Jagmeet Singh is a hypocrite
- Thread starter AMKiller
- Start date
It's doesn't matter who wins, we need them to go at,, Muslims killing Muslims is always good, keeps them occupied, we will help the Jews take over what's left when the dust settles.
The promised Mahdi will lead a religious, messianic armed uprising to establish a purely Islamic government led by him, a direct descendant of the Prophet. His government will establish justice and remove all the authoritarian pharaohs that have enslaved the Muslims and deny them the true Islamic system. It will last for just under a decade, until the Messiah of Nazareth returns and establishes a heavenly messianic government in Jerusalem. This is an ancient movement that began with the uprising of the Prophet’s grandson, Imam Hussain in 680 CE, when he was tragically martyred by the cruel Umayyads in Karbala Iraq.
- Hussain’s grandson, Imam Zaid, led an armed uprising in Kufa against the Umayyads in 740 CE until he was martyred.
- Then Imam Zaid’s son, Yahya, led an armed uprising against the Umayyads in Khurasan until he was martyred through crucifixion.
- Then emerged Muhammad son of Abdullah, son of Hasan, son of Hasan (brother of Hussain), son of Ali in Medina. He led an armed uprising against the Abbasids until he was martyred in 763 CE. Many believed he was the Mahdi and he was known by the title Nafs-al-Zakiya “pure soul”
- The Muhammad’s brother Ibrahim led an armed uprising against the same evil Abbasid ruler Mansur, in Ahwaz until he was martyred
- Then Ibrahim’s son Hasan began to initiate an uprising in Basra until he was imprisoned by the Abbasids.
- Then another of Imam Zaid’s sons, Isa, launched an armed uprising which also failed
- Then wrote the Martyr of al-Fakhkh, Hussain, son of Ali, son of Hasan, son of Hasan, son of Hasan son of Ali. He led an uprising in Mecca until he was martyred in 786 CE
And literally dozens of subsequent uprisings by various descendants of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him & his progeny). The Mahdi will appear soon and conclude this ancient struggle between good and evil. Current events in the Middle East, such as the wars in Syria and Yemen are signs that the advent of the Mahdi is imminent.
You told me to get up to date. The caste system is still alive and well in India.
If those wars come to a peaceful conclusion... will you need to wait for the next one? What about Iran?
This is why religion and its people are gutter trash, the yearning for death, destruction and human misery.
Did you not say "Muslims will make Canada in your image". You did and now you're backtracking, you jihadist scumbag.
[/FONT]
One cannot be certain, but our strong feeling is that the current wars that are waging in Yemen, Syria and Afghanistan will culminate in the appearance of the Mahdi. The Afghan war has been going on since 2001 and hasn’t concluded yet. The conflicts in Yemen and Syria may cool off, but even if they do, people have tasted warfare and are now used to armed uprising. Our Mahdi will appear in Mecca and people will give him the oath of allegiance in the shade of the sacred Ka’ba. Then an army will come up against him but will suffer a disastrous catastrophe. Another army will make its way from the land of Khorasan (modern-day Afghanistan) with black flags. Perhaps they are the modern day Taliban or a similar faction. As for Iran, I do not know which side they will be on, but hopefully they are on the right side of history. When the Mahdi comes, all the governments in the Muslim world will have to end and give allegiance to the Mahdi. If the Iranian government refuses to fold they too will face the full fury of the Mahdi’s forces.
Now here are some of those subsequent uprisings after 786 CE led by various descendants of the Prophet (peace be upon him) which shows that this struggle has always been energized and despite having failed until now, the uprising of the Mahdi will be the final one that is successful:
-Then Yahya bin `Abdullah bin Hasan bin Hasan bin `Ali in al-Hadi’s days after he had survived the event of al-Fakh, he finally settled in the mountain of al-Daylam in the days of Haroun al-Rashid who sent al-Fadl al-Barmaki to fight him. They negotiated peace with him and he returned peacefully to Madinah and received a lot of money from the Caliph, later it was proven that he was still calling to himself secretly so he was arrested and they differed on his death.
-Then his brother Idris bin `Abdullah bin Hasan bin Hasan bin `Ali who also survived al-Fakh then headed towards al-Maghrib and received Bay`ah from the tribes and overthrew the `Abbasies.
