The Difference Between Sunni and Shiite

[The Professor]

To us, that is, non Sunni's and non Shiites, the dif btwn em is:

Their undying antipathy towards each other goes back to just a few generations after the death of the Prophet Mohammed in 632 AD.

His son in law, or something, succeeded the short rule of Mohammed's right hand man, after the Prophet's death.

And in about 680, or 700, or thereabouts, the last of the direct line of Mohammed, the brothers, I believe, Ali and Hussein, were defeated, or assassinated, in a battle, or skirmish, near Karbala in southern Iraq.

A location of note in the very hot days of today, Karbala, one of the most holy sites of all Shia. And of course, locus of trouble in the early years of W's war.

The Ali Mosque in Karbala, indeed, is, I believe, the #1 single most sacred spot on all Earth for Shia.

The point: whatever they're fighting about or over, Sunnis and Shiites, is, really, to our purposes, in light of our interests, completely irrelevant.

Or, at the least, highly escoteric.

They doctrinally differ over the legitimacy of the Caliph, or Pope, or whatever they call him.

Shiites hold to the direct line of the Prophet. They protest against the person of the Caliph, whether Umayyad, til about 780, in Damascus, or the far more glorious Abassids, in Baghdad, who held the caliphate there til Genghis, or one of his Mongol relatives, in 1240 AD.

Shiites hold to the Prophet's blood, consider all others usurpers after the martyrdom of Ali near Karbala.

Sunnis, then, are orthodox, or analagous to---they're happy with, or, at least, support whoever's on the throne, or pillow, or sofa, or whatever.

So, there you go. Shiites want the Church, or Faith, or Islam, to be headed by a relative of Mohammed, and they protest, ala Protestants, against any other.

While Sunnis are, to my understanding, more accepting, apologists for, make up the Party of supporters of the Caliph, through history, once in Damascus, then Harun al Rashid, the greatest, exact comtemporary of Charlemagne, in Baghdad, exactly 800 AD.

But that's not the dif btwn Sunnis and Shiites. At least not to us, those of us who are neither, who are outsiders.

All that succession stuff to us outside is not real germaine.

1. They hate each other. Who cares why. More than they hate us, even. Almost as much as they hate Jews.

2. Almost the entire gigantic Muslim world is, of course, Sunni. Orthodox. Regular. It goes like this. I'll say a country, you answer, Sunni or Shiite. The secret: the answer is always Sunni. Syria: Sunni. Egypt: Sunni. Jordan: Sunni. Afghanistan/Pakistan: Sunni. Muslims in the Philippines: Sunni. Indonesia: Sunni. Al Quaeda: Sunni. Al Quaeda in Iraq: Sunni. Those extremists in Saudia Arabia, I forget their name: Sunni, naturally.

3. All are Sunni. Except. Except the ONE Shiite nation, world power, who, by the way, they're not Arab, they're Persians: Iran. Iran is the world's center and leading influence of international Shia.

4. Now, it just so happens that southern Iraq, approximately the bottom 2/3 of the nation, is controlled, or looks for leadership to Iran. Iran is Shiite. And the southern 2/3 of Iraq, including Karbala and the Ali Mosque, is Shiite.

5. Our troubles in Iraq were mostly vs the minority Sunnis of Anbar Province, the triangular shaped area left of Baghdad, reaching to Syria. Anbar flipped, came our way, coincidentally with the Surge policy that's been so successful. What happened was Sunni Al Qaeda in Iraq was so extreme in its violence towards civilians, killed so many mamas, grammas and maidens, the mainstream Sunnis of Anbar turned against Sunni Al Qaeda in Iraq, began cooperating instead with General Petraeus. The Sunnis of Iraq, mostly in Anbar, apparently, flipped, came our way, around the time of the Surge.

6. Having pacified largely the baby nation's biggest sore, the Prime Minister, al Maliki, a Shiite (Iraq is 60% Shiite, 30% Sunni, and 10% Kurd, the latter in the north), was able to take on that Muqtada al Sadr, a friend, at least, of Iran. Sadr city is a huge (2 million) slum of Iran-looking Shiites just outside Baghdad. Muqtada and Mullah, to my outsiders understanding of all this, are kinda the very names, defintions, of Shiite-ism, in the first place. That is, they're not Popes, or Cardinals, or Deacons, or something ala orthodoxy. But they're instead, Mullah, Muqti, titles themselves of something Protestant-ish. Either way, the Shiite PM of Iraq was finally, after some resolution of Anbar, able to focus, using more Iraqi than US troops, on the Shiites now. "Finally," cried his Sunni and Kurd critics---it's about time you took on your own troublemakers. He gained domestically hugely through this, grew politically internally. Then, Sadr laid down his arms, given an ultimatum. It was August, 2008, I followed THAT very closely as it went down.

