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.