO BE CONTINUED
by firstname.lastname@example.org | Jul 2, 2010 | George Hassan Reports, Terrorism Update
The Dream Killers
Do you know that Sunnis adhere to true Islam while Shiites live outside of Islam?
Do you know how the Shiite uses a little known reference in Koran, to lie in order to survive?
For too long writers particularly those in the west have been exceptionally cordial and carefully steered clear of dispute on the role of Shiite Islam in fostering violence. In doing so, they encouraged a tiny minority of Farsi speaking Arabs in Iran to have their biggest plunder in the history of our civilization.
However, unlike the past generations who relied solely on the accounts from Iran’s Arab clergy whose survival, depended on tragedy telling and the blur boundaries between history and imaginary tale, This generations have physical evidence by way of Photos, live news, DVD’s, Face book, Twitter, Cell phones of the events as it happens.
It is the hope of this writer that reader will gain knowledge by shedding light on the history unfolding before our eyes and while still fresh with key participants alive.
In rendering an account of unfolding, writer’s aim is not to yield to temptation to distort truth or to make a sense of it. The mission of this writer is an attempt to shed light on the secretive plot design on Iran. The means they managed to turn their age-old scheme into reality using Islam as a tool. It is up to the Iranian people, the West, and particularly the U.S. policy makers to make a sense of what is happening today. Every reference is made with accurate documentations accessible without compromising the integrity of the source.
While showing step-by-step, day-to-day how a handful of Arab Iranian clergy through use of Shria (the Islamic law), taghiya (permissible lie), Marjae Taghlead (no independent thinking), infallibility, Monafiq (hypocrite) Mehdi (the coming of Arab imam) and Mortad (automatic death sentence if leaving Islam), terrorized, tricked, and prepared naive Iranians for their Islamic revolution and Their ultimate goal of turning Iran into another Arab state. Finally, to exposes false accounts of prophets and imams that secular Iranians learned and now believe that a single one of them is enough to poison a nation’s mind and impair its capacity to think.
It is express wish of the author to make it plain that the word “Arab” explicitly refers to the Iran’s Farsi speaking Arab Shiite clergy. Those Arabs who came into Iran around the 16th century with a mission to convert Iranian Sunnis into Shiites, and, in the process conversion, they almost wipe out the entire population. Nevertheless, the same uncultured, unassimilated, children of the Arab is ruling Iran today. Moreover, the word Islam is referred to Iran’s Shiite institution.
The cold and heartless killing of Iran’s Sunnis presented a unique opportunity for the Shiite to not only revenge the killing of their Imam Hussein by the Sunnis, but also created an opening to use Iran as a political base to unite “world Shiites” for future encounter with the Sunnis.
Since the new comers spoke Arabic and the Koran was in Arabic, the unschooled, inexperienced, Iranians took the Arab words as part of the Koran or suggestive of connection to the Koran and the Shiite saints. As the time went on, the Arab mullahs enforced their values, and their laws that were directly out of tribal Arabia, upon the Iranians. As the numbers of these Arab mullahs grew, so did their power and influence over the government and the unsuspecting Iranians. Later, in addition to the Sunnis, they added Jews an ‘old foe,’ and Baha’is, a ‘new rival’ to their list of “enemies of Islam.”
Although this was not the first time Iran became a land of easy living for the Arabs, it was the beginning of the use of religion as a political tool and as a core base for their terror on a grand scale and without accountability or restrain.
Sunnis vs. Shiite
Here is a brief history of the difference between Shiite and Sunni — and why it is important to know, is embedded in the faith of present Iran, and the future of the world.
The word “Sunni” in Arabic comes from a word meaning “one who follows the traditions of the Prophet”.
The word “Shia” in Arabic means a group or supportive party of people. They are also called “Shia-ye-Ali”, or “the Party of Ali,” “Ahl-al-Bayt” or “Household of the Prophet.” Ali is the Shiite ‘First’ imam (leader) and Sunnis ‘fourth.’ 1
1. The differences between the Sunni and the Shi’a are primary, not secondary and are not merely differences in tafsir- (interpretation of Koran), or of fiqh (jurisprudence) says Allamah Khalid Mohammad. The New Encyclopedia Britannica, Jacob E. Safra, Chairman of the Board, 15th Edition, Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., 1998, ISBN 0-85229-6330, Vol 10, p. 738
1. Since the prophet had no sons, and did not designate a successor, many of the Prophet’s companions decided to hold an election and agreed that the new leader should be elected from among those capable of the job. In fact, that is what precisely happened. They decided in favor of Abu Bakr, Mohammad’s disciple and close advisor from the earliest days, and father of his second wife ‘A’ishah. Abu Bakr was the most judicious and most senor of all candidates. He became the first of the so-called ‘four legitimate caliphs’ (Arabic khalifah,” successor”, representative”), of the Islamic nation.
However, here is how both parties view the history of Islam.
According to the Sunnis, 2 history of Islam consisted of 23 years of time of Mohammad, and thereafter 30 years of “rightly guided caliphs,” Abu Bakr (632-634), Omar (634-644), Othman (644-656), and Ali (656-661). This is what precisely happened.
