CRAZY: Now Jeremy Corbyn says 9/11 was 'manipulated' so West could blame Bin Laden

LABOUR leader Jeremy Corbyn has claimed the 9/11 terror attacks were 'manipulated' so the United States and Britain could launch the war on Afghanistan.

Read Full News at: http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/608173/Jeremy-Corbyn-says-9-11-manipulated-to-blame-Bin-Laden-so-West-could-go-to-war

Read More

New Evidence Proves Israel Attacked USS Liberty With Orders To Kill 294 Americans

Fresh evidence presented in an exclusive Al Jazeera investigation into the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty that killed 34 Americans proves the incident was not a mistake

Rescue efforts the day after the USS liberty was attacked by Israeli forces.

(TheAntiMedia) Fresh evidence presented in an exclusive Al Jazeera investigation into the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty that killed 34 Americans proves the incident was not a mistake. Since 1967 the ‘official story‘ has been that Israel simply misidentified the American ship as Egyptian for several hours. Israel apologized to the United States and for several decades we’ve been led to believe that this could be the only explanation for why Israeli jets and torpedo boats would launch rockets, missiles and torpedoes at an American target for more than two hours.

A new documentary called ‘The Day Israel Attacked America” airing on Al Jazeera was produced and directed by award winning British film maker Richard Belfield. Thanks to the audio evidence obtained by Belfield, it is finally possible to prove the survivors of the attack on the USS Liberty were right all along. The survivors have always been extremely confident that Israel’s intentions were to sink that ship and kill everyone on board so Egypt could be blamed for the tragedy. Why? To convince President Lyndon Johnson (and the American public) that we needed to declare war on Egypt. This is the definition of a ‘false flag‘. (can you say 9/11?)

It appears that once again, a conspiracy theory has turned out to be conspiracy fact. You can finally take off your tinfoil hats!

“Earlier this year, I acquired a copy of the audiotape of the attack as it had unfolded, the real time conversations between Israeli Air Force pilots and their controllers back at base. It had never been broadcast before. I went to talk to Al Jazeera and after careful consideration, the network commissioned the film.” – Richard Belfield

Just sixteen minutes after Israel attacked America, the USS Liberty was confirmed by Israeli forces to be an American ship. These conversations can be heard in the documentary Al Jazeera has been airing on their station.

“To what state does she belong?” (Answer): “American”

Yet the attacks continued for an hour and a half!

Even five minutes before the first bombing you can hear Israeli Air Force pilots question whether the ship was American or not. You don’t have to be a genius to understand why these pilots would be extremely uncomfortable attacking a ship suspected to be American without being given direct orders to do so. I believe we can safely assume this attack wouldn’t have been carried out otherwise.

“Is it an American ship?” “What do you mean American?” “No comment.”

Twenty minutes after a ground controller answered “American” when asked “to what state does she belong?” by Israeli Air Force pilots, the first torpedo hit the USS Liberty. A voice can clearly be heard which confirms that this target, thought to be American at that time, was to be destroyed.

“The torpedo is talking care of the ship now.”

As soon as the first torpedo hit the USS Liberty, Israeli torpedo boats circled the ship and started machine-gunning the American target for another 40 minutes. When the USS Liberty crew lowered their lifeboats into the water to evacuate their ship, the Israelis moved closer so they could gun down the Americans attempting to save their own lives.

More than ten years ago a journalist named Arieh O’Sullivan from the Jerusalem Post was allowed to listen to these same audiotapes. He published a transcript of the Israeli military transmissions he heard directing the attack on the USS Liberty. Sixteen minutes after the attack started, just as in the recording obtained by Al Jazeera, O’Sullivan’s transcript (translated from Hebrew to English) shows the same exchange.

“Kislev, what country?” (Answer): “Apparently American.”

That is where O’Sullivan’s transcript, published over ten years ago by the Jerusalem Post, ends. There is just one major problem with that… The attack continued for another hour and a half!

Navy Admiral Thomas Moorer, who has served this country as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Chief of Naval Operations, once lead an independent commission to investigate what really happened to the USS Liberty. The commission’s findings were made public in 2003. Here are a few of the shocking conclusions.