7. Saddam was neither Sunni nor Shiite. He was secular, a Baathist, member of the Baath Party, which also is strong in Syria. As such, Saddam was aligned with the Sunni minority of the mostly Shiite country he terrorized. Saddam's removal was very harmful, therefore, to Sunni interests in Iraq, and is the reason the first several years of W's war saw so much Sunni trouble.

The Prof

[Dale escondido]

This is the same story over and over. The culture of hate permeates all the religious differences .
With a genocide throw in every 25-50 years to fuel new generations that only HATE.
You have to teach this hate young and frequently to stick, but they do it.

[Bill Cosby]

Nice read........... :)

Who did you steal this from???? :lmao2:

3. All are Sunni. Except. Except the ONE Shiite nation, world power, who, by the way, they're not Arab, they're Persians: Iran. Iran is the world's center and leading influence of international Shia.

I am not going to pick your take apart but it would seem to have a slant .......

Are you familiar w/ the history here???

[Kanadesaga]

Nice read........... :)

Who did you steal this from???? :lmao2:



I am not going to pick your take apart but it would seem to have a slant .......

Are you familiar w/ the history here???


copy/paste is such a nice tool.

[Bill Cosby]

copy/paste is such a nice tool.

Yep......... I guess this why they say he is the Plagiarism princess?? :disbelief:

[mwillman]

He must have Plagiarized since that post uses punctuation.

[Dale escondido]

Typical empty left wing attacks as substance is hard to refute.
This shit has been going on forever the 1915 genocide and germanys use of the servs and christian from croatia in 40s.
This goes back to the 8th century.
If you had history in school youd know this.

[Dale escondido]

that is too long to read

I agree dont hurt yourself .
If your liberal just attack the poster, if conservative say good post:thumbsup:
You will fit right in here.

[Kanadesaga]

Typical empty left wing attacks as substance is hard to refute.
This shit has been going on forever the 1915 genocide and germanys use of the servs and christian from croatia in 40s.
This goes back to the 8th century.
If you had history in school youd know this.

and if you had any history you'd know it was Serbs. :lmao2: :lmao2: :lmao2:

Like from Serbia, or do youi think Servia?

[Dale escondido]

and if you had any history you'd know it was Serbs. :lmao2: :lmao2: :lmao2:

Like from Serbia, or do youi think Servia?

Trypical attack the typo.
Sense you clueless on the subject. Go google and look better, einstien
The germans got the serbs and christians to fight for them on the russian front and they turned croats in who were killed or send to labor camps. Mostly retaliation for incidents 30 years earlier when it happened in reverse.

[Kanadesaga]

Trypical attack the typo.
Sense you clueless on the subject. Go google and look better, einstien
The germans got the serbs and christians to fight for them on the russian front and they turned croats in who were killed or send to labor camps. Mostly retaliation for incidents 30 years earlier when it happened in reverse.


but, that's what you rightys do, I was attacked all night by Maryann, er the prof, for my typos, so I thought it was fair game. After all, he ranted for hours about it. :lmao2:

[Bill Cosby]

Typical empty left wing attacks as substance is hard to refute.
This shit has been going on forever the 1915 genocide and germanys use of the servs and christian from croatia in 40s.
This goes back to the 8th century.
If you had history in school youd know this.

??? What does any of that have to do w/ the topic about types of Islam???

The prof prob spent a couple moments cutting & pasting here you could @ least comment on that.......... :thumbsup:

[Dale escondido]

??? What does any of that have to do w/ the topic about types of Islam???

The prof prob spent a couple moments cutting & pasting here you could @ least comment on that.......... :thumbsup:

Because these are all the results of different sects of muslim religions with some christian thrown in.
They fight kill and die because of the killing of a child 1400 years ago.
Nowadays I am sure they teach you about the nine crusades and the horrific deeds done by the christians in school.
But the muslims history just wont settle down, they teach the hate to their children ,they teach others are diseased and touching them is disgusting.
How can it end?

[Bill Cosby]

Because these are all the results of different sects of muslim religions with some christian thrown in.
They fight kill and die because of the killing of a child 1400 years ago.
Nowadays I am sure they teach you about the nine crusades and the horrific deeds done by the christians in school.
But the muslims history just wont settle down, they teach the hate to their children ,they teach others are diseased and touching them is disgusting.
How can it end?

A child died??? What child died???

Come on dale stop, put the pipe down & remember never to start smoking that shit before you post.........

The crusades were bad- war is bad.....

Muslims won't settle down....????

I think you mean lay down.

I guess they are tired of that shit.......... That would be my guess..........

They teach hate to their children......!!!! Yea that is not good but hey that is what ppl do.....>>> Is that unique to Moslems.....??? NO!!!!! http://www.hyscience.com/archives/Kids%20writing%20on%20bombs%202.jpg

http://www.hyscience.com/archives/Kids%20writing%20on%20bombs.jpg


How can it end?

lol......... I think you have given this some thought already.. Now go head & just say it, answer your own question.......:thumbsup:

[Dale escondido]

My god your to smart to even research then refute.

