Have there been Muslims who preach Islam in a way that makes you want to vomit, or even consider apostasy? Have there been people coming at you with those big beards, throwing Quran verses and hadiths at you for a shock effect? Do you live in a Muslim country where scholars refuse to denounce domestic violence, honor killings, oppression of non-muslims, women, and other shameful acts? Do you live in a Muslim country where their views of Islam are shaped by the culture and ways of life? And when you object to them, they say you're misguided, or just a non-Muslim for not following them? Doesn't it annoy you that so many misguided people use this religion to promote hatred and bloodshed? Doesn't it annoy you how so many people in this religion overreact and resort to extreme measures? Doesn't it annoy you MORE when those who engage in any of the above cause Muslims to become insecure about Islam, and even become apostates?

If you think people leave Islam just because they want to drink or have sex outside of marriage, then you're an idiot. You fit in with the above morons who think they're getting extra judgment day points by using Islam to suit their emotions and stupidity. It's becoming increasingly difficult to remain a part of this ummah with all the lunatics we sadly produce. And if you can't see this then YOU HAVE NO FAITH, and you don't want to admit the problems that are affecting many young Muslims.

It's becoming increasingly difficult to be a Muslim today because of what happens in the name of our religion. Every single day someone or some group does something ridiculous in the name of Islam. And you know what? Those morons who use this religion for violence, hatred, stupidity, and oppression DON'T CARE what we have to go through. To them, they're doing God a favor by presenting Islam this way. They think they're getting extra judgment day points by causing hatred and fear!

It is so painful to see how many bullies we have in this religion of ours. We have people in Islam who show no mercy, who are unforgiving, who will do their best to bring you down, who will do their best to embarrass you, who will do their best to insult and degrade. It makes me wonder, how are we suppose to have inner peace and full confidence in Islam when these people are running around and targeting us?

Thursday, February 22, 2018

Daniel Haqiqatjou is now supporting pedophillia!


Please someone call the police on this guy. A screenshot is at the bottom.
This post contains foul language on my part, and I'm not sorry for it.
I also would just like to thank the amount of Muslims who came out in the comments of his article to call him out. Though that being said, there still is an unfortunate number of swines who support every word he says.

This is my third post (second refutation) about this utter nutjob Daniel Haqiqatjou. Literally, how stupid some Muslims can be is just beyond me. No, stupid isn't the correct word here. Psychotic is.
Daniel is now supporting forced marriage and pedophilia because "it is against liberalism and anything against liberalism/feminism/secularism is something I will support".

Haqiqatjou has taken issue about an Al Jazeerah article talking about forced marriages and forced marriages of little girls. When this happens, these girls are forced to end their education. Let's analyze his latest outburst paragraph by paragraph.

"Another common orientalist trope in Western media: The sad Muslim bride forced into marriage. But this is not Western media. It is Aljazeera."

Yeah so what is so wrong with Al Jazeerah writing an article about a girl being forced into marriage?

"Reflect on the hypocrisy on display with Western culture. It is considered healthy and acceptable for children as young as kindergarten (5 year olds) to "explore their sexual identities" or even their gender. It is perfectly acceptable for school children (6-12 year olds) to be involved with sexting and sexual relationships (as long as it is "safe" sex!). It is natural for high school kids (13-18 year olds) to be sexually active and fornicate to their hearts' content. Only the "late bloomers" are still virgins by freshmen year of college."

Who the hell said young children should explore their sexuality or gender? No one.
WHICH CHILD is "sexting" and involved in "sexual relationships"? What the hell is going on in this moron's head? NO CHILD thinks in such a way. NO CHILD is mentally or physically mature to be involved in such activities. As for high schoolers (13 is not high school by the way, so sad Haqiqatjou is born and raised in the west yet is so stupid to realize 13 year olds are still in junior high/middle school), yes they are heavily involved in dating and sex (though there is also a significant population of religious adherents, and those just not ready to engage in such activity) but they do it with their own CONSENT and WITHIN the same age group. Haqiqatjou somehow compares this to FORCED marriages of LITTLE GIRLS. High schoolers can THINK like adults, LITTLE GIRLS cannot.

"But if a 15 year old gets married, suddenly that is a human rights violation and a crime against humanity?"

