
Adam
453 posts

















@adil_bach @WiwidPr0vess As usual, Dilawar is talking out of his ass.




@stendhalist Palestine has never really mattered in Dawla's ideology. They've always viewed it as a secondary matter to be solved in the distant future. This tendency has also intensified since 2014 as IS has become hyper insane. They've become a lot more deranged even by their own standards




It is no surprise that once again a new khariji on this app has appeared to spread shubuhaat about our scholars, pretending to claim them outwardly, and taking small cut out texts from them to misrepresent them. In the video below, Sheikh Abdullah Al-Qusaayr mentions cases where ruling by other than what Allah revealed constitutes major disbelief. He then mentions 2 cases where it does not remove one from the millah - these 2 are when one rules by other than what Allah revealed by mistake, or when one does so while knowing it is obligatory but does it out of desire or wordly gain. At the end, he explains that the difference between the first cases and the second is that the first cases involve الاعتقاد The first cases involve preferring, equating or permitting which in turn is attacking and belittling the ruling of Allah and this is why this individual is a taghut Now lets put your statement with no context and pair it with his speech in the video below. Either the Sheikh contradicts himself or its that you have decided to isolate a single statement of his which is no surprise, you’re only following the footsteps of your group in this. He has clearly mentioned the conditions for one to become a taghut therefore when he talks about it, apply these conditions youtu.be/-JgbpNOaLh4?si…



It is no surprise that once again a new khariji on this app has appeared to spread shubuhaat about our scholars, pretending to claim them outwardly, and taking small cut out texts from them to misrepresent them. In the video below, Sheikh Abdullah Al-Qusaayr mentions cases where ruling by other than what Allah revealed constitutes major disbelief. He then mentions 2 cases where it does not remove one from the millah - these 2 are when one rules by other than what Allah revealed by mistake, or when one does so while knowing it is obligatory but does it out of desire or wordly gain. At the end, he explains that the difference between the first cases and the second is that the first cases involve الاعتقاد The first cases involve preferring, equating or permitting which in turn is attacking and belittling the ruling of Allah and this is why this individual is a taghut Now lets put your statement with no context and pair it with his speech in the video below. Either the Sheikh contradicts himself or its that you have decided to isolate a single statement of his which is no surprise, you’re only following the footsteps of your group in this. He has clearly mentioned the conditions for one to become a taghut therefore when he talks about it, apply these conditions youtu.be/-JgbpNOaLh4?si…










Martyrdom of a foreign member of the Syrian army; Mustafa al-Rusi who was assassinated few days ago. He was part the Red Bands Unit.












