Consume Product

anyone who steps up will be immediately elimanted by ZOG

its better to have no leader and continue operate against USrael with impunity

at some point the morale will collapse, ammunations runs out and if israel really outjew their hand... men could rebel

this whole war is for them and even mecenary of Zion knows it

A supreme leader of sand niggers is still just a sand nigger.

It’s going to be Tucker Qarlson. You heard it here first.

Why are you glazing the sandnigger demon religion? Are you a sandnigger yourself? Your post history says probably!

I don't recall that name, but he sounds good based on what you write of him. Would be generally destabilizing to the world if someone like this could give Shi'ism a more active role, for instance, a more active Hezbollah and a more active Houthi movement would generally be a nuisance to the Judeo-Western liberal international order, especially in countries like Bahrain, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen.

However, mass media seems to be suggesting the more liberal Khomeini, who seems like he would be a grave disappointment.

I think that the son of Khamenei is also considered a strong contender, with the caveat that the Islamic Republic doesn't want to set up a dynasty because that resembles the same monarchy that they overthrew.

The Mahdi is a non-scriptural character - I don't see why any Muslim should believe in the Mahdi, Sufyani, the anti-Christ, Second Coming of Jesus, and other non-Quranic persons and events, although Muslims in practice are mired in ideas such as these - and *many* people purporting to have been the Mahdi, perhaps, most famously, the Sudanese Mahdi, have popped up over the centuries.

Views on false Mahdis are mixed: some Muslims declare them kafirs, other Muslims say that false Mahdis are justified by *taqiyya* - i.e. if declaring yourself the Mahdi helps to rid a country of an occupier like the British in the Sudan as the Sudanese false Mahdi's claim did, then it is justified.

Nevertheless, if we take the *hadith* tradition to be true for the sake of argument, the Mahdi has to be predated by Sufyani. Sufyani is believed to arise in or around Syria or Iraq.

Sufyani obviously wasn't either of the Assads or of the Syrian Ba'athi in general, because Sufyani is someone whose armies will fight those of the Mahdi. If Iran is where the Mahdi arises, Sufyani can't be an ally of theirs, as were the Syrian Ba'athi. Sufyani has to be in power when the Mahdi is, so their times in office do not add up, either. As for al-Jolani, he fits few if any at all of the physical characteristics, even if his armies were to one day invade Iran. I think that Sufyani also needs to invade modern-day Saudi Arabia, which is where he will suffer a major military defeat. Can you imagine Syria and Iran battling inside Saudi Arabia?

The answer seems to me this: there can be no Mahdi before Sufyani, ergo, this man can at most be yet another false Mahdi if he is elected Supreme Leader soon.

Basically, you can just write this hypothesis off. If there is a Sufyani, Mahdi, etc., they aren't on the visible horizon. Al-Jolani isn't Sufyani, and I can't see any Iraqi candidate, either. Sufyani has to be in power when the Mahdi is so that the Mahdi can defeat him, and so the Mahdi isn't in sight, either.

Personally, I see the hadiths as containing all sorts of ambiguity and errors: for instance, what did Muhammad *really* say at his Final Sermon? I leave you with the Quran? The Quran and my family? The Quran and my *Sunnah*? They shouldn't be regarded as on the level of religious scripture, a mistake many or most Muslims make.

Muqtada Al-Sadr tried to claim the title of the Mahdi during the Battle of Sadr City. He was obviously not the Mahdi, but people claim that title far too often and then fail.