-Then Muhammad ibn Ibrahim Tabataba bin Isma`il al-Dibaj bin Ibrahim bin Hasan bin Hasan bin `Ali during al-Rashid’s days. He rebelled alongside abu al-Saraya and they went to Kufa and defeated the `Abbasiyyah and took their gold and received Bay`ah from the Koufans and all Arabs surrounding it, then Muhammad died during that revolution so abu al-Saraya replaced him with a young `Alawite boy called Muhammad bin Muhammad bin Zayd ibn Zayn-ul-`Abidin bin al-Husayn.
-As stated above Muhammad bin Muhammad ibn Zayd bin `Ali bin Husayn rebelled and he was no more than a tool for abu al-Saraya who was the leader of the revolution. Abu al-Saraya appointed `Abbas bin Muhammad bin `Isa al-Ja`fari on Basarah and Husayn al-Aftas bin Husayn bin `Ali Zayn-ul-`Abidin on Makkah. He also appointed Ibrahim bin Musa bin Ja`far al-Sadiq on Yaman. Finally they were both defeated, abu Saraya was beheaded and Muhammad bin Muhammad was imprisoned and it was said poisoned.
-Then an army was sent to defeat Zayd al-Nar bin Musa bin Ja`far al-Sadiq who was burning the houses of Banu al-`Abbas and their followers. Zayd negotiated a peaceful surrender and was jailed in Baghdad.
-Ibrahim al-Jazzar bin Musa bin Ja`far al-Sadiq who was previously placed in Yaman by abu al-Saraya was controlling Yaman, and he became famous for his massacres thus his name “al-Jazzar”.
-Then his son Muhammad bin Ibrahim bin Musa bin Ja`far al-Sadiq and he was calling for Muhammad bin Muhammad, he was killed in Khurasan.
-Then Muhammad bin Sulayman bin Dawoud bin Hasan bin Hasan bin `Ali, but his supporters abandoned him so he hid in Madinah until he died.
-Then Idris bin Idris bin `Abdullah bin Hasan bin Hasan bin `Ali in al-Maghrib after his father died and he established the Idrisi dynasty where his children ruled for hundreds of years.
-Then the infamous scholar of Ahlul-Bayt al-Qasim al-Rassi bin Ibrahim Tabataba bin Isma`il bin Ibrahim bin Hasan bin Hasan bin `Ali also during the days of al-Ma’moun. He remained in hiding while his callers called for his Imamah in the lands, then he moved from Egypt to Hijaz and hid until al-Ma’moun died. After al-Mu`tasim came to power he tried to capture him, but al-Qasim fortified himself in a mountain called al-Ras where he and his children lived.
-Then rose Muhammad Sahib al-Taliqan bin al-Qasim bin `Ali bin `Umar al-Ashraf bin `Ali bin Husayn bin `Ali and the people called him al-Soufi and they differed on what happened to him after al-Mu`tasim.
-Then Muhammad bin Ja`far bin Yahya bin `Abdullah bin al-Hasan bin al-Hasan bin `Ali rebelled in Hirat and conquered the southern part where he and his children ruled until 290 AH.
-Then Muhammad bin Salih bin `Abdullah bin Musa bin `Abdullah bin Hasan bin Hasan bin `Ali who appeared in a village near Madinah. However, abu al-Saj managed to trap him and imprison him in the city of Surra man Ra’a (Samarra), at that time many of the `Alawites refrained from revolting and calling for themselves.
-Then it was the time of al-Hasan bin Zayd bin Muhammad bin Isma`il bin Hasan bin Zayd bin Hasan bin `Ali ibn abi Talib, he conquered Tabaristan and the areas of Daylam and ruled for forty years until he died in 250 AH.
-Then Muhammad bin Ja`far bin Hasan bin `Umar bin `Ali bin Husayn bin `Ali ibn abi Talib, who rebelled in the non-Arab lands but was imprisoned by al-Mutawakkil.
-It was said that more `Alawites rebelled in the time of al-Mutawakkil, some were killed while others were imprisoned.
-Then Yahya bin `Umar bin Yahya bin Husayn bin `Ali Zayn-ul-`Abidin who appeared in Kufa and won the people’s hearts during the Caliphate of al-Musta`in.