• The attack, by a U.S. ally, was a deliberate attempt to destroy an American ship and kill its entire crew.
• The attack included the machine-gunning of stretcher-bearers and life rafts .
• The White House deliberately prevented the U.S. Navy from coming to the defense of the USS Liberty. This was the first time in naval history a rescue mission had been cancelled while an American ship was under attack.
• Surviving crew members were later threatened with court-martial, imprisonment, or worse if they talked to anyone about what had happened to them; and were “abandoned by their own government.”

John Crewdson, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, published in 2007 what former CIA analyst Ray McGovern has called the ‘most detailed and accurate account of the Israeli attack‘ for the Chicago Tribune and Baltimore Sun. You guessed it, Crewdson was fired by the Chicago Tribune just a year later after working there for 24 years. You should read his work.

“Israeli messages intercepted on June 8, 1967, leave no doubt that sinking the USS Liberty was the mission assigned to the attacking Israeli warplanes and torpedo boats as the Six-Day War raged in the Middle East. Let me repeat: there is no doubt – none – that the mission of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) was to destroy the USS Liberty and kill its entire crew.” – former CIA analyst Ray McGovern.

This article is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to the author and TheAntiMedia.org. Follow us on Facebook and Twitter to receive our latest articles. Image credit: DDees.co
m

Read More

Israel’s National Intelligence Agency (Mossad) Was Behind September 11th 2001 Attacks – FOX NEWS REPORTS

This was aired then immediately banned and removed from the Fox archives right after 9-11, a lot of people still have never seen it and is a must for the first step in the process.

credit[realitieswatch.com]
         [foxnews]

Read More

When Israel’s Great Brainwashing Began

In the '50s and '60s, there was just one Israel as far as we were concerned — Holocaust-survivor, Ashkenazi Jewish, socialist and secular.

Every year after Yom Kippur, the sounds of hammer blows could be heard from the yard behind our apartment house. Three days later the sukkah stood, made of plywood covered with white sheets and decorations, and we, the most secular people on the street, were invited in.
Pictures of rabbis were hung inside that sukkah. In (the few) other sukkahs on the street, people hung photos of Israeli generals and symbols of the various units, in the spirit of the time.
Back then, our balcony faced the Lebels’ balcony. On Yom Kippur you weren’t allowed out onto the balcony with food so as not to hurt their feelings, even though my father didn’t really know his Yom Kippur and from his Purim.
They were our ultra-Orthodox neighbors. Mr. Lebel was a diamond cutter, Yossi and Benny were our friends, with their side-curls and black clothing. That couldn’t happen today. It stopped when the Lebels moved to Bnei Brak — and we were sorry. We never saw them again. Never again was a sukkah built in the yard behind 8 Stand St.
The Lebels were an exception on that homogeneous Tel Aviv street. So were "the Bukharans,” an Egged bus driver and his family. They were the only non-Ashkenazis on our street, not including Shaul Mitzri, who owned the grocery store, and the watermelon sellers in their wagons who showed up sometimes. Even the scissor sharpener would call out in German, “Hallo! Scherenschärfer!“
That was the Tel Aviv bubble back before it was called a bubble. There were no rich, no poor, (almost) no Mizrahim and no Arabs at all. Where vineyards had stood a few years before, Arabs could not set foot, not even to visit.
I think the first Arab I met was the Druze boy who came with us on a youth mission to Jewish communities in the United States to sing and dance “Song of Peace.” We were 17 years old then, Jaffa was beyond the mountains of darkness, and visits to the Galilee and Negev were a dream reserved for annual school trips, which usually only went as far as Caesarea. The Galilee was under military rule, but who knew?
In the 1950s and ‘60s, there was just one Israel as far as we were concerned — Holocaust-survivor, Ashkenazi Jewish, socialist and secular. It spoke Hebrew, Yiddish, Romanian, Polish, Hungarian and German, and to us it was egalitarian and unified. It didn’t know anything but itself. It only asked why we went like sheep to the slaughter and said Nasser wanted to destroy us. It sang songs like “Dudu” and “Reut.”
No one told us what really happened here only a few years before. There were “gangs” and we overcame them. There were “riots” and the “English,” and of course everyone was against us. People didn’t ask what those half-ruins were everywhere, or what had happened to their owners.
In any case, the Jewish National Fund had started covering them with forests, which sprang up with the help of the saplings we brought on Tu Bishvat with great fanfare to Gan Meir park, and with the coins we put into the blue box every Friday, even when it was hard for our parents.
At morning assembly we read daily verses from the Bible. In Bible class we wore kippot — we had to — and when a Bible fell on the floor we were quick to kiss it. We had to.
We knew we were right about everything — and most importantly, we were the only ones who were right and the only victims. Anyone who wants to understand the Israeli psyche, with all its complexities, has to begin back then. That was when the great brainwashing started; it’s doubtful many other peoples underwent anything like it.
Already back then the national repression and denial were born, the dehumanization and demonization. Back then were born the alienation and racism. Relations with the Lebels were an exception, but after all, they spoke German, just like us.
[Source: haaretz.com]

