Forum Menu - Click/Swipe to open
 

Dajjal Propganda vs Dajjal Propganda: What should we believe?

You have contributed 0.0% of this topic

Thread Tools
Appreciate
Topic Appreciation
xs11ax, abu mohammed
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
11,537
Brother
106
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#1 [Permalink] Posted on 29th November 2015 15:56

Please use this thread to give solid examples of contrasting information and why the narrative is problematic.

Jzk

report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
11,537
Brother
106
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#2 [Permalink] Posted on 29th November 2015 16:00

Dajjal Propganda vs Dajjal Propganda Example 1: AL-Qaeda, 9/11 & Taliban

Abu Hafs al-Mauritani (Al-Qaeda Mufti) Interview: This is the ONLY Interview he has given, his claims are:

  1. Al-Qaeda had nothing to do with 1993 World Trade Centre Attacks
  2. Al-Qaeda did 9/11
  3. Osama Bin Ladin wanted to harm Taliban

If you believe this Mufti then everything we believe is FALSE

If we believe everything else then what this Mufti says is FALSE

report post quote code quick quote reply
+1 -0Like x 1
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
11,537
Brother
106
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#3 [Permalink] Posted on 29th November 2015 16:13

Dajjal Propganda vs Dajjal Propganda Example 2: ISIS funded by America and Allies

General Wesley Clark that ISIS was created by USA and Allies

GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, in a way. But, you know, history doesn’t repeat itself exactly twice. What I did warn about when I testified in front of Congress in 2002, I said if you want to worry about a state, it shouldn’t be Iraq, it should be Iran. But this government, our administration, wanted to worry about Iraq, not Iran.

I knew why, because I had been through the Pentagon right after 9/11. About ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me in. He said, “Sir, you’ve got to come in and talk to me a second.” I said, “Well, you’re too busy.” He said, “No, no.” He says, “We’ve made the decision we’re going to war with Iraq.” This was on or about the 20th of September. I said, “We’re going to war with Iraq? Why?” He said, “I don’t know.” He said, “I guess they don’t know what else to do.” So I said, “Well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda?” He said, “No, no.” He says, “There’s nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq.” He said, “I guess it’s like we don’t know what to do about terrorists, but we’ve got a good military and we can take down governments.” And he said, “I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail.”

So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, “Are we still going to war with Iraq?” And he said, “Oh, it’s worse than that.” He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, “I just got this down from upstairs” — meaning the Secretary of Defense’s office — “today.” And he said, “This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” I said, “Is it classified?” He said, “Yes, sir.” I said, “Well, don’t show it to me.” And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said, “You remember that?” He said, “Sir, I didn’t show you that memo! I didn’t show it to you!”

GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Oh, it’s always — there are always interests. The truth is, about the Middle East is, had there been no oil there, it would be like Africa. Nobody is threatening to intervene in Africa. The problem is the opposite. We keep asking for people to intervene and stop it. There’s no question that the presence of petroleum throughout the region has sparked great power involvement. Whether that was the specific motivation for the coup or not, I can’t tell you. But there was definitely — there’s always been this attitude that somehow we could intervene and use force in the region. I mean, that was true with — I mean, imagine us arming and creating the Mujahideen to keep the Soviets out of Afghanistan. Why would we think we could do that? But we did. And, you know, my lesson on it is, whenever you use force, there are unintended consequences, so you should use force as a last resort. Whether it’s overt or covert, you pay enormous consequences for using force.

GEN. WESLEY CLARK: ISIS got started through funding from our friends and allies… to fight to the death against Hezbollah.


  1. This guy is a Retired US Army General and there has no action and no reaction against him whatsoever
  2. Take a good look at his affiliations and he is not a good samaritan
  3. Take a look at self-proclaimed goal of making $40 million after retirment
  4. The Mujahideen in Afghanistan were also funded and helped by CIA

Is this a case of a US General putting information in the public domain to satisify those who suspect things anyway?

report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
11,537
Brother
106
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#4 [Permalink] Posted on 29th November 2015 16:18

Dajjal Propganda vs Dajjal Propganda Example 3: Pentagon hit by a Plane

  1. Where is the Debris of the Plane?
  2. How can the plane make a perfect TUBE LIKE exit in the wall?
  3. IF this is a conspiracy why did those who spent millions spreading this make childish mistakes like this?
  4. COULD this be that they wanted to confuse people and spread disinformation? i.e. the goal is to create confusion???