Yes dumbass, when a 15 year old is FORCED into marriage, that is a violation of human rights.

"Western standards of sex and marriage are projected onto the rest of the world, but to understand these practices, we have to understand the larger social context. Within kinship based societies, marriage has more than just romantic significance. It has economic and social significance as well. Getting married is an important way to connect families and to create larger networks of support and economic opportunity. Marriage is also the primary avenue of socialization and religious development for young adults."

So the option is to sell off our little daughters and sisters for older men to have sex with? Forcing women in to marriage is good because is "connects" families? Because it has "economic" and "social significance"?

"None of this makes sense from a Western paradigm because Western states have systematically destroyed kinship structures and destroyed the family unit, forcing their populations into an atomized existence, where all must be servile to the state and its corporate subsidiaries."

In my previous refutation of this animal, I showed quotes how Daniel was a big time advocate for women being housewives. He is heavily against any freedom for women. If a woman is not staying at home, cooking, cleaning, or raising children, then she is a liberal feminist who follows reformed Islam.

"Westerners can understand these marriages with a simple analogy. Marriage in kinship based societies is an institution analogous to formal education as an institution in Western states. In the West, children are *forced* -- against their will -- to attend primary school education and then college. This schooling is a means of socialization (i.e., tarbiyya) and often is the only path to economic opportunity and social mobility."

Dumbass Daniel compares forced marriage with children being "forced" to go to school. I'm not going to comment further on how stupid this is.

"Of course, "education" is glamorized in modern discourse, but the reality for many people is that their education buys them a spot as a lowly cog in the engine of corporate drudgery, and only if they're lucky. The vast majority have to content themselves as blue collar or service workers slogging long hours to scrape out a modest living. This is what education buys them, yet we are keen to export this panacea to the rest of the world, i.e., to make sure the poor girls of Niger leave their "forced" marriages to "willingly" go work in the sweatshop. I mean, what other amazing career paths exist in the villages of Niger? Or Afghanistan? Or Iraq? Last time I checked, there weren't many Fortune 500 companies opening offices in this locales. Only us lucky ones in the West get to enjoy deep, fulfilling, meaningful careers as corporate peons, toiling our lives away in order to ensure that investors see sufficient growth from one fiscal quarter to the next."

So what do we do then? Stay at home and not get educated? Education teaches you life skills, ways of communication, and in general fosters your behavior as you grow up. It allows you to be in control of your own life, to make good decisions, and to not submit to anything stupid.

Dumbass Daniel, these girls in Niger, Iraq, and Afghanistan CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE if they're educated. Dumbass, because there aren't great economic opportunities avialble, these girls should pulled out from school and forced into a marriage?

Psychopath, why don't you come out and say you support the Taliban for banning education for girls?

"Islam is a kinship based deen. The family structure is the cornerstone of any healthy society. The majority of the maladies we see around us is due to the disintegration of this structure. We have to be aware of these larger dynamics and be prepared to defend the rationality, morality, and superiority of Islam if we want to address the attacks against the Sharia when it comes to the fiqh of marriage without resorting to superficial reactionism. Unfortunately, the reality is that the average Muslim would be scandalized by the uncensored, unabridged fiqh of nikah. That is why Aljazeera can publish trash like this without pushback."

Yeah, so this is why we should not allow girls to be educated and married off without their consent, because it creates a "healthy" society. This is not a "structure", you fucking idiot. No good comes from this.
Yes, the average sane minded Muslim would be shocked to see a fool like you writing this shit. This proves my whole point about my blog- psychotic preachers of Islam causes apostasy among young Muslims.

"NB: if you go through the details of this report, you can plainly see how insidious it really is. The father explains that his daughter was secretly hanging out with a specific boy, so, given the circumstances and his consideration of the situatoon, he said they need to get married. Seems like a good decision by all accounts. Preventing zina is so important and if there is no reason to delay, why do so? We need to be applauding this father and mother and learn from their example."

A couple of things. Firstly, a girl "hanging out" with a guy doesn't mean they are in love, at all. Secondly, the post by Al Jazeerah features a few women, something Daniel conveniently leaves out. He only mentions one girl, and even then so it is not justifiable to marry her off. The first video shows how young girls are brainwashed into believing they are cursed if they disobey their parents, something Daniel also left out. Nothing is to be "applauded" here.