Read More

What is Ijma? [lang:en]

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 

In linguistic terms, ijmaa‘ means resolve and agreement. 

In shar‘i terms, it means the agreement of the mujtahids of this ummah after the death of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) on a shar‘i ruling. 

By saying “agreement” we exclude differences of opinion; if there is a difference of opinion, even from one person, then we cannot say that there is ijmaa‘. 

By saying “the mujtahids” we exclude the common folk and those who follow or imitate scholars; it does not matter whether they agree or disagree. 

By saying “this ummah” we exclude the consensus of others, which carries no weight. 

By saying “after the death of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)” we exclude their agreement at the time of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him); ijmaa‘ or consensus at that time does not count as evidence, because evidence is established by the Sunnah of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), whether in word or deed or by approval. Hence if a Sahaabi says “We used to do” or that they (i.e., people) used to do such and such at the time of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), this is indicative of the approval of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), according to consensus. 

By saying “on a shar‘i ruling”, we exclude their agreement on a rational or human ruling, which has nothing to do with the matter under discussion, because we are talking about looking for ijmaa‘ as one of the kinds of shar‘i evidence. 

Ijmaa‘ counts as evidence on the basis of a number of pieces of evidence, including the following: 

1.     The verse in which Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning): “Thus We have made you (Muslims), a Wasat (just) (and the best) nation, that you be witnesses over mankind” [al-Baqarah 2:143].  The words “witnesses over mankind” include testifying about their deeds and judging their deeds, and the words of the witness may be accepted.

2.     The verse in which Allah, says (interpretation of the meaning): “(And) if you differ in anything amongst yourselves” [an-Nisa’ 4:59] indicate that whatever they agreed upon is sound and correct.

3.     The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “My ummah will not unanimously agree on misguidance.”

4.     We say: If the ummah unanimously agrees on something, it must be either true or false. If it is true, then it is proof. If it is false, how can this ummah, which is the dearest of nations to Allah since the time of its Prophet until the onset of the Hour, agree on something false with which Allah is not pleased? This is quite impossible. 

Types of ijmaa‘ 

Ijmaa‘ is of two types: definitive and presumptive. 

1.     Definitive is that which well known and well established, such as consensus that the five daily prayers are obligatory and that zina (fornication, adultery) is haraam. No one can deny that this type of ijmaa‘ is proven and established, or that it constitutes proof in and of itself, or that the one who rejects it becomes a kaafir, unless he is ignorant and may be excused for his ignorance.

2.     Presumptive is that which can only be known by means of research and study, where the scholars may differ as to whether is ijmaa‘ (on a particular issue) or not. The most correct scholarly opinion concerning that is the view of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah, when he said in al-‘Aqeedah al-Waasitiyyah: The type of ijmaa‘ that is to be accepted is that of the righteous early generations (as-salaf as-saalih), because after their time there was a great deal of disagreement and the ummah spread far and wide. End quote. 

It should be noted that the ummah cannot agree on something that is contrary to an unabrogated, clear, saheeh text, because it can only agree on what is true. If you see consensus that you think is contrary to that, then it must be one of the following: either the evidence is not clear, or it is not saheeh, or it is abrogated, or there is a difference of opinion concerning the matter of which you were not aware. 

Conditions of ijmaa‘: 

There are certain conditions for ijmaa‘, such as: 

1.     It should be soundly proven in the sense that it is either well known among the scholars or transmitted by a trustworthy narrator who has read widely.