Go in peace and put me on ignore, PLEASE.

[Smurf-Herder]

BTW, Muslim hegemony was the reason for the inital Crusades in the first place ... if anybody cares.

"The Crusades originally had the goal of recapturing Jerusalem and the Holy Land from Muslim rule and were launched in response to a call from the Eastern Orthodox Byzantine Empire for help against the expansion of the Muslim Seljuk Turks into Anatolia."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusade

[Binky]

He must have Plagiarized since that post uses punctuation.



:lmao2: :lmao2: Good one.

[Binky]

An interesting post.

[Bill Cosby]

BTW, Muslim hegemony was the reason for the inital Crusades in the first place ... if anybody cares.

"The Crusades originally had the goal of recapturing Jerusalem and the Holy Land from Muslim rule and were launched in response to a call from the Eastern Orthodox Byzantine Empire for help against the expansion of the Muslim Seljuk Turks into Anatolia."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusade


To replace one hegemony w/ another....... Kinda like how it is today & has always been.............

[Smurf-Herder]

To replace one hegemony w/ another....... Kinda like how it is today & has always been.............

But the Crusades may not have ever happened if the Muslims didn't start it. At one point they occupied parts of Spain.

[The Professor]

To replace one hegemony w/ another....... Kinda like how it is today & has always been.............

"types" of islam?

clearly not very familiar with the topic

pensively stroking his thoughtful chin, the single most uneducated poster on all dcj poses...

[Bill Cosby]

"types" of islam?

clearly not very familiar with the topic

pensively stroking his thoughtful chin, the single most uneducated poster on all dcj poses...

Think as you like.......... (It would be a refreshing change if you did think now & then)

I am up for the challenge if you care to explore the topic..........;)

You cut & pasted something that is of interest to me.....

If you wish to discuss it pls do so if not STFU about it already & go play teacher w/ someone else........

[The Professor]

if you wanna discuss, discuss

i already said it all:




To us, that is, non Sunni's and non Shiites, the dif btwn em is:

Their undying antipathy towards each other goes back to just a few generations after the death of the Prophet Mohammed in 632 AD.

His son in law, or something, succeeded the short rule of Mohammed's right hand man, after the Prophet's death.

And in about 680, or 700, or thereabouts, the last of the direct line of Mohammed, the brothers, I believe, Ali and Hussein, were defeated, or assassinated, in a battle, or skirmish, near Karbala in southern Iraq.

A location of note in the very hot days of today, Karbala, one of the most holy sites of all Shia. And of course, locus of trouble in the early years of W's war.

The Ali Mosque in Karbala, indeed, is, I believe, the #1 single most sacred spot on all Earth for Shia.

The point: whatever they're fighting about or over, Sunnis and Shiites, is, really, to our purposes, in light of our interests, completely irrelevant.

Or, at the least, highly escoteric.

They doctrinally differ over the legitimacy of the Caliph, or Pope, or whatever they call him.

Shiites hold to the direct line of the Prophet. They protest against the person of the Caliph, whether Umayyad, til about 780, in Damascus, or the far more glorious Abassids, in Baghdad, who held the caliphate there til Genghis, or one of his Mongol relatives, in 1240 AD.

Shiites hold to the Prophet's blood, consider all others usurpers after the martyrdom of Ali near Karbala.

Sunnis, then, are orthodox, or analagous to---they're happy with, or, at least, support whoever's on the throne, or pillow, or sofa, or whatever.

So, there you go. Shiites want the Church, or Faith, or Islam, to be headed by a relative of Mohammed, and they protest, ala Protestants, against any other.

While Sunnis are, to my understanding, more accepting, apologists for, make up the Party of supporters of the Caliph, through history, once in Damascus, then Harun al Rashid, the greatest, exact comtemporary of Charlemagne, in Baghdad, exactly 800 AD.

But that's not the dif btwn Sunnis and Shiites. At least not to us, those of us who are neither, who are outsiders.

All that succession stuff to us outside is not real germaine.

1. They hate each other. Who cares why. More than they hate us, even. Almost as much as they hate Jews.

2. Almost the entire gigantic Muslim world is, of course, Sunni. Orthodox. Regular. It goes like this. I'll say a country, you answer, Sunni or Shiite. The secret: the answer is always Sunni. Syria: Sunni. Egypt: Sunni. Jordan: Sunni. Afghanistan/Pakistan: Sunni. Muslims in the Philippines: Sunni. Indonesia: Sunni. Al Quaeda: Sunni. Al Quaeda in Iraq: Sunni. Those extremists in Saudia Arabia, I forget their name: Sunni, naturally.

3. All are Sunni. Except. Except the ONE Shiite nation, world power, who, by the way, they're not Arab, they're Persians: Iran. Iran is the world's center and leading influence of international Shia.

