Many of the Shi'ite of Iraq do not simply praise the Sahabah. You have left out my words which were "excessive praise", so what you said has completely changed the meaning of what was really being mentioned. There is nothing wrong in praise which is mentioning good things about Allah's messenger and his companions. It is actually something permissible. Excessive praise is not. And the meaning of "excessive praise" is simple and could not possibly be confused as I immediately mentiong the meaning after mentioning the words: that excessive praise is contrary to Tawheed (i.e. it is worshipping Allah in any form or way; it is minor or major shirk). In others, they worship dead saints, visit shrines for ibadah, and do similar to the graves of the Sahabah. There calling upon Hasan and Husain in their dua and prayers is well known and so is their visiting shrines.
The Evidences are numerous:
http://www.reuters.com/article/middleeastCrisis/idUSL7273743
http://www.kuwaittimes.net/read_news.php?newsid=MTI1NDM4NDI1OQ==
Minhaaj us-Sunnah by Shaykh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah. As I understand it, excerpts of the book regarding the Shi'ah are online.
Then moving onto the next topic, about ruling by other than what Allah has legislated.
The Messenger (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said: "The Khilaafah in my Ummah after me will be for thirty years. Then there will be kingship after that." [Saheeh – Reported by Ahmad, Tirmidthee, Aboo Ya’laa.]
So if he knew there would be kingship, what is his advice?
The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said:
"The best of your rulers are those whom you love and who love you, and those who supplicate Allah in your favor and you supplicate Allah in their favor. The worst of your rulers are those whom you hate and who hate you; and whom you curse and who curse you." It was asked (by those who were present): "Should not we oppose them?" He said, "No, as long as they establish Salat; as long as they establish Salat in your midst." (Muslim)
The next statement is something I have copied from a book I own, entitled "Explanations of the Creed" and authored by Muhammad al-Hasan ibn 'Alee ibn Khalf al-Barbahaaree.
This first part is taken from point 34 (p. 43):
It is not permissible to fight the ruler nor to rebel against him even if he oppresses. This is due to the saying of the Messenger of Allah to Abu Dharr al-Ghifaaree, "Have patience even if he is an Abyssinian slave." [Its like is reported in Muslim; Eng. trans. vol.3, nos. 4525, 4526] and his (sallallahu 'alayhi wa salam) saying to the Ansaar, "Have patience until you meet me at the Pool." [Reported by al-Bukhaaree; Eng. trans. vol.5, no. 136 ] There is no fighting against the ruler in the Sunnah. It causes destruction of the religion and the worldly affairs.
This second part is taken from the footnotes on point 34 (p. 43)
Hudhaifah, radiallahu 'anhu, reports in a longer hadeeth that the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa salam) said, "There will come leaders who will not follow my guidance and will not follow my Sunnah. There will be amongst them men who will have hearts of devils in the bodies of humans." He (Hudhaifah) asked, "What shall I do O Messenger of Allah if I reach that?" He replied, "You should hear and obey the ruler even if he flogs your back and takes your wealth, then still hear and obey". [Reported by Muslim; Eng. trans. 3/1029/no.4554].
These Hadeeth can apply to the Muslim kings who rule by other than what Allah has legislated.
Concerning the issue of ruling by other than what Allaah has revealed, then this is a great topic which cannot be discussed on the likes of this forum. I recommend that you await the release of "Fitnatut-Takfeer" of Shaykh al-Albaanee. This contains the fatwaas of Shaykh al-Albaanee, Shaykh Ibn Baaz and Shaykh Ibn 'Uthaymeen on this great topic. And all of them are in agreement. Takfeer is not to be performed upon a ruler until it is known that he rejected Allaah’s rule as a matter of belief, or that he deemed secular law more superior to that of Islaam, or he viewed Islaam to be outmoded, backward etc. As for the one who replaces the Sharee’ah with secular law (tabdeel) then he too is not to be judged kaafir automatically until it is known that his action occurred from him due to his belief that secular law is superior etc. Likewise for the one who refers to secular law for judgement and makes it a reference point, he too is not to be judged a kaafir unless it is known from him that he holds this to be permissible as a matter of belief.