 

 

report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
11,537
Brother
106
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#5 [Permalink] Posted on 29th November 2015 16:23

Dajjal Propganda vs Dajjal Propganda Example 4: Uncle/Nephew Deoband Debacle!

For a number of years thre is ongoing tussle and disagreement between:

  1. Maulana Mahmood Madani (HA)
  2. Maulana Arshad Madani (HA)

Everyone tries to say that NOTHING is happening between uncle and nephew and YET there are multiple lawsuits and disputes (in India and UK)

I mean what on Earth is going on? If you have a dispute say we disagree! Why:

  1. Say we love each other
  2. And then have masive lawsuits and disputes

Isn't the whole issue TAILOR-MADE to create huge confusion!!!

report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
11,537
Brother
106
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#6 [Permalink] Posted on 29th November 2015 16:28

Dajjal Propganda vs Dajjal Propganda Example 5: TTP vs Pakistani Deobandees

Surely Deobandi (Ulama and laymen) in Pakistan have known about this group for over a decade.

  1. What took them so long to come clean that these are Khawarij? Take a good look at years old threads on Sunniforum and Haqqforum with Deobandees defending them.
  2. WHY did all the Deobandees in Pakistan DUMP them together and after the 2014 Peshawar incident when the entire Pakistani Nation went against them?

Deobandees clearly back Taliban, SO SURELY they have known about this group all along! Either they are with Taliban (of Afghanistan) or TTP Is a separate Khawarij group. Why over 10 years and countless lives??? As soon as Pakistan Government Policy changed (Army action), Deobandees changed.

report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
11,537
Brother
106
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#7 [Permalink] Posted on 29th November 2015 16:30
I am not discussing who is right and who is wrong. I am merely taking about the insane amounts of confusion in the world, today.

I understand that people have the need to defend one side over the other and they will based on their allegiances.

WHO are we supposed to trust???
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
Unspecified
31
Brother
8
#8 [Permalink] Posted on 29th November 2015 17:11
Assalamualikum

Excellent thread. Though to be honest, I was wishing at the end there will be some sort of a 'solution'. Or things we can do that will clear the mess/confusion. Whether you all like it or not, people do look up to 'senior' members such as yourself, Maripat, london786 and a whole host of others.

You could be receiving flak from some sections, but a timely thread indeed mashaAllah.

Again, I wish there will be posts that will clear the confusion, little by little at least.
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
11,537
Brother
106
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#9 [Permalink] Posted on 29th November 2015 18:01

my176 wrote:
View original post

W-Salam,

I honestly wish I knew!

report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Abu_Bilal's avatar
Offline
Pakistan
196
Brother
265
Abu_Bilal's avatar
#10 [Permalink] Posted on 30th November 2015 09:35
Assalamu Alaykum,

Just my two cents.

Deobandis did not change about TTP one bit. The army action has been going on since 2007, in Swat and FATA. Deobandi ulema have been unanimous about TTP, and a fatwa about suicide attacks was issued well before 2007. However, one can say that there was a soft spot for TTP in some of the deobandi ulema, due to old contacts and allegiances.

Rest i fully agree with this thread, that Dajjali system banks on creating confusion, and that is exactly what is happening. These are times of fitnah.

In my humble opinion, the easiest way to save oneself from the Dajjali system is by sticking to our Akaabir, their views, their majaalis, etc.
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
11,537
Brother
106
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#11 [Permalink] Posted on 30th November 2015 10:37
Abu_Bilal wrote:
View original post


Mufti Saheb,

Lets go with your explaination for a second.


Are you saying that Ulama had a soft spot for Khawarij despite killings, murders and mayhem? So while Khawarij were killing scores of innocent civilians Ulama had a soft spot.

Would you kindly confirm your statement?