4. Now, it just so happens that southern Iraq, approximately the bottom 2/3 of the nation, is controlled, or looks for leadership to Iran. Iran is Shiite. And the southern 2/3 of Iraq, including Karbala and the Ali Mosque, is Shiite.

5. Our troubles in Iraq were mostly vs the minority Sunnis of Anbar Province, the triangular shaped area left of Baghdad, reaching to Syria. Anbar flipped, came our way, coincidentally with the Surge policy that's been so successful. What happened was Sunni Al Qaeda in Iraq was so extreme in its violence towards civilians, killed so many mamas, grammas and maidens, the mainstream Sunnis of Anbar turned against Sunni Al Qaeda in Iraq, began cooperating instead with General Petraeus. The Sunnis of Iraq, mostly in Anbar, apparently, flipped, came our way, around the time of the Surge.

6. Having pacified largely the baby nation's biggest sore, the Prime Minister, al Maliki, a Shiite (Iraq is 60% Shiite, 30% Sunni, and 10% Kurd, the latter in the north), was able to take on that Muqtada al Sadr, a friend, at least, of Iran. Sadr city is a huge (2 million) slum of Iran-looking Shiites just outside Baghdad. Muqtada and Mullah, to my outsiders understanding of all this, are kinda the very names, defintions, of Shiite-ism, in the first place. That is, they're not Popes, or Cardinals, or Deacons, or something ala orthodoxy. But they're instead, Mullah, Muqti, titles themselves of something Protestant-ish. Either way, the Shiite PM of Iraq was finally, after some resolution of Anbar, able to focus, using more Iraqi than US troops, on the Shiites now. "Finally," cried his Sunni and Kurd critics---it's about time you took on your own troublemakers. He gained domestically hugely through this, grew politically internally. Then, Sadr laid down his arms, given an ultimatum. It was August, 2008, I followed THAT very closely as it went down.

7. Saddam was neither Sunni nor Shiite. He was secular, a Baathist, member of the Baath Party, which also is strong in Syria. As such, Saddam was aligned with the Sunni minority of the mostly Shiite country he terrorized. Saddam's removal was very harmful, therefore, to Sunni interests in Iraq, and is the reason the first several years of W's war saw so much Sunni trouble.

The Prof

[Binky]

Think as you like.......... (It would be a refreshing change if you did think now & then)

I am up for the challenge if you care to explore the topic..........;)

You cut & pasted something that is of interest to me.....

If you wish to discuss it pls do so if not STFU about it already & go play teacher w/ someone else........


:lmao2: :lmao2:

[Bill Cosby]

if you wanna discuss, discuss

i already said it all:



No son, you said nothing.. This is someone elses opinion not yours.. You cut & pasted this here.......

That does not make it yours.........:rolleyes:

Give me your take on what was said here & we will have something to talk about...........

[The Professor]

now, why would The Prof paste a piece NOT representing his position?

es decir, por que?

mr cosby, the single most uneducated poster on all dcj, is not making sense

surprise

if mr cosby wishes to discuss "types" of islam, let him do so

regardless who penned the now famous post in question

which is obviously The Prof's---there's not ONE spelling error or typo

LOLOL!

[Dale escondido]

if you wanna discuss, discuss

i already said it all:




To us, that is, non Sunni's and non Shiites, the dif btwn em is:

Their undying antipathy towards each other goes back to just a few generations after the death of the Prophet Mohammed in 632 AD.

His son in law, or something, succeeded the short rule of Mohammed's right hand man, after the Prophet's death.

And in about 680, or 700, or thereabouts, the last of the direct line of Mohammed, the brothers, I believe, Ali and Hussein, were defeated, or assassinated, in a battle, or skirmish, near Karbala in southern Iraq.

A location of note in the very hot days of today, Karbala, one of the most holy sites of all Shia. And of course, locus of trouble in the early years of W's war.

The Ali Mosque in Karbala, indeed, is, I believe, the #1 single most sacred spot on all Earth for Shia.

The point: whatever they're fighting about or over, Sunnis and Shiites, is, really, to our purposes, in light of our interests, completely irrelevant.

Or, at the least, highly escoteric.

They doctrinally differ over the legitimacy of the Caliph, or Pope, or whatever they call him.

Shiites hold to the direct line of the Prophet. They protest against the person of the Caliph, whether Umayyad, til about 780, in Damascus, or the far more glorious Abassids, in Baghdad, who held the caliphate there til Genghis, or one of his Mongol relatives, in 1240 AD.

Shiites hold to the Prophet's blood, consider all others usurpers after the martyrdom of Ali near Karbala.

Sunnis, then, are orthodox, or analagous to---they're happy with, or, at least, support whoever's on the throne, or pillow, or sofa, or whatever.

So, there you go. Shiites want the Church, or Faith, or Islam, to be headed by a relative of Mohammed, and they protest, ala Protestants, against any other.

