Muslim Gives Fitting Response To Ayaan Hirsi Ali
Channel: Mohammed Hijab
File Size: 19.36MB
You will never forget this reputation and you should never forget this reputation. Your dejected individual, a sick person, so dour,
all the steps that precede jihad, you should and could see Jihad as an extension of doubt, a mental and ideological slave. And I want you to remember that
that job 10 discount code for 10% discount on a wide range of products including premium Ethiopian black seed products. Assalamu aleikum wa rahmatullah wa barakato. Today we're going to be dealing with an intellectual fraud, an imposter, a duplicitous woman,
an intellectual patroon
a slob and a galleon. Yes, a Sloboda, galleon, an individual who has been caught lying about their life experiences to try and manipulate facts, thereby out costing and alienating ostracizing not only the Muslim community which she abandoned,
but the Somali community and the African community, because she was caught lying about her experiences, saying that she was there in Somalia when there was a civil war, when we know that she was in a completely different country, she was in Kenya. And she only fabricated those facts in order to gain the sympathy of individuals who should thereafter use in order to attack the Muslim community, lifting flipping contracts, calm
and net 15 compared to do with knife, needles,
your she it again doesn't know the birth or his family has made a comeback. What a scandalous woman she is, what a scandalous woman she is.
But not only is that the case, which will not be the subject of today's discussion.
But she is an individual, who if you listened to her for more than five minutes,
is a contradictory individual,
not only in what she believes in or espouses, but in what she says in her so called intellectual engagements. Let's take a look at some of these clips that I found were a video in which she was talking about Dawa, of all things. She talks about Dawa.
The first thing I found quite interesting
was the fact that she says, and this is quite interesting, being a black African woman, she completely separates itself from Africa, and from the so called developing world. And she says, Our listen to this, our Western heroes, referring to whom the founding fathers of America, they celebrated more than we celebrate the founding fathers more than we celebrate any of our Western heroes. And then thereafter, she says,
she's she attacks Karl Popper. Yeah. And I criticized popper for, for jumping for skipping Muhammad. He goes from Plato to Hegel, and in between, he forgets Muhammad. And she feels that in many of our publications, that the Prophet Muhammad was unethical, and so on. And yet she says, our American here are our Western heroes, referring to the founding fathers of America. Does she not know that the inception of America is almost no different at all, from the inception of ISIS?
The pillaging and raping and genocide of the Native American population?
Does she not know being someone who supposedly is against enslavement? And so on that so much of these founding fathers, they possessed the slaves themselves? And what condemnation? Have we heard from this intellectual slave? Yes, because I believe, if Malcolm X was alive today, that he points out that individual and he called her a house Negro, there's no doubt about it.
There's no doubt about it, and individual like that, who
looks up to the savior of the United States of America and she says our American heroes, we don't hear any criticism of a liberal kind of a moral kind
forwarded to those individuals.
So why is it the case that you choose to manipulate the facts as we will see as this video progresses and matures, and try and
Smith not only just the Islamic world or the Muslim world,
but Somalia as a country, and Africa as a continent.
Let me say something. And then in the 10 years in Medina that followed the call the invitation to persuasion, the use of language, slowly transformed, maybe not so slowly transformed into the use of force. She starts talking about the dour, and she says, it slowly transformed to the use of force. And obviously, for those who know the biography of the Prophet Mohammed Salah salam, there was a 13 year period in Mecca where the Muslims were being attacked, subjected to all kinds of torture, all kinds of boycott all these kinds of things, which, by the way, evidences that this man, the Prophet Muhammad wasallam, was sincere to his cause, since he was getting no so called pucks have them have
the scores for 13 entire years.
And he was offered a way out many times, but in these 13 years, and then there was a 10 year period after that called the Medina and period. And she, she in her language says, slowly move to the use of force. Well, if you look at chapter 22, verse number 39 of the Quran is very clear why that movement to the so called use of force was implemented in the first place, was in a little levena yukata Luna be in the holy move, that it has been given permission, express permission
for those believers who have been oppressed to fight back.
So what she's trying to portray is this megillah maniacal attitude of the Muslim people, and this diabolical attitude, and this power, hungry expansionist attitude, when in fact that the very turning point in the syrup is outlined in the very Koran using couched with language of justification couched with language of justification, justification, because you have been in the home or because they have been
volleyball, oppressed, but the language should be telling
in the Quran, the reason why, and this is why the vast majority, and an argument could be made for all of the expeditions that took place in the Medina and period
were defensive. The Battle of better the Battle of art is not a it's an open secret, all you have to do is open a book of the biography of the Prophet Muhammad Sallallahu sallam, and you will realize that these were defensive expeditions they will have most of them will fall on the borders of Medina, they have nothing to do with expansion, really so dour,
all the steps that precede jihad. In fact, you should and could see Jihad as an extension of Tao.
So this is a manipulative insertion by this individual, this low life individual who is trying to use Islam and Muslims and the developing world so called developing world to create narratives of
hatred and animosity. Clash of Civilizations uses this all the time Samuel P. Huntington Sturm. So when a non Muslim is invited to come to Islam, and in and refuses, then force is justified, you have scant attention to the facts is false. The Quran clearly says and there was consensus among the jurists on this issue, that like cut off a dean obeying the rules to middle away from a
human bla bla bla bla, bla, them for sama, chapter two verse 256. There is no compulsion in religion. That truth has been made clear from false it. So whoever wants to
disbelieve in falsehood and believe in truth, then they will have the true anchorage facts for the stem stackable outwards. Lamp Islam Allah. The Quran says in chapter 18, for men shot of a human woman shall affiliate for whoever wants to believe, and whoever wants to can this belief and yes, these verses are
there, the context is talking about disbelievers non Muslims.