According to the Shiite, the history of Islam was as follows: 23 years of Prophet Mohammad’s Resalah (the time Mohammad spent in Mecca and Medina), 24 years of ‘rebellion’ (the era of the first three Caliphs), and 6 years of Ali’s rule. The Sunnis believe that the Prophet was replaced by a Caliph immediately after his demise and there had been no gap. 2. Allamah Khalid Mahmud, Director, Islamic Academy, Manchester, United Kingdom Translated by Abdurrahman Ishâq
The election of the “rightly guided caliphs” Abu Bakr (632-634), Omar (634-644), Othman (644-656), Ali (656-661), gave hope that the Sunnis aspiration would be the first outstanding contribution to the world democracy by the way of newborn Islam. The system of “election” that was Sunni’s practical donation to the Islamic world became Shiites thorn-in-the-side and a source of irritation that have caused the everlasting divide.
Shiite declared that only Ali, (the fourth Sunni caliph and the first Shiite imam) Prophet Mohammad’s son-in-law and ‘Alivian’ the direct descendants of ‘Ali’s marriage to the Prophet’s daughter Fatimah, “qualify” as a leader of the entire Muslim community. This was done, even though Shiite conceded that Ali accepted his predecessor and approved Abu-Bakr’s Caliphate. After the third caliph was assassinated, Ali became the fourth caliph. The Shiites broke rank and the split that formed over the years grew into central distinctions that continue to affect the history of the world.
Although Splits among religions is a common cause of violence, no split has led to as much hatred, as much bloodshed as that between the Sunni and Shiite.
Shiite claims that Mohammad elected Ali as his successor and announced it at the gathering of ‘Ghadir-e- Khum.’ Sunni believe that although Mohammad praised Ali at the ‘pond of Khum,’ Prophet did not make any statements as who shall be his successor. The exact meaning of the praise is subject of interpretation.
What’s more, The Prophet delivered his Farewell sermon in Mecca in front of the largest gathering of Muslims from every city to Hajj, and that would logically be the most appropriate time and place to announce, the appointment of Ali as his successor. In fact, the entire Muslim Ummat was gathering there to hear his parting words and perhaps the appointment of a successor.
2. Shiite does not believe that Mohammad fully accomplished what he set out to do therefore; “Mehdi” the Shiite’s absent imam is the one to complete what Mohammad left unfinished. “This of course is a slap on the face of Sunnis,” says Ahmad Khalid Mahmud. With regard to the mission of the prophet, Iran’s Shiite leader Ruhollah Khomeini says, 3“ The seal of prophethood had come for the reformation of mankind but he was unsuccessful in his time”. Khomeini also write, “The imam of the time (Mehdi) will come with a message of implementing justice in our lives and he will bring about a change in the entire universe. This is the obligation and duty in which even the messenger of Islam, Mohammad was not completely successful.”
3. Khomeini, Ittehad va yek jahati, Publication, Farhang Jamhoori Islami P.15 Multan
3. Infallibility: Shiite thrives on infallibility, while Sunni view infallibility as a sin. Imam in Sunni has limited authorities, (leading prayers in mosques, explanation of Koranic verses,)
However, Shiite Imam is Infallible. Shiite imam is head of the entire world Muslim community with godly power and deep knowledge and capacity to convey the word of God.
Fatima Mernissi writes, 4 “one of the ideas that divide Sunnis and Shiites is that the Sunnis do not believe in the infallibility of the imam, for infallibility belongs only to God: no human being, even an imam or caliph, can claim it. Making mistake is the privilege of human beings and thus makes it impossible to criticize those in power.”
4. Fatima Mernissi Islam and democracy p. 109
Khomeini anointed himself as an Imam and ordered the killing of Iranian secular. Through his fatwa, he wiped out Shah’s generals and military personals. He sent nearly 300.000 twelve and thirteen-year-old boys to war most never made it back.
4. Taghiya (the permissible lie in Shiite Islam)
When is it O.K. to lie?
When your Bible tells you can lie to survive?
Farsi dictionary defines taghiya as ‘distortion of facts, hide something by pretense.’
Moroccan scholar and author, Fatima Mernissi, in her book “Islam and democracy” writes, 5 “In the Koran, taghiya means “tyrant,” a holder of power that knows no limits. The concept has various aspects, each as negative as the other. Sometimes it is a matter of overweening pride that impedes submission (sura 2, v. 14), sometime the despotic megalomania of such as Pharaoh, who is mentioned by name (sura 20, v. 24, 43). The taghiya is the leader who is contemptuous toward everything, including the divine.” She also writes “taghiya is a favorite word in the language of modern Islamic fundamentalists; it is the insult they most often throw at the heads of contemporary Muslim leaders”. 5 Fatima Mernissi Islam and democracy 105
In day-to-day life of Sunnis, not only ‘speaking lie’ is not permissible, it is (Haraam) forbidden. On the other hand, Shiite encourages its followers to do Tághiya (permissible lie) whenever they seem necessary.