While Sunnis are, to my understanding, more accepting, apologists for, make up the Party of supporters of the Caliph, through history, once in Damascus, then Harun al Rashid, the greatest, exact comtemporary of Charlemagne, in Baghdad, exactly 800 AD.

But that's not the dif btwn Sunnis and Shiites. At least not to us, those of us who are neither, who are outsiders.

All that succession stuff to us outside is not real germaine.

1. They hate each other. Who cares why. More than they hate us, even. Almost as much as they hate Jews.

2. Almost the entire gigantic Muslim world is, of course, Sunni. Orthodox. Regular. It goes like this. I'll say a country, you answer, Sunni or Shiite. The secret: the answer is always Sunni. Syria: Sunni. Egypt: Sunni. Jordan: Sunni. Afghanistan/Pakistan: Sunni. Muslims in the Philippines: Sunni. Indonesia: Sunni. Al Quaeda: Sunni. Al Quaeda in Iraq: Sunni. Those extremists in Saudia Arabia, I forget their name: Sunni, naturally.

3. All are Sunni. Except. Except the ONE Shiite nation, world power, who, by the way, they're not Arab, they're Persians: Iran. Iran is the world's center and leading influence of international Shia.

4. Now, it just so happens that southern Iraq, approximately the bottom 2/3 of the nation, is controlled, or looks for leadership to Iran. Iran is Shiite. And the southern 2/3 of Iraq, including Karbala and the Ali Mosque, is Shiite.

5. Our troubles in Iraq were mostly vs the minority Sunnis of Anbar Province, the triangular shaped area left of Baghdad, reaching to Syria. Anbar flipped, came our way, coincidentally with the Surge policy that's been so successful. What happened was Sunni Al Qaeda in Iraq was so extreme in its violence towards civilians, killed so many mamas, grammas and maidens, the mainstream Sunnis of Anbar turned against Sunni Al Qaeda in Iraq, began cooperating instead with General Petraeus. The Sunnis of Iraq, mostly in Anbar, apparently, flipped, came our way, around the time of the Surge.

6. Having pacified largely the baby nation's biggest sore, the Prime Minister, al Maliki, a Shiite (Iraq is 60% Shiite, 30% Sunni, and 10% Kurd, the latter in the north), was able to take on that Muqtada al Sadr, a friend, at least, of Iran. Sadr city is a huge (2 million) slum of Iran-looking Shiites just outside Baghdad. Muqtada and Mullah, to my outsiders understanding of all this, are kinda the very names, defintions, of Shiite-ism, in the first place. That is, they're not Popes, or Cardinals, or Deacons, or something ala orthodoxy. But they're instead, Mullah, Muqti, titles themselves of something Protestant-ish. Either way, the Shiite PM of Iraq was finally, after some resolution of Anbar, able to focus, using more Iraqi than US troops, on the Shiites now. "Finally," cried his Sunni and Kurd critics---it's about time you took on your own troublemakers. He gained domestically hugely through this, grew politically internally. Then, Sadr laid down his arms, given an ultimatum. It was August, 2008, I followed THAT very closely as it went down.

7. Saddam was neither Sunni nor Shiite. He was secular, a Baathist, member of the Baath Party, which also is strong in Syria. As such, Saddam was aligned with the Sunni minority of the mostly Shiite country he terrorized. Saddam's removal was very harmful, therefore, to Sunni interests in Iraq, and is the reason the first several years of W's war saw so much Sunni trouble.

The Prof

Thanks for taking the time. I gave up on this che guy.
I did remember in school the first to take over from mohammed was a child ,but i cant find it now so maybe i am mistaken.
Crusades looked at in detail were pretty brutal and unfair most of the time, but we finally moved past the thinking that permeated the times.
Muslims still have to grow.

[ROdger Right]

They gave them selves no room to grow is the problem. Such a backwards peoples.
I guess we all have that english fellow to thank, ever since then the church's power has never been the same.

[Bill Cosby]

Thanks for taking the time. I gave up on this che guy.
I did remember in school the first to take over from mohammed was a child ,but i cant find it now so maybe i am mistaken.
Crusades looked at in detail were pretty brutal and unfair most of the time, but we finally moved past the thinking that permeated the times.
Muslims still have to grow.

Son you should sit in silence & be thought a fool………. Cause every time you post you remove all doubt………..

If you are looking for this fool to help or teach remember the sayin about the blind leading the blind…………

[Bill Cosby]

They gave them selves no room to grow is the problem. Such a backwards peoples.
I guess we all have that english fellow to thank, ever since then the church's power has never been the same.

Well it is safe to assume after that comment you are not "one of them" & you have not fucking idea what the hell you are talking about........

You should prob spend some time reading instead of commenting you might pick up on something...............

[Bill Cosby]

now, why would The Prof paste a piece NOT representing his position?



Note your own take “dumbass representing”……..

If you have an opinion state it……

Did you do that- no!!!

You pasted someone else’s shit…….