"And the bride herself admits that her husband is treating her well. I bet she isn't really even that broken up about it but that does not stop aljazeera from making it look like the biggest tragedy of all time. When Muslim women are actually surveyed about their views on being married off early, the vast majority support it and for good reason, but don't expect that to make CNN or BBC. They just dismiss these opinions as internalized patriarchy, false consciousness, and due to a lack of "education," i.e., Western brainwashing."

Look at this bullshit king here. I have never seen any survey about Muslim women supporting the idea of them being married off. This fucked up idiot Haqiqatjou is pulling things from his own ass.
And again, he is conveniently leaving out the stories of other women who are SUFFERING because of forced marriage. Notice how he finds one article, and only picks out certain things from it to fool his audience. There are numerous articles and human rights reports that show little girls suffer when forced into marriages to much older men. Haqiqatjou is so damn stupid to not even be aware of this.

"Furthermore, look at how much they are pushing these UN aid agencies as the saviors who are "educating" the Muslims to avoid early marriage and to limit the number of children they have. This is the kind of social engineering being used to fundamentally disrupt and corrupt the Muslim world under the guise of aid. In reality, it is a continuation of colonization"

In my previous post, I talked how these aid agencies are in fact improving the lives of women. These aid agencies are giving women a voice. Women in Muslim countries do not have the option of limiting the amount of babies she will push out from her vagina. She has to "obey" her husband and the society. She has to stay at home, sacrifice her wishes and dreams, because idiots with Haqiqatjou disease are in abundance. This isn't "colonization".

Tuesday, January 16, 2018

Refuting Daniel Haqiqatjou once again

See my video on Daniel Haqiqatjou: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d96j-2XQ9KE&t=1s

I don't think I'll post about this swine ever again. He proves to everyone what a mentally unstable moron he and his followers are. This will be my third and final post about him; I feel like people get my point.
Here is a link to a post he put up a few days ago: https://www.facebook.com/haqiqatjou/posts/2088623788022999?pnref=story

In a quick summary, a Muslim woman (Aisha) posted on his page that America's invasion of some Muslim countries like Afghanistan and Iraq is good for women, because now women in these countries (especially Afghanistan) are more free. She says it is because of kaffir armies and kaffir men that helped save women. And she is 100% correct. Before America invaded Afghanistan, it was under a horrible rule by the Taliban. Women were banned from being educated, banned from working, banned from being out unless a mehram male was with them, banned from showing their hair and face, banned from appearing on TV, given no justice at all from the legal system, and the list just goes on and on. Sane, civilized, and Muslims who have an ounce of humanity would immediately reject the rule of the Taliban, and immediately realize things are much better today (though of course there is PLENTY of work to be done still, it still is a hellhole of a country for women). But Daniel REALLY doesn't like the idea of women being free from oppression. Let's start looking at his rant:

"SubhanAllah. I honestly would have trouble expressing this so succinctly. If you are still struggling to understand the sheer destructiveness and poison that is feminism and wonder why I am "obsessed" with attacking it, simply read this comment made by a feminist on my page.

The fact that she includes Amina Wadud and the Department of Defense in the same sentence is a stroke of genius, albeit unintentional. YES, Amina "Say No to the Quran" Wadud and her feminist cohort in academia and elsewhere, and feminists generally are all part of the same "civilizing mission" to transform Muslim society, dismantle the Islamic tradition, and mutilate the Muslim family in order to recast it according to their liberal, secular, statist vision of humanity, even those Muslim feminists who are too naive to understand this bigger picture. All of them play a part."

Every single Muslim country is backwards beyond belief. No Muslim country is a civilized place for women, unless you are a burka covered housewife and accepts the discriminatory values of the society and government. Every Muslim woman who lives in the west is much better off in every way possible. They are equal to men and in charge of their own lives. There is no fatwa on their head for the choices they make. No Muslim country is like this for women. No Muslim country see's women as humans, but rather sources of "fitnah" that need to be in their place. Notice how this insecure freak Daniel goes on and on about how the "family structure" is threatened by those who want to free Muslim women from oppression. He mentions "Islamic tradition", but he fails to realize no such thing exists when it comes to gender relations. Nothing in Islamic scriptures mandates gender roles for women. Anyone can feel free to try and prove me wrong on this.