-Then Husayn bin Muhammad bin Hamzah bin `Abdullah bin Husayn bin Zayn-ul-`Abidin who was imprisoned by al-Musta`in and died in prison.
-Then Muhammad bin Ja`far bin Hasan bin Ja`far bin Hasan bin Hasan during al-Musta`in’s days in Armenia or Kufa, he died in prison in 250 AH.
-Then al-Kawkabi Ahmad bin `Isa bin `Ali bin Husayn bin Zayn-ul-`Abdin, he rebelled in al-Kufa in the time of al-Mahdi in 255 AH.
-Then Ahmad bin Muhammad bin `Abdullah bin Ibrahim Tabataba bin Isma`il bin Ibrahim bin Hasan bin Hasan bin `Ali in al-Mu`tamid’s time. He had battles with ibn Touloun and was beheaded as a result.
-Then al-Da`i Muhammad bin Zayd bin Muhammad bin Isma`il bin Hasan bin Zayd bin Hasan bin `Ali in 277 AH. He had many battles and was killed in Jurajan in al-Mu`tadid’s time.
-Then al-Nasir al-Utroush al-Hasan bin `Ali bin Hasan bin `Ali bin `Umar al-Ashraf bin `Ali Zayn-ul-`Abidin in al-Jil and al-Daylam in 284 AH, and he conquered lands and gained much strength until he was killed in 304 AH.
-Then al-Da`i al-Hasan bin Qasim bin Hasan bin `Ali bin `Abdul-Rahman bin Qasim bin Hasan bin Zayd bin Hasan bin `Ali. Fought the children of al-Nasir al-`Abbasi and defeated them then ruled Tabaristan for twelve years.
-After him his son al-Mahdi Muhammad bin Hasan bin Qasim bin Hasan during the reign of al-Muti` al-`Abbasi in 353 AH. He ruled over al-Jil and al-Daylam until he died in 360 AH.
-Then al-Tha’ir Ja`far bin Muhammad bin Husayn bin `Ali bin Hasan bin `Ali bin `Umar bin Zayn-ul-`Abidin and he gained strength and ruled until he died in 367 AH.
-Then his son abu al-Husayn al-Mahdi bin Ja`far al-Tha’ir in the Caliphate of al-Qadir Billah al-`Abbasi and he did not last long as he died from sickness.
-Then his brother Husayn bin Ja`far al-Tha’ir, and he ruled the lands he dominated until he died.
-Then Ahmad bin Husayn bin Haroun bin Husayn bin Muhammad bin Haroun bin Muhammad bin Qasim bin Hasan bin Zayd bin Hasan bin `Ali also in the time of al-Qadir in 380 AH. He had some battles until he finally conquered Tabaristan and died in 411 AH.
-Then his brother al-Natiq bil-Haq Yahya bin Husayn in the time of al-Qa’im al-`Abbasi, and he ruled the lands he dominated until he died in 424 AH.
-Then al-`Aqiqi `Ali bin Ja`far bin Hasan bin `Abdullah bin `Ali bin Ahmad bin `Ali bin Husayn bin Zayn-ul-`Abidin in the time of al-Qa’im in 404 AH.
-Then Ahmad bin Muhammad bin `Ali bin Muhammad bin Hasan bin Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-A`rabi bin Muhammad bin Hasan bin `Ali bin `Umar al-Ashraf bin `Ali bin Husayn bin `Ali just as those before him did in 1027 CE.
-Then al-Nasir al-Husayn bin Ja`far bin Husayn bin Hasan bin `Ali bin al-Nasir al-Utroush near al-Daylam.
-Then al-Muwaffaq Billah Husayn bin Isma`il bin Zayd bin Ja`far bin Hasan bin Muhammad bin Ja`far bin `Abdul-Rahman bin Qasim bin Hasan bin Zayd bin Hasan bin `Ali.
-Then his son al-Murshid Billah Yahya bin Husayn.
-Then abu Talib Yahya bin Ahmad bin al-Aamir abi al-Qasim al-Husayn al-Mu’ayyad Billah Ahmad bin Husayn bin Haroun after 1097 CE in the time of al-Mustazhir and he fought against the Batini sect.
[/FONT]
Is that a Sunni interpretation? I know the Sunni in the form of ISIS had little love or respect for Shia. I've seen the clips of Sunni blasting Shia mosques sky high during the short lived caliphate.