2.     It should not have been preceded by a well-known difference of opinion. If that was the case, then there is no ijmaa‘, because scholarly opinions are not invalidated by the death of their authors. 

Ijmaa‘ does not cancel out a previous difference of opinion; rather it prevents differences of opinion from arising. 

This is the most correct view, because of the strength of its argument. 

And it was said that the second condition is not stipulated, so it is valid in a later period for there to be consensus on one of the previous opinions and for that to serve as proof for those who come afterwards. 

According to the majority, it is not essential that those who unanimously agree all die when still holding this view for  ijmaa‘ to be established; rather ijmaa‘ is established as soon as they (the scholars of a particular era) agree, and it is not permissible for them or anyone else to go against it after that, because the condition for the establishment of ijmaa‘ do not include any stipulation that the era (of the scholars who reached this consensus) should have come to an end with their passing. As ijmaa‘ is established at the moment they agree (on a particular issue), there is nothing that could cancel it out. 

If one of the mujtahids (scholars) says or does something and that becomes well known among the mujtahids, and they do not denounce it even though they are able to do so, then it is said that there is ijmaa‘. It was said that this establishes that there is ijmaa‘; others said that it is may be regarded as proof but not ijmaa‘; and others said that it is neither ijmaa‘ nor proof. And it was said that if they all passed away before denouncing it then it is ijmaa‘, because their silence until the time of their death, even though they were able to denounce it, constitutes proof of their agreement. This is the view that is most likely to be correct. 

Al-Usool min ‘Ilm al-Usool, 62-64 

And Allah knows best.

Read More

Taqleed me Gumtahi! [lang-hin/ur]

Asslamu Alaikum Wa Rahamatullahe Ta’la Wa Barkathu..

Bismillahirrahmanirr­aheem ..

Topic – “Kaha Muqallid or Kaha Itteba e rasool”

Taqleed ve ek ayse afat hai k ager banda ek dafa es changul me fas jaye tou fer sunnat-e-rasool per amal k kabel nahi rahta , Wo fer Andha or behra ho ker apne Taqleede Mazhab per he chalta hai, goya wo Sunnat-e-rasool (s.a.w) k Mutalib ho ya Mukhalif , Apne Galat Mazhab ki himayat me ager unh Ahadees me tod-maroor ve karna pade tou esse ve nahi chukte, humare ek hanfi muqallid sb ne Apne ulma ki andhe taqleed kar k itteba ko tod-maroor ker taqleed sabit karne me koi gurez nhi ki aur taqleed ko sahi sabit karne ki nakaam kosis ke.

Muqallid kavi ve sahi hadees per Nahi amal kar sakta kuki wo jahil hota hai , Aur Muqallid jahil hota hai esper ummat k ijma hai.

Ager kisi ve Muqallid ko itteba-e-rasool karna ho tou wo kisi ka Muqallid he ku bane , jab wo kisi k Muqallid ban gaya tou wo itteba -e- rasool kaise ker sakta hai? Taqleed Muqallid ko Izazat nahi deta k wo kisi aur k itteba kare , Taqleed tou touq aur bairi hai jo Muqallid ko apne Imam ki Taqleed se Azaad nahi hone dete, Muqallid jis Imam ki Taqleed karta hai Ankhe band ker k use Imam k piche jata hai Muqallid Andha hota hai aur Itteba karne wala bina (Ankh wala)jo frk bina or Nabina me hai wahi frk Motaba aur Muqallid me hai jaise :