"Feminists may protest that they don't support military invasion, colonization, the "civilizing mission," etc., but they ALL support coercion through violence in one form or another. Do they not demand reform? Do they not demand the dissolution of gender roles, which are the bedrock of Islamic society and Islamic law? Do they not demand cutting ties with the Islamic scholarly tradition because it is patriarchal? Do they not make these demands by threatening action, mobilization, boycotts, threatening the careers and livelihoods of whomever stands in their way? "

Again, Islam doesn't mention gender roles for women. And scholarly tradition? For 1400 years scholars from different empires all have differed because of the time and place they lived in. Islamic history in no way depends on "scholars", as they were basically independent from the state and worked on their own (or collaborated with others). Most of them did not concentrate in one area, but focused on different ones. So Daniel here is saying for 1400 years scholars all agreed upon women should be burka covered housewives when in reality no such thing occurred. Some maybe did, but definitely many didn't, because it really is a non-issue. And there have been many scholars who didn't hold stupid views of women (but Daniel would never talk about them).

"These are not empty threats. They are backed up with money and force. NGOs, which this Aishah knowingly mentions, operate on the basis of undermining Muslim societies by bankrolling "open-minded" reformers and sanctioning anyone who resists. This is how they forcefully inject their liberal imperatives into Muslim society. How many NGOs supported by billions of dollars of Western funding are dedicated to promoting homosexuality, promoting "reproductive rights," i.e., abortion and the pill, promoting the dissolution of gender roles such as motherhood and fatherhood as relics to be smashed, promoting transgenderism, opposing Islamic law at every turn, opposing Islamic family law, etc., etc.? None of this is benign. The goal is to reshape Muslim society from the ground up. Muslims need to WAKE UP."

Yes, there are plenty of NGO's in Muslim countries that are trying to help Muslim women get basic rights. Trying to help them get educated, get justice, have a say in their own lives, and so on. Many NGO's are run by Muslim organizations from Muslim countries, so no, not all of them are "Western funded". I have never come across any NGO advocating for homosexuality, notice how Daniel is going off topic. This is what happens when you are a complete degenerate fighting hard against women's rights.
I already mentioned know such thing as "gender roles" exist in Islam for women. As for transgenders, well they exist. There are millions of Muslims born with ambiguous genetalia who may identify with a specific gender. Daniel should google how such people are treated in Muslim countries, but he'll most likely just use them as scapegoats for his rants.
As for Islamic law, well every Muslim country that uses "Islamic" law is hell for women. Enforcing strict, hardline laws which actually come from ancient FIQH (scholars) has proven to be hell for women.
Yes, Muslim society needs to be reshaped. And this is a GOOD thing.

"The saddest part is that Muslims, even supposedly "woke" Muslims, even supposedly "traditional" Muslims, have bought into the old Orientalist trope of misogynistic, jealous, insecure Muslim men abusing their women, women that have no other choice than to turn to the West (and its enlightened philosophies) to be saved. I am hearing this same ignorant, racist line over and over again from people who should know better: "Muslim women are turning to feminism because Muslim men are so rotten. It's a waste of time to oppose feminism, which is perfectly fine and reasonable anyway. Instead we need to focus on the source of why Muslim women turn to feminism in the first place, which is abuse from violent Muslim men!"

I have written many times before how Muslim women are much better off living in the west. MANY TIMES. I have written how Muslim countries are HELL for women. MANY TIMES.
 See my article on how culture influences our perceptions of Islam: http://mymuslimthoughts.blogspot.ca/2015/04/does-culture-influence-our-views-on.html
His last line is a joke he thought would make others laugh. He is an idiot for thinking so.

"I mean, Lord Cromer couldn't have said it better himself. George W. Bush couldn't have said it better himself. Even James Mattis, Trump's Defense Secretary couldn't have said it better, though he tried, as quoted in the article this Aishah person so helpfully linked. Mattis says, "You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil. You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them." Yeehaw! Shoot those misogynists! Or set up an NGO that will go and break them by other means. Because they're disgusting misogynists who beat women!

Isn't it ironic that feminism, which is supposedly so concerned with equality of the sexes, contains as a central pillar of its philosophy the belief that one sex is inherently more malicious, more vicious, more oppressive than the other? One sex is more predisposed to inflict suffering on the weak and vulnerable?"