In modern days, the 1930,s and on, Iran’s Arab ayatollahs used taghiya on daily bases to mislead Iranian and the Iranian government. Grand Ayatollahs Kashani, Behbahani, Broujerdi, Khomeini, and today’s supreme leader ayatollah Khamenei, all encouraged and ‘demanded’ Shiite clergy to use taghiya.
Khomeini has repeatedly said, “In times, the distortion of fact is neither a sin nor a vice for the good of Islam.”
- He also said, “Taghiya is the shield of every faithful and the custodian of every virtuous.”
- “Those who do not observe Taghiya are those who are non-believers of Islam.”
- “Allah blesses those who put Taghiya into practice in every circumstance they believe necessary.”
- “Taghiya covers nine out of ten codes in Islam.”
It certainly did for the innocent Iranians. It is inconceivable how far an Islamic leader departs from the truth to make his revolution a success by for example, telling the indigents, “everyone is ‘entitle’ to a free home with utilities paid for life.”
That distortion of facts for the spread of Islam has given license to self-appointed Farsi speaking Arab clergy to detain, torture, and execute Iranians.
That distortion of facts for the ‘good of Islam’ has undermined trust of their followers, their neighboring nations, and before long the international community. More so, it has damaged the image of Islam as a whole and in it has placed the Sunnis who are 90% of the world Muslims and do not subscribe to Taghiya, in the same category.
by email@example.com | Jun 18, 2010 | George Hassan Reports, Terrorism Update
Understanding my writings:
If my writing seems harsh or the tone is severe, it is because I see things; I know things, which are emotionally upsetting for those closer to it. This is true with most Iranian American writers. I believe I have mentioned it once, that sometimes, the cruel words that is Islamic black-and white culture embedded in me, reflects my writing.
Truly, I am doing about the only thing one can do to further the cause of truth in a world driven with Terror, dishonesty, and at the edge of destruction.
To put in plain words: I am trying to explain the failing of the past to the powers of the present in the hope that accurate information as they are would do more good than giving risk-free sermons and passing judgment.
I believe the world is changing. The world is ready for information, accurate information, no matter how is presented as long as it is true and can be proven. The West is worried about ‘Islam,’ the Shiites and the global terrorism. I believe after what is happening, Christians particularly Americans are no longer in the mood to turn the other check.
I want to present information in ways that the American public can use and still be friends with the Muslims of the world.
Following you will find some information about Khomeini and what he did to Iran after the revolution in the late 70’S, in future issues I will share more about the history of terrorism particular in Iran and the latest “Intel” from the ground in Iran what is really going on today.
In a speech on July 1, 1980 in city of Qom (Shiites Holiest Mosque), Ruhollah Khomeini,the supreme leader of Islamic community, explained the true functions of mosques. He declared, “Compassion is in conflict with God” and “Mosques are built with Mehrab.”The word mehrab (altar, adytum) does not only mean an inner sanctum, the word harb means war, and mehrabmeans a battlefield. The word mehrab in Arabic and Koran means ‘theatre of war’. He added, “The prophet has swords to kill humans. Ummat, followers of the prophet Mohammad, peace be up on them, were all Jundi (militia) and they all drew their swords and they were all killers of human beings. We want a leader who cuts off hands, gives lashes, and kills by stoning, the same way that Prophet Mohammad, peace be up on him, did. Mohammad cut off people’s hands, flogged, and stoned them to death. Mohammad, peace be up on him, massacred the entire ‘discontented’ Jewish tribe of ‘BaniGharizeh.’
It was in the mosques or holy places that Khomeini spewed out his theoretical wrath and devised his revolutionary Islamic plot. And after each sermon, Iran’s Arab clergy came out into the streets of Tehran,among other cities, armed with guns and machine guns, licensed and ready to shoot Iranians who they believed did not adhere to Khomeini’s strict Islam.
Mosques are places that Muslim leaders recite Koranic verses for its followers. Iranians have lost their nationality, rationality, and power of reasoning by following, the most irrational guidelines coming from these the Koranic pronouncement.
What will happen if we give in? Ask an Iranian!
The genocide against Iranians, the car bombs that slaughters innocent men, women and children, the dehumanization of women, the stonings, the worldwide terror coming from Islamism extremists that make these Islamic countries fight for their survival, should serve to convince America and the West that this is not just a distant peril. It is real, it is here, and soon it will become a permanent nightmare.
Americans, just as Iranians,will be force to hold allegiance to the Arab Islam and the sands of Arabia. America would be prohibited from or the least chastised for acknowledging their heritage, the heritage they created for their children.
The Islamic nations have a common enemy in Arab Islam’s teaching. It all comes from the ‘mosques.’ Mosques should stay where they are, in the Middle East.
Think for a moment:What gifts (other than poverty,broken spirit, shortage of literacy, profusion of backwardness, bleak economic deficiency, dictatorship, totalitarianism,terror, etc.) has the Arab Islam bestowed upon Muslims?
This article is available for Download?