Mushrik Muwahid Nahi ho sakta
Biddati Ahle-Sunnat Nahi ho sakta

Ayse he Muqallid Mutabeh rasool nahi ho sakta , Muqallid ke bebasi k ye haal hai k ager usse pucha jaye k tu Apne Imam ki Taqleed ku karta hai ? Allah tala ne kaha hai k tu hanfi ban ? ya rasullah sallahu alaihe wasallam ne kaha ?
Wo kahta hai k Mujhe tou kuch pata nahi , log jiske Taqleed karte hai main ve uske Taqleed karta hu, balke yahi sawal Mutabeh rasool ya Ahle hadees se koi ager puche k tu Ahle hadees ku hai ?
Tu hadees per Amal ku karta hai ?
tou wo fouran jawab deta hai k itteba Rasullah sallahu alaihe wasallam k Allah Tala ne Quraan paak me hukm deya hai aur Itteba rasool (s.a.w) rasool ki hadees per Amal karne se he ho sakta hai.
Ese leye main hadees per Amal karta hu aur Ahle hadees kahlata hu, rasullah sallahu alaihe wasallam k sewa na koi humara Imam hai aur Na hum kisi k Muqallid humare Imam serf Mohammad sallahu alaihe wasallam hai, jo rasul hai aur rasool ki Taqleed nahi hote aur Muslim Al Sabut me hai jo hanfio ki Motebar kitab hai.

*۔۔ لَیْسَ الرَّجُوْعُ اِلَی النَّبِیِّ عَلَیْہِ الصَّلٰوۃُ وَالسَّلاَمُ اَوْ اِلَی الاِجْمَاعِ لَیْسَ مِنْہُ لاَنَّ اْلاَخْذَ عَنِ الْمُؤَیِّدِ لَیْسَ تَقْلِیْدٌ بَلْ عِلْمٌ نظریٌ

Nabi ki hadees per Amal karna Taqleed nahi Taqleed un logo ki hotebhai jinko logo ne Imam banaya hota hai , Allah ki taraf se unke paas Imam k koi Certificate nahi hota aur yahi Quraan kahte hai.

(اِنْ ھِیَ اِلاَّ اَسْمَآءٌ سَمَّیْتُمُوْھَآ اَنْتُمْ وَ اَبَآؤُکُمْ مَّآ اَنْزَلَ اﷲُ بِھَا مِنْ سُلْطاَنٍ ) [53:النجم:23]

“Ye tou mahaz chand naam he hai jo tumne aur tumhare baap dada ne rakh leye hai,Allah ne unke koi sanad nazil nahi ki, wo log tou guman he ki pairwi karte hai aur us chez ki jo unke dil chate hai”
(sreh No53,ayat No23)

Tahrer Musannif Ibn humman hanfi me hai :

’’ اَلتَّقْلِیْدُ الْعَمَلُ بِقَوْلِ مَنْ لَیْسَ قَوْلُ اِحْدٰی الحُجَّۃِ بِلاَ حُجَّۃٍ مِّنْھَا‘‘

“Taqleed us Admi ki baat per bela dalill Amal karne ko kahte hai jiske baat ki sareyat Mohammadia me koi haiseyat nahi”
yaani taqleed khud sakta Imam ki hote hai, Allah k banaye hue Imaam yaani Nabi ki Taqleed nahi hote,Nabi ki itteba aur Itaat he hote hai, hanfio ne apne ek Imam bana leya aur dusre Muqallido ne apne Imaam bana leya ,es Tarah sab Muaqllid apne apne Imaam ki Taqleed karne lag gaye jiska natiza ye hua k Islam aur Musalmano me tafarka pad gaya , Allah tala ne serf ek Imam banaya tha hazrat Mohammad sallahu Alaihe Wasallam aur uske Itteba k hukm deya tha tabk Musalmano me ferka paida na ho , leken Muqallid ne apne peswa or Imam ki Taqleed suru kar de.

Ab apke samne pess e khidmat h kuch scan page Jisse Apko Taqleed ku hakikat pata chalege. Kuch Scan page hanfio k ghar ki h jiska wo radd nhi kar sakte .

Taqleed aur itteba me fark hai , khud hanfio k ghar ki gawahi with scan..

1-Taqleed e saksi per koi ijmaa nahi,hanfio k ghar ki gawahi.

2-Taqleed e saksi 4th hijri sadi me wajud me aya, Mufti Taqi Usmani sahab :

3-Taqleed e saksi na sahaba r.a k jamana me tha or na he tabaye k jamane me tha,Mufti Taqi Usmani sahab :

4-Taqleed e saksi kise kahte hai ? , Taqi Usmani sahab :

5-Taqleed e saksi se hazrat Muaaz ibn jabal r.a (sahaba) ne mana farmaya :

6-Taqleed e saksi karne wala Munkir e hadees hota hai, hanfio k ghar ki gawahi :

7-Taqleed e saksi k he hukm dete hai hanafi Muqallid :

Ab Aina dekhaya ja raha jo taqleed jaij or halal samjhte hai,jabke ye Nazaiz or Haraam hai.

