Al-Bukhari and Muslim and Shia

1- Al-Kafi as a book is not infallible and Shia do not regard their books of tradition as Sahih like the Ahlu Sunna do with Bukhari or Muslim.

Al-Bukhari and Muslim are not crammed with forgeries. There is a difference between the position that a book is not infallible, which is the Sunni belief about the Sahihayn, and the position that a liar is not infallible.

A Shi`i protesting the "critical examination" of hadith and the correct "interpretation" of Qur'an is really like a vegetarian proposing to extol the merits of pot roast.

3- The mention of deletions is prevalent in Sahih Muslim and Bukhari.

This is what I mean. In Shi`i English, since "abrogation" is called "deletions", then the rejection of false interpretation can easily be called "tahreef." After Agamemnon killed his own daughter, the rest was easy.

The completeness of Quran is so indisputable among Shia that

... that they do not dare to make takfir of one who denies it.

Whereas there is absolute consensus among the Sunnis and some of the *early* Shi`is, that to deny it is kufr - not just lying, or evil-doing, or sophistry, or "being badly mistaken" !