No idea what the first part is saying. As for the second part, douchebag Daniel fails to realize equality of the sexes refers to women getting the same rights, opportunities, and freedoms as men. It refers to the idea that women aren't just baby making machines who stay at home and cook and clean. And yes, I as a Muslim male can testify to this, that Muslim men are the reason Muslim women suffer so much. What else would be the reason? Flying pigs? Unicorns? Aliens from outer space?

You can look at the Quran in chapter 4 verse 128 where it speaks about women being allowed to divorce cruel men. Even Allah seems to think so that men are oppressive towards women.

"But these are not questions polite, reasonable people ask or think about. We should all accept that men, as a sex, are the archetypal oppressors and women are the archetypal innocent victims. It's in our nature! And you just need a few carefully selected anecdotes, culled by a trenchant confirmation bias, to be convinced of this primordial, universal truth for all ages. Yeah, right."

No, it is not in our nature to be violent, it is the society that conditions us men to be oppressive to women. Fortunately the western society has figured out that men seeing women as equals is the solution to end violence and sex crimes against women, something Muslim countries have yet to figure out (oh and also dumbass Muslim men like Daniel who live unfortunately in the west). Women are not innocent victims, but there is a great deal of oppression and discrimination that exists within Muslim countries and communities, due to both culture AND strict hardline interpretations of Islam.

"No doubt there are abusive Muslim men. They'll get what's coming to them. And there are no doubt abusive Muslim women. They'll get what's coming, too.

 But no, Muslim men are uniquely, exclusively, inherently abusive, says the feminist. Leave Islamic law and its tradition, since it is all dominated by those evil Muslim men, and embrace your kafir saviors, as this Aishah creature so transparently phrased it. Allah has sent the kuffar to invent feminism and save Muslim women from Islam. This is what feminism has been for over 200 years up until today, just as effective today as it has been for generations. A weapon of mass destruction, more powerful than the atomic bomb."

Comparing abusive Muslim women to abusive Muslim men is like comparing a squirt gun to a tsunami. Honor killings, forced marriage, rape, domestic violence, harassment (even of women in burkas), discrimination in society and in legal systems (like jailed for being raped because four witnesses were not provided, or police preventing girls from leave a burning school because they aren't wearing hijab) affects Muslim women A WHOLE LOT MORE than it does to Muslim men. And the sad part is, everyone is in denial of this (people like Daniel included), which is why there is never any change in Muslim attitudes towards women in Muslim countries.

The second part I believe I already answered (notice he keeps on repeating himself in the same rant, a sign of severe stupidity)

"If today's feminists can enthusiastically embrace these "kafir saviors" who have come to save them, just take a guess who else will come as the chief savior.

Have you figured it out?

Here is a hint. You will recognize him as the chief kafir savior, literally the false messiah, because of k-f-r on his very forehead. And despite that clear indication, women will flock to him, as the Beloved ﷺ prophesied. You are seeing the unmistakable precursor of this with your very own eyes: Muslim women praising their kafir savior, in those exact words! Testify to the truthfulness of the Prophet ﷺ!"

So he's talking about the dajjal here. Pretty stupid to compare America's invasion and saving of women to dajjal. And he misinterpreted (surprise surprise) the hadith. The hadith of more women following the dajjal has the same logic as the hadith of more women being in hell. Simply because there will be a lot more women than men. In a hadith that I read somewhere, it said there will be 50 women for one man near the end of times. FIFTY times more women than men! Jonathan Brown, a popular hadith scholar (who himself says hadiths aren't always reliable since they were compiled hundreds of years after the death of the Prophet by men through a game of Chinese whisper) has said that throughout history, Islamic scholars have always interpreted hadiths about more women in hell and more women following the dajjal just because of the fact that there will be more women than men. And also, there is an authentic hadith (accepted by even right wing Muslims) that states there will be MORE WOMEN IN HEAVEN (JANNAH) than men. What's Daniel's response here?

And the Prophet DID NOT say anything about Muslim women following the dajjal or praising the kaffir! This asshole just lied! Most of the followers of the dajjal will be Jewish women according to many scholars (reasons aren't really known).