Jzk
Posted via the Muftisays Android App
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Abu_Bilal's avatar
Offline
Pakistan
196
Brother
265
Abu_Bilal's avatar
#12 [Permalink] Posted on 1st December 2015 06:14
Muadh_Khan wrote:
View original post


Well where did i say that?

Actually it has a long background. To make it short, Army carried out Lal Masjid, and other offences. There was response from TTP. Deobandi ulema tried to stop the army action through dialogue. At that time TTP only targetted military people. However, as the salafi/mamaati menace grew within their ranks, they started targeting civilians directly. It was all very confusing in those days. Some of their actions were in accordance with the shariah and some were not. Therefore, some deobandi ulema openly condemned them, some only condemned their unlawful actions, some had a soft spot for them and tried to persuade them towards dialogue and shariah compliant actions. Also TTP had many groups working within them, with different mindsets.

But after the Army Public School massacre, the picture became pretty clear. That sick and disgusting ideology of murdering 5 year old children, and targeting the civilians directly. Hence the khawarij tag. So in principle, deobandi ulema always denounced the unlawful actions of TTP.

Same is the case with IS. When it started, all sorts of people joined them, citing all those ahaadees mentioning Syria as the final battlefield. But slowly as their barbaric actions became public, the khawarij tag came. Allah knows best.
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Offline
Gham-o-Huzn
3,269
Brother
3,503
Maripat's avatar
#13 [Permalink] Posted on 1st December 2015 10:11
A Confusion Addressed to Me


Humein to aaj tak ye hee ma'aloom nahin hua ki Ali Miyan ka Babri Masjid par muaqqaf kya hai.

Tr: Till today I don't know Ali Miyan (RA)'s stand on Babri Mosque.

***********

This is a Barelwi politician friend of mine.
It is clear that Barelwis keep an eye on what we do and what we think.
I suppose they take all the advantage of our efforts in academics.
I shall take above statement by this friend in this spirit - that he genuinely wanted to know Ali Miyan (RA)'s stand on Babri Mosque.

This brings me to the topic of the present thread.
Clearly there is a confusion.

Next we may ask what is the solution to this confusion?
Since Ali Miyan (RA) is no more we can not solve this problem.

Then there will be a related problem.
What should be our stand on Babri Mosque?

Since the issue is rather complex I personally shall not make my own stand.
But this brings us to the real issue.
What should a Muslim who came to this forum do about these issues.

Ask any Maulwi and the answer will be very clear - write to the Dar-ul-Ifta.
From the Dar-ul-Ifta, say at Deoband, you are unlikely to receive a clear cut answer.
A dar-ul-Ifta in pakistan will do even better.
"This is an Indian problem and the Ulama of Bharat will know better about this issue."
In fact our first Maulwi himself was less than integral about his response.
He simply deflected the problem. In all probably he will be smarting after this type of action.
I have seen countless episodes where a 'smart' answer is so cherished by them.

When someone asked about Dr Zakir Naik do we know the first response?
"We do not know who is this person."
That can not be true. By that time Dr Naik has been very well known.
Clearly the official answers must have received Al-Jawab-Sahi stamp from senior Muftis.

This all leaves us common people in a lurch.

Can we do something about it?

My assertion is that we modern educated Muslims have to bear a responsibility more than we have been doing so far.
American President can pick up any academician from a university and make him an ambassador of a country.
Solely because the blighter has read some books about that country.
And this has been serving them very well all this time.
All this time when our 'Ulama have been refusing to decide whether we may or may not vote.
Or when our 'Ulama say that a woman raped by her father in law can live with her husband without talking to him and touching him.

This last statement should be taken as an additional confusion.

Anyway this too will be distressing.
The question is what should we do about such situations.

One more question : What should be our stand on the wars between Sahaba (RA)?

It is distressing for us and it is distressing for every new Salik, every Muslim who wants to use Islam to solve his worldly problems.

I would like to give a better answer than saying I would not like to talk about it.

So let us decide what should we do.

To begin with we must make a list of such inconvenient issues and questions and, in parallel, discuss their solutions.

report post quote code quick quote reply
+2 -0Like x 1Winner x 1
back to top