Things are way more nuanced than Sunni and Shi’a. But since you are unfamiliar with the very intricate spectrum of diversity within Islam I will have to teach you gradually. But generally this idea is a “Sunni” interpretation. The Shi’a believe that the twelfth Imam is the Mahdi who went into hiding in 874 CE in Samarra Iraq. They believe this little boy will return as the Mahdi before the end of the world. We “Sunnis” believe the Mahdi hasn’t appeared yet, though we, like the Shi’a, believe the signs indicate he will emerge soon. Historically it is disputed whether a twelfth imam, a son born to the eleventh imam as the Shi’a allege, even existed.
Also, though ISIL claim to be Sunni, they are closer in behavior to the ancient Kharijites who consider themselves alone to be Muslim and everyone else unbelievers. The Kharijites believe that committing a major sin makes a Muslim into an apostate; but mainstream Sunni Islam rejects this notion.
When I said we will make Canada into our image I was speaking in the context of us South Asians, in my capacity as an Indian, not a Muslim. So read the quote in context.
That explains why you both blast the sh*t out of each other.
Thing is now... the Shia are learning how to fight. They're no longer Sunni target practice.
They seem to frighten enough Sunni to bankroll them at the pains of death.
So you are South Asian before you are a Muslim.
And believe it or not, I thought your issue with dogs was interesting. Do you feel as a South Asian, you can make it illegal to own dogs (for example) within your own communities? Or better yet, make dog parks illegal as dogs are allowed to run about unleashed and may run up to a member of your community and act like a dog by sniffing and possibly licking. You seemed to take issue with that. If you have political majority within a community do you feel the right to, lets say rewrite laws contrary to Canadian Laws?
For reference... and I missed the part where you said the owner of a dog has to be severely fined if their dog runs up and licks you. I could certainly see if the dog bit you... but licked? I do not know how many cultures would agree to that. You would certainly have to force it upon people from another culture. Not just the evil white men.
That's why it is important for him to stay.
That is why the leftoids are staying so far from this thread. He's not a one off person... his beliefs are in line with many of his culture and I think we should hear him out.
I agree and it was an interesting post kinda in line with the 4 horseman of the apocalypse, but interesting that the Islamic messiah is coming in the form of a warlord from the religion of peace.
Not at all. I am Muslim first and Muslim last. I have no other identity. I am South Asian ethnically but don’t consider that as a basis for my identity, only as a basis for my political interests in Canada as part of that ethnic community.
The issue of dogs isn’t a South Asian one. As far as I know Hindus and Sikhs have no issue with dogs, though culturally we South Asians don’t keep them in our homes as pets. In Islam, dogs are ritually impure, so their saliva or sweat are defiling. Hence there should be laws implemented to protect the sentiments of the Muslim community that dogs must be on leashes at all times in the public or if they are to be unleashed it must not be done in public parks but in designated areas only.
Dogs don't sweat, genius, they pant.
Unleashed dogs already have designated areas, they are leash-free parks and dog parks.
Can we have a law respecting our sentiments towards Pisslam and the Prophet(may piss be upon him).
So that kind of smashes your desire for multiculturalism and cosmopolitanism I would think. Multicultural providing it does not come in contrast to your (and your community's) sentiments.
May I ask about sunbathing? Many cultures allow women to sunbathe in bathing suits. If within your community there was a park or a lake that has traditionally allowed women to bathe wearing one piece and two piece suits. If by chance you become a majority within a community do you feel it would be ok if other cultures sunbathe or swim in the manner of their culture?
Multiculturalism is fine until it affects the rights of other people. If its people’s culture to have pet dogs, that is fine from Canada’s perspective, but allowing those dogs to harm or annoy other people is wrong. Your rights end where mine begin. A dog licking someone without their permission means the dog’s owner has to be held liable, simple as that.
If people want to sunbathe wearing practically nothing that is their problem. Our culture and religion obviously doesn’t allow for such a shameless display. We religious people avoid beaches and places like this. I remember reading a few years ago that in Montreal there was a YMCA next to a Jewish yeshiva. The YMCA had women wearing practically nothing exercising as is part of your culture. The Jewish yeshiva requested the YMCA to ‘frost’ their windows and YMCA did so out of respect for the Jewish community’s sentiments.
[/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/FONT]