And finally, Daniel ends his shitty rant by saying the following:

"To the Muslim community: Wake up. Boycott anyone who advocates feminism. Call out those duat and "shaykhs" who play into the feminist narrative by posing as "the good kind of Muslim man" in order to slavishly pander to confused Muslim women, rather than to do their duty to warn Muslim women and men about the reality of feminism and its destructive past and present. This is a collective responsibility.

We need to work hard to eradicate this satanic disease that has caused so much pain and suffering. Or we can continue the way we have been going, continue with the status quo, which has been working so splendidly, as evidenced by the swell of these false Aishahs in our community. Be afraid that, without action, your own daughters and sisters will, with high likelihood, grow up to be a false Aishah, pining for the false Amina "Ibrahim was a deadbeat" Wadud and the Department of Defense. Fear Allah."

We civilized and sane Muslims need to pray to Allah that our sons don't turn out to be like Daniel, and that our daughters and sisters never, EVER marry a man like Daniel.

Let's have a look at the comments. Some sad humans, really. Especially the self hating women who worship Daniel like a second Allah:

And look who it is, Abdul Raffay and Junaid Hyat, two idiots who have been banned from several Pakistani pages for their repeated sick comments against women.

Speaking of Junaid, I mentioned in my video that he made a comment about a woman needing to be grabbed by the vagina. I didn't take a screenshot of it, but I found another one on a Pakistani page about a woman being raped. See what he said:

Yep, blaming a woman for being sexually abused.

Saturday, December 16, 2017

The awrah of a man is not from the naval to the knees!


Right wing Muslims (mostly males) often love harassing hijabless Muslim women. When these right wing Muslim men are asked about why they aren't wearing hijab, the common response is that they don't have to cover their hair because the awrah of a man is only from the naval to the knees. So in other words, they can freely flaunt anything else and wear any attire they like (as long as it covers the naval to the knees and it isn't made of silk).

Sorry to say, but women are attracted to good looking men (nice hair, eyes, muscular arms and shoulders, chest, and abs). Are men sinful for this if women get turned on? Does Shaytaan go out with us if we go out into the public? Because those features that I mentioned are considered okay to show for Muslim men.

Does this make sense to you? Women must wear hijab or burka but men can, under Islam, show the above features?

Another thing I would like to point out is that the body shapes of men ALSO show even if our traditional awrah is covered. No one pays attention to this, sadly. Because everyone is busy going after Muslim women for "showing" body shapes. I have said this before, it doesn't matter what is worn, body shapes of men and women will ALWAYS be visible. It is stupid that the Muslim community expects women to pay attention to how she appears in public because no one should have to worry about others seeing the shapes of the body. I as a male, even in my loose baggy jeans, will still have some shape visible to others. Do I care? No. Should I worry? No. In the exact same way, no Muslim woman should be pressured into thinking about if her shapes are visible. Most Muslim men and women do not have the intention to show certain body shapes. They are visible because they just are.

Now as I promised way up above about a personal story. Two years ago I was waiting alone at a bus stop. I was sitting on a bench and looking at my phone. In the distance I saw a woman approaching me. I figured she wanted to take the bus too. But then she came really close and sat right next to me. I looked at her and she gave me a several-teeth- missing smile. I got creeped out. I just looked down and pretended to be busy on my phone. She kept staring at me! Literally like what the heck. And then she said "my my, aren't you a sight for sore eyes". I was SUPER uncomfortable. I just nodded and hoped she would stop staring and talking. She STILL kept on staring. Then, just when I thought things couldn't get worse, she put her hand in my lap. I immediately got up and told her to stop. She replied "well honey I just can't help it. Come here and sit on mommy's lap". I began walking away. The bus was about five minutes away, but I would rather walk a bit and find another bus stop and wait for another 30 minutes then be anywhere near that woman for another five. As I was walking away, she yelled "oh my, look at that @$$".

Now this may seem a little funny but there are several important things to think about here. If there was a Muslim woman in my place instead of me (a male), Muslims would be saying she should wear better clothes and should be with a mehram. Because not only are you in a dangerous situation, you are being cursed by the angels for showing your "beauty". So what about me? I always wear very loose jeans and loose shirts. I don't style my hair either. Yet I was a source of attraction and temptation to this creepy woman (still haunts me by the way). Should I have worn a burka? Should I have been with a mehram woman to "protect" me?
Also, a similar situation happened with my Muslim friend (except this time it was a male bothering him by making sexual advances). What do right wing Muslims say about this? Where are all those salafis and followers of people like Daniel Haqiqatjou, Anjem Choudhary, Abu Waleed, and so on?