You got an opinion state it---------- Not someone’s elses…..

[ROdger Right]

I know you wouldnt try and look like a total jackass by saying our prisons are easily comparable to international prisons.
Yea ours are bad, almost everywhere else is like 10 times worse.

Oh please share on your experiance. Or does that only work one way.

I see 2 ways of having muslims fit into the world with out first conquering everybody else.
1: They change the Q'uran and make it possible for others to live with out being muslim and being a devot one.
2: We kill every male that practices islam so we would indeed be rid of them forever providing that all the womens children take their fathers religion.

[Bill Cosby]

I know you wouldnt try and look like a total jackass by saying our prisons are easily comparable to international prisons.
Yea ours are bad, almost everywhere else is like 10 times worse.

Oh please share on your experiance. Or does that only work one way.

I see 2 ways of having muslims fit into the world with out first conquering everybody else.
1: They change the Q'uran and make it possible for others to live with out being muslim and being a devot one.
2: We kill every male that practices islam so we would indeed be rid of them forever providing that all the womens children take their fathers religion.
http://static.crooksandliars.com/files/uploads/2009/01/torture_719b2.jpg

[The Professor]

Son you should sit in silence & be thought a fool………. Cause every time you post you remove all doubt………..

If you are looking for this fool to help or teach remember the sayin about the blind leading the blind…………

utter nonsense

what a poser

absolutely nothing to say

and that, like a 4th grader struggling thru the curriculum

the single most uneducated poster on all dcj once more makes no sense

now he actually asks YOU to say something so HE'LL have something to discuss

LOLOLOL!!!

[The Professor]

Note your own take “dumbass representing”……..

If you have an opinion state it……

Did you do that- no!!!

You pasted someone else’s shit…….

You got an opinion state it---------- Not someone’s elses…..

the single most uneducated poster on all dcj never disappoints

it's not opinion, you dropout, not a word of editorial in there

it's history



To us, that is, non Sunni's and non Shiites, the dif btwn em is:

Their undying antipathy towards each other goes back to just a few generations after the death of the Prophet Mohammed in 632 AD.

His son in law, or something, succeeded the short rule of Mohammed's right hand man, after the Prophet's death.

And in about 680, or 700, or thereabouts, the last of the direct line of Mohammed, the brothers, I believe, Ali and Hussein, were defeated, or assassinated, in a battle, or skirmish, near Karbala in southern Iraq.

A location of note in the very hot days of today, Karbala, one of the most holy sites of all Shia. And of course, locus of trouble in the early years of W's war.

The Ali Mosque in Karbala, indeed, is, I believe, the #1 single most sacred spot on all Earth for Shia.

The point: whatever they're fighting about or over, Sunnis and Shiites, is, really, to our purposes, in light of our interests, completely irrelevant.

Or, at the least, highly escoteric.

They doctrinally differ over the legitimacy of the Caliph, or Pope, or whatever they call him.

Shiites hold to the direct line of the Prophet. They protest against the person of the Caliph, whether Umayyad, til about 780, in Damascus, or the far more glorious Abassids, in Baghdad, who held the caliphate there til Genghis, or one of his Mongol relatives, in 1240 AD.

Shiites hold to the Prophet's blood, consider all others usurpers after the martyrdom of Ali near Karbala.

Sunnis, then, are orthodox, or analagous to---they're happy with, or, at least, support whoever's on the throne, or pillow, or sofa, or whatever.

So, there you go. Shiites want the Church, or Faith, or Islam, to be headed by a relative of Mohammed, and they protest, ala Protestants, against any other.

While Sunnis are, to my understanding, more accepting, apologists for, make up the Party of supporters of the Caliph, through history, once in Damascus, then Harun al Rashid, the greatest, exact comtemporary of Charlemagne, in Baghdad, exactly 800 AD.

But that's not the dif btwn Sunnis and Shiites. At least not to us, those of us who are neither, who are outsiders.

All that succession stuff to us outside is not real germaine.

1. They hate each other. Who cares why. More than they hate us, even. Almost as much as they hate Jews.

2. Almost the entire gigantic Muslim world is, of course, Sunni. Orthodox. Regular. It goes like this. I'll say a country, you answer, Sunni or Shiite. The secret: the answer is always Sunni. Syria: Sunni. Egypt: Sunni. Jordan: Sunni. Afghanistan/Pakistan: Sunni. Muslims in the Philippines: Sunni. Indonesia: Sunni. Al Quaeda: Sunni. Al Quaeda in Iraq: Sunni. Those extremists in Saudia Arabia, I forget their name: Sunni, naturally.

3. All are Sunni. Except. Except the ONE Shiite nation, world power, who, by the way, they're not Arab, they're Persians: Iran. Iran is the world's center and leading influence of international Shia.

4. Now, it just so happens that southern Iraq, approximately the bottom 2/3 of the nation, is controlled, or looks for leadership to Iran. Iran is Shiite. And the southern 2/3 of Iraq, including Karbala and the Ali Mosque, is Shiite.