I will mention a few quotations of the scholars anyways to show that they are all clearly upon the same:
Ibn Al-Qayyim: "And as for the replaced law (al-hukmul-mubaddal) - and THAT IS RULING BY OTHER THAN WHAT ALLAAH HAS REVEALED - then it is not permissible to implement it nor to act by it, and it is not permissible to follow it, and the one guilty of it (saahibuhu) is BETWEEN (THE STATES) OF KUFR (DISBELIEF), FUSOOQ (REBELLION) AND DHULM (OPPRESSION)."
Shaikh Ibn ’Uthaymeen said, "And there is a doubt (shubhah) with many of the youth, which has become firmly and deeply rooted in their minds and it has kindled the issue of revolting against the rulers - and it is: that those rulers replace the Sharee’ah (haa’ulaa`il-Hukkaam MUBADDILOON), they prescribe the (secular) laws from themselves and they do not rule by what Allaah has revealed and the rule is present - but they prescribed laws from themselves.....Does the description of apostasy apply to them or not? And this requires knowing the evidences which indicate that this saying or action is apostasy, then applying them to an individual, and then, whether this individual has any doubts (which may excuse him) or not? Meaning: Sometimes a text can indicate that this action is kufr and this saying is kufr, but there are preventive barriers which prevent the application of the ruling of kufr upon this specific individual… and these preventive barriers are many, amongst them dhann (speculation) which is ignorance and amongst them ghalabah (which means being overcome by something)…"
Then the shaykh gives some examples from the sunnah - so he mentions the hadeeth of the man who asked for his body to be burned after his death and the ashes to be scattered across the earth. So the shaykh explains that the outward manifestation of his 'aqeedah is kufr, and doubt in the power of Allaah. And the shaykh gives the example of the one who when he finds his lost camel in the desert says: "O Allaah, you are my servant and I am your Lord". So the shaykh says that this is a word of kufr, but the one who says it is not to be declared a disbeliever, because he was overcome (i.e. had no power of it) due to the intensity of his happiness. And the Shaykh also gives the example of "the one who is compelled to kufr - so he utters a word of kufr, or does an action of kufr, but he is not to be declared a disbeliever by a text of the Qur’aan, because he does not desire it and has not made it his choice." at-Tahdheer min Fitnatit-Takfeer of Shaykh Naasir (p. 105-107).
You are repeatedly posting things that are about criticizing rulers and trying to paint a picture of me as someone who likes corrupt rulers or does not believe that a numerable portion of rulers are actually corrupt. Please understand that I am in no way accepting the faults of rulers as permissible. Neither have I indulged in my personal opinions clearing any ruler of wrongdoings or confirming that they done wrong things because it is of no benefit to anyone in these forums.
Rather, my objective is only to present the clear methodology in our religion with regards to the rulers, whether oppressive or just. I believe the more people who read this with an open mind will read over the statements made by the scholars and the evidences from the Qur'aan and the sunnah that I have posted. This, I believe, will be of benefit because we can focus on studying our religion and correcting our own mistakes in our own lives: which is attainable and reasonably within our reach-- something that our religion calls us towards-- not critizing Muslim rulers and rousing people to demonstrations and the like, which our religion tells us wastes times and weakens our resolve. So the proof for us needing to study our religion, have unconditional belief in what we learn, implement it, and have patience is:
Allah (subhana wa ta'allaa) says, "By Time. Verily, Man is in loss! Except those who believe (in Islâmic Monotheism) and do righteous good deeds, and recommend one another to the truth (i.e. order one another to perform all kinds of good deeds (Al-Ma'rûf)which Allâh has ordained, and abstain from all kinds of sins and evil deeds (Al-Munkar)which Allâh has forbidden), and recommend one another to patience (for the sufferings, harms, and injuries which one may encounter in Allâh's Cause during preaching His religion of Islâmic Monotheism or Jihâd, etc.). (Al-'Asr)