Sunday, December 10, 2017

Daniel Haqiqatjou has blocked me from his facebook page

This is interesting. Daniel blocks me off his page, yet lets the aggressive, even racist, sexist, and kaffirphobic comments continue to pour in!

Wednesday, December 6, 2017

The self hating and extreme Muslim women who unfortunately make their way to live in the West

I've written about self hating Muslim women before. I have also shown screenshots of them, see here:

Now what really annoys me are the self hating Muslim women who immigrate to the west. Below is a woman I found on Daniel Haqiqatjou's page:



The four morons who liked her comment also live in the west, yes among kaffirs.

And we wonder yet again why so many young Muslims are insecure about Islam.

Friday, November 24, 2017

Daniel Haqiqatjou is the latest moron to join the list of nut job fanatics

I made a video on this see here:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d96j-2XQ9KE&list=LL8yHjmv7DuxLSxepXfyBUtQ&index=43

Here is a new post I just made about him: http://mymuslimthoughts.blogspot.ca/2018/01/refuting-daniel-haqiqatjou-once-again.html

As much as I hate to say it, Trump is correct in banning Muslims from certain countries.
I have posted on here before about online Islamic forums, certain Islamic youtube channels, and certain Islamic websites which are full of stupidity. Right wing Muslims are a plague. They justify every psychotic statement they make in the name of Islam. Furthermore, every psychotic Muslim preacher or organization will always attract followers. I have no idea why this ummah contains so many idiots who blindly worship anything that is abnormal, degenerate, and swine-like.

I was browsing through a Pakistani facebook page  (Pakistan Votes) which is probably one of the very few sane minded pages to exist in the Islamic world. On it I found a screenshot (here is the link to the page https://www.facebook.com/pakistanvotes/posts/1915659475115451) from this man (Daniel Haqiqatjou) who said something like having female friends leads to flirting, which leads to zina. Okay, that I kind of agree with. Then came a response from a Muslim woman to him which went something like having male friends creates understanding between the genders which leads to a decrease in sexual harassment. Obviously this is correct, as I have posted before on here links to studies that show men who see women as equals are far less likely to harass or sexually assault.
I googled this guy's name and I found out he runs the website Muslim Skeptic. It is full of articles that take shots at women, non-Muslims, and those who don't adhere to strict Islamic doctrines. Pretty disgusting huh? It also had articles of him supporting child marriages (because it decreases the chances of "zina") and an article where he compared hijabless women to not wearing a seatbelt. He throws in jokes here and there to make himself look funny, but only his low IQ followers would laugh at them. After seeing his site I found his facebook page, which had the same stupidity on his site. It also showed that he lives in America, which is shocking because Muslims of his caliber should only be found in conservative Islamic countries where they can preach their hate and filth to crowds of uneducated fools. But this time we get to see the sick comments supporting his views. And you know what? Many of his supporters live in America and in Europe. These right wing animals are found living in civilized countries. Sick comments and living in places where tolerance and gender equality are highly respected. How does this make sense in any way?

The following are screenshots of the comments on his page. As I said, psychotic Muslim preachers always attract followers. It is mostly men but as I mentioned before there are always self hating women who will join hands these idiotic right wing Muslim males.

To answer the idiots, gheerah and dayooth are salafi concepts that are aimed at making men insecure and controlling. No civilized man with a rational mind can think in such a way. The sickness in the comments prove how they view women, and they're using Islam to support this stupidity.

P.S. notice the amount of likes these morons get.

P.P.S this guy Bulbulia also wrote a comment on the page saying Muslim men shouldn't let their daughters go to western universities otherwise they would comeback with non-Muslim boyfriends. I would show it but I would have to find it and the amount moronic comments just makes me angry. But you see what kind of freaks are gathered? I remember that comment itself got 5 likes. Shocking and stupid.

And see the self hating women who come on and support this freak:

These are just a few screenshots. There's a lot more vomit on his page.