5. Our troubles in Iraq were mostly vs the minority Sunnis of Anbar Province, the triangular shaped area left of Baghdad, reaching to Syria. Anbar flipped, came our way, coincidentally with the Surge policy that's been so successful. What happened was Sunni Al Qaeda in Iraq was so extreme in its violence towards civilians, killed so many mamas, grammas and maidens, the mainstream Sunnis of Anbar turned against Sunni Al Qaeda in Iraq, began cooperating instead with General Petraeus. The Sunnis of Iraq, mostly in Anbar, apparently, flipped, came our way, around the time of the Surge.

6. Having pacified largely the baby nation's biggest sore, the Prime Minister, al Maliki, a Shiite (Iraq is 60% Shiite, 30% Sunni, and 10% Kurd, the latter in the north), was able to take on that Muqtada al Sadr, a friend, at least, of Iran. Sadr city is a huge (2 million) slum of Iran-looking Shiites just outside Baghdad. Muqtada and Mullah, to my outsiders understanding of all this, are kinda the very names, defintions, of Shiite-ism, in the first place. That is, they're not Popes, or Cardinals, or Deacons, or something ala orthodoxy. But they're instead, Mullah, Muqti, titles themselves of something Protestant-ish. Either way, the Shiite PM of Iraq was finally, after some resolution of Anbar, able to focus, using more Iraqi than US troops, on the Shiites now. "Finally," cried his Sunni and Kurd critics---it's about time you took on your own troublemakers. He gained domestically hugely through this, grew politically internally. Then, Sadr laid down his arms, given an ultimatum. It was August, 2008, I followed THAT very closely as it went down.

7. Saddam was neither Sunni nor Shiite. He was secular, a Baathist, member of the Baath Party, which also is strong in Syria. As such, Saddam was aligned with the Sunni minority of the mostly Shiite country he terrorized. Saddam's removal was very harmful, therefore, to Sunni interests in Iraq, and is the reason the first several years of W's war saw so much Sunni trouble.

The Prof

[Hog Trash]

Originally Posted by Bill Cosby
Note your own take “dumbass representing”……..

If you have an opinion state it……

Did you do that- no!!!

You pasted someone else’s shit…….

You got an opinion state it---------- Not someone’s elses…..the single most uneducated poster on all dcj never disappoints

it's not opinion, you dropout, not a word of editorial in there

it's history

The ProfYou have sacrificed your persistance at the alter of ignorance Professor....There is no light at the end of this tunnel.

You realize that you are not dealing with the brightest star in the heavens, but you don't seem to be aware that you are wasting your time.

Those who are blind by choice will never see the light....Those who are deaf by choice will never hear the truth.

[The Professor]

probably true, my frank and funny friend

but my STUDENTS need to know that if they ever take the time to address their The Prof

he will always find the 10 or so seconds it takes to GET BACK to em

the dull kid in question included

it's why i get paid for OFFICE HOURS

LOLOL!

thanks, my HOG friend

keep up the good work, you are a powerful man

we do it for ayn rand

so long, frank lloyd wright

So long, frank lloyd wright.
I cant believe your song is gone so soon.
I barely learned the tune
So soon
So soon.

Ill remember frank lloyd wright.
All of the nights wed harmonize till dawn.
I never laughed so long
So long
So long.

Chorus
Architects may come and
Architects may go and
Never change your point of view.
When I run dry
I stop awhile and think of you

So long, frank lloyd wright
All of the nights wed harmonize till dawn.
I never laughed so long
So long
So long.

LOLOLOL!!!

party on, HOG man

i'll see ya round the FORUMS

shopping's been good

prices are DOWN

for those of US with a little CASH

yes?

cliffy

ego is the fountainhead of all human greatness

[Dale escondido]

Son you should sit in silence & be thought a fool………. Cause every time you post you remove all doubt………..

If you are looking for this fool to help or teach remember the sayin about the blind leading the blind…………

You contribute nothing, you never research and only attack.
You are fesces with feet. The by product of everything wrong with america in concentrated form.

[Bill Cosby]

You contribute nothing, you never research and only attack.
You are fesces with feet. The by product of everything wrong with america in concentrated form.

:lmao2: :lmao2: :lmao2:

& you are but a dumbass totally unable to defend any opinion much less his self... have a good day & take your own advice............:taunt:

[Bill Cosby]

the single most uneducated poster on all dcj never disappoints

it's not opinion, you dropout, not a word of editorial in there

it's history



To us, that is, non Sunni's and non Shiites, the dif btwn em is:

Their undying antipathy towards each other goes back to just a few generations after the death of the Prophet Mohammed in 632 AD.

His son in law, or something, succeeded the short rule of Mohammed's right hand man, after the Prophet's death.