1-Shah Waliullah Muhaddish dehlawi r.al se Taqleed k Radd:

2-Imaam Hafiz ibn hazam r.al Taqleed jaise sadid gumrahi se bachne k leye Allah se dua karte :

3-Moulana Abdul hayy lakhnwai r.al Taqleed se bachne or Quraan o hadees per chalne ko batate:

4-EESAA ALAIHIS SALAM ve kisi ki Taqleed Nahi karege Allama Abdul Hayy Lakhnawi :

5-Imaam Qurtubi r.al Taqleed karne se mana karte :

6-Sayed Nazer hussain r.al ne Taqleed se ruzu keya :

7-Sah Waliullah Muhaddis dehlawi r.al Taqleed karne se Mana karte :

8-Sah Waliullah Muhaddis dehlawi r.al se Taqleed k Radd “Chauthi sadi se pahle koi Taqleed Nahi karta tha” :

9-Sah Waliullah Muhaddis dehlawi r.al k Taqleed karne walo ko Nasihat :

10- Sah Waliullah Muhaddis dehlawi r.al se kisi ek Mazhab ki Taqleed karne walo per Waar :

11-Imaam Jalaluddin suyuti r.al ne Imaam Gazali r.al k Qaul Naqal karte aur kahte “MUQALLID KA ILAAJ TALWAAR HAI” :

12-Imaam Tabrani r.al se Taqleed k radd:

13-Taqleed karne waala Sahi hadees per Amal Nahi karte Khud hanfio ki jubani :

14-.Taqleed karne wala hadees v gadta hai :

15-Kisi saks k saksiyat se khud ko jana-jaana , usse Taqleed karna us saks k sabit Nahi :

16-Imaam Ahmed ibn Hambal r.al se Taqleed k Radd:

17-Imaam Ahmed ibn Hambal r.al Aksar Raye(Qayas) ki kitabo ko dekte tou unka Dil Afsos karta :

18-Muqallid jahil he hota hai,Aur sab Fasaad ki jar “Taqleed” he hai, Hanfio ki gawahi :

19-Taqleed karne walo ki baat jhote hote hai :

20-Taqleed karne wala chupaya janwar ki tarah hai :

21-Taqleed karne wala jahil or serf galti karne wala hota hai, Hanfio ki gawahi :

22-Taqleed serf jahil or Bewakuf he karta hai :

23- Taqleed karna Haraam hai :

24- Imaam Safaii r.al se Taqleed k Radd :

25- Imaam Ahmed r.al se Taqleed k Radd :

26- Imaam Safayi r.al ne Dusro ko v Taqleed karne se Mana keya or Khud ki ve :

27- Imaam Amir bin Shuraheel Al Sho’ab (Tabayi) r.al ne Quraan o hadees ko Apnane Aur Qayas ko Radd karne ko kaha :

28-Taqleed karna Haraam hai, Imaam hafiz Shukaani r.al :

29-Imaam Zamakhsari r.al “Gumrahi ki Maa ki Maa ko Taqleed kahte” :

30-Hazrat Salmaan Farsi raziallahuanha ne “Taqleed karne se Mana keya” :

31-Hazrat Muaaz ibn jabal raziallahuanhu ne ve “kisi ki Taqleed karne se Mana keya” :

32-Imaam Shaukani r.al “Taqleed karne walo ki aur jo Mujtahid khud ki Taqleed karne ko bolta 2no ki remaand (class) lete :

33-Taqleed Halal Nahi Haram hai :

34-Sufiyan Al Soori r.al ne Quraan o Hadees ko Afzal kaha Aur Raaye wa Qayas ko Tark karne ki Nasihat ” :

35-Quraan o Hadees ko Apnao Raaye wa Qayas ko Nahi :

36-Haq wajeh ho jaane k baad Muqallid Andha or Behra hota hai, hanfio ki jubani :

Allah paak Taqleed jaise sadid gumrahe se hume bachane ki toufeq de or hak ko hak jaan ker usper amak karne ku toufeq de…Aameen.

Read More