And in about 680, or 700, or thereabouts, the last of the direct line of Mohammed, the brothers, I believe, Ali and Hussein, were defeated, or assassinated, in a battle, or skirmish, near Karbala in southern Iraq.

A location of note in the very hot days of today, Karbala, one of the most holy sites of all Shia. And of course, locus of trouble in the early years of W's war.

The Ali Mosque in Karbala, indeed, is, I believe, the #1 single most sacred spot on all Earth for Shia.

The point: whatever they're fighting about or over, Sunnis and Shiites, is, really, to our purposes, in light of our interests, completely irrelevant.

Or, at the least, highly escoteric.

They doctrinally differ over the legitimacy of the Caliph, or Pope, or whatever they call him.

Shiites hold to the direct line of the Prophet. They protest against the person of the Caliph, whether Umayyad, til about 780, in Damascus, or the far more glorious Abassids, in Baghdad, who held the caliphate there til Genghis, or one of his Mongol relatives, in 1240 AD.

Shiites hold to the Prophet's blood, consider all others usurpers after the martyrdom of Ali near Karbala.

Sunnis, then, are orthodox, or analagous to---they're happy with, or, at least, support whoever's on the throne, or pillow, or sofa, or whatever.

So, there you go. Shiites want the Church, or Faith, or Islam, to be headed by a relative of Mohammed, and they protest, ala Protestants, against any other.

While Sunnis are, to my understanding, more accepting, apologists for, make up the Party of supporters of the Caliph, through history, once in Damascus, then Harun al Rashid, the greatest, exact comtemporary of Charlemagne, in Baghdad, exactly 800 AD.

But that's not the dif btwn Sunnis and Shiites. At least not to us, those of us who are neither, who are outsiders.

All that succession stuff to us outside is not real germaine.

1. They hate each other. Who cares why. More than they hate us, even. Almost as much as they hate Jews.

2. Almost the entire gigantic Muslim world is, of course, Sunni. Orthodox. Regular. It goes like this. I'll say a country, you answer, Sunni or Shiite. The secret: the answer is always Sunni. Syria: Sunni. Egypt: Sunni. Jordan: Sunni. Afghanistan/Pakistan: Sunni. Muslims in the Philippines: Sunni. Indonesia: Sunni. Al Quaeda: Sunni. Al Quaeda in Iraq: Sunni. Those extremists in Saudia Arabia, I forget their name: Sunni, naturally.

3. All are Sunni. Except. Except the ONE Shiite nation, world power, who, by the way, they're not Arab, they're Persians: Iran. Iran is the world's center and leading influence of international Shia.

4. Now, it just so happens that southern Iraq, approximately the bottom 2/3 of the nation, is controlled, or looks for leadership to Iran. Iran is Shiite. And the southern 2/3 of Iraq, including Karbala and the Ali Mosque, is Shiite.

5. Our troubles in Iraq were mostly vs the minority Sunnis of Anbar Province, the triangular shaped area left of Baghdad, reaching to Syria. Anbar flipped, came our way, coincidentally with the Surge policy that's been so successful. What happened was Sunni Al Qaeda in Iraq was so extreme in its violence towards civilians, killed so many mamas, grammas and maidens, the mainstream Sunnis of Anbar turned against Sunni Al Qaeda in Iraq, began cooperating instead with General Petraeus. The Sunnis of Iraq, mostly in Anbar, apparently, flipped, came our way, around the time of the Surge.

6. Having pacified largely the baby nation's biggest sore, the Prime Minister, al Maliki, a Shiite (Iraq is 60% Shiite, 30% Sunni, and 10% Kurd, the latter in the north), was able to take on that Muqtada al Sadr, a friend, at least, of Iran. Sadr city is a huge (2 million) slum of Iran-looking Shiites just outside Baghdad. Muqtada and Mullah, to my outsiders understanding of all this, are kinda the very names, defintions, of Shiite-ism, in the first place. That is, they're not Popes, or Cardinals, or Deacons, or something ala orthodoxy. But they're instead, Mullah, Muqti, titles themselves of something Protestant-ish. Either way, the Shiite PM of Iraq was finally, after some resolution of Anbar, able to focus, using more Iraqi than US troops, on the Shiites now. "Finally," cried his Sunni and Kurd critics---it's about time you took on your own troublemakers. He gained domestically hugely through this, grew politically internally. Then, Sadr laid down his arms, given an ultimatum. It was August, 2008, I followed THAT very closely as it went down.

7. Saddam was neither Sunni nor Shiite. He was secular, a Baathist, member of the Baath Party, which also is strong in Syria. As such, Saddam was aligned with the Sunni minority of the mostly Shiite country he terrorized. Saddam's removal was very harmful, therefore, to Sunni interests in Iraq, and is the reason the first several years of W's war saw so much Sunni trouble.

The Prof


When you actually have an opinion or make a statment I will comment on it.......

I am done wasting time playing.........:)

[The Professor]

thank GOD!