No, there's nothing in the Quran. And there is nothing in the summer, you liar that indicates that if people do not become Muslim, that force is thereby justified. You are a liar. You are a liar. Just as you lied about your life story to try and bring yourself into the West. You lie about the Quran and you sit there on podiums and manipulate the facts and you thought you'd get
away with it, didn't you? And you thought you'd get away with it, didn't you? The biggest challenge is the extent to which agents of Dawa, listen to what you say agents of Dawa
meaning spreading Islam. The word Tao means really inviting people to Islam, agents of that. So people that try and invite people to Islam can exploit the constitutional and legal protections that guarantee American citizens, freedom of religion and freedom of speech freedoms, that would of course, be swept away. If the Islamists achieve their goals. That's right. They and this is actually part of her book, so called book which is not even reference and is, is a nonsense book talking about the Muslim Brotherhood and other such things, and making it seem as if the Muslim Brotherhood have some kind of handhold on the UAE, the western dollar. absolutely false. People don't, most
people don't subscribe to Muslim Brotherhood ideology, if you want to call it that, in the in the West, our society then says Enough is enough. And up to here, not far that we're going to ask, you know, we're going to enforce the rule of law. Meaning what here? What is she actually trying to say? She is saying the constitutional rights that they have in America, freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of religion, are being exploited by the dollar carriers, if you want to call them that for the sake of argument, and that those individuals really have to obey by the rule of law. And enough is enough, inference made that what you're saying is that dow should not be present
and there should be laws against it. You are, in your own words, and immigrant. You've come from in 1992, you've come from another country seeking refuge. And now you're saying Enough is enough.
Who on earth do you think you are?
Who on earth do you think you are? And what do you think this is? This is fascism. She in her in their entire presentation. There's nothing I understood more than in her own fascistic inclinations.
And tendencies. She's trying to disguise it. But the truth is the truth. This is it. We have to know that the friend from the phone I call Schmidt, the famous political philosopher representing fascism would say, and that by the way, you can have a fascistic liberalist you can have that fascism and liberalism are not two sides of a lot two completely diametrically opposed things, they can actually work in tandem with one another.
It's possible. So this is a kind of fascistic presentation, why don't you just say that, that certain things should be off limits for certain people, and that there are,
you know, clear boundaries as you want to put it. So you have a fascistic presentation, you're saying this kind of censorship should be allowed. So you want freedom of expression and freedom of speech to apply to almost all other religions and all other people's but not to the Muslims into Islam? This is nothing but a type of fascism. And if you don't, if you want to refute that, you can try and refute that, but believe you me with your pseudo intellectual, yeah, lacking of knowledge, you won't be able to refute much, and what I find really problematic, that is so sickening to the core to listen to this woman's be. It's unfortunate that we now have a democracy where opposition,
you know, healthy opposition has become obstruction. So it's okay to criticize Islam, and that becomes obstruction.
But when Dawa is done, which is Islamic Propagation, let's say for the sake of argument
that you that should be outlawed, and Enough is enough. So hold on, do you not see the inconsistency in what inconsistency is what you're saying?
you're complaining, you are literally complaining at the fact that any criticism against Islam according to your understanding, is seen as an obstruction becomes an you call it healthy opposition. So when criticism of Islam is done is called healthy opposition, and when that is challenged is called obstruction. But when propagation of Islam is done, which is a constitutional right, according to us, us constitutional law, for example, that is, somehow the obstruction. So all you're saying is let's treat different people differently. You're not even making an argument from violence. You're not even saying this can this is directly correlated with violence.
And even if you didn't make that argument, it'll be a weak argument because correlation doesn't always mean causation.
It's a fantasy.
So you have no leg to stand on here. You're inconsistent, you're inconsistent, these are glaringly obvious.
How can you live with yourself? Having such inconsistencies? This kind of cognitive dissonance, how can you live yourself with this kind of intellectual cognitive dissonance?
Just 10 minutes before that you are saying it's
It's not healthy to obstruction. And now you're saying is healthy Australia is called obstructions by healthy opposition. You're completely a contradictory person. You made me sick. You made me sick. What you are is a public intellectual. The man, he puts his hand on her hand, and he says, You are a public intellectual, how patronizing how condescending you are republicans are now you've got the seal of approval from the light man that you wanted to get the seal of approval from. And then he says, and another place, he says, actually, when she talks about her immigrating from
so called from Somalia, but really from Kenya, or wherever it was, we don't know. In 1992, he goes, you're doing fine. Let's take a look at this. You know, I came to the west in 1992. So I'm a newcomer. But you're doing fine. Thank you. So it's giving her his approval? You know, don't worry, you're a public intellectual, even though you you have you don't have the qualifications for for that, or you haven't done peer reviewed stuff. But your public intellectual. But how condescending This is? Could you imagine a white man like that, putting his hands on Jordan Peterson and saying you're a public intellectual, Jordan Peterson look up, I'm saying Excuse me, what the hell are you
or any of the people that you know, the in the West now will pop academics, putting their hands up on Richard Dawkins or any of these individuals and say, You're You are a public intellectual. You say, Excuse me, I don't need your endorsement. With all due respect. I don't. You know, this is embarrassing.
And you're smiling. They're sitting, take soaking it all up. This is exactly what you wanted, isn't it? You wanted the white manual savior to come and put his hand on yours, quite physically, actually, not just intellectually, because you have been in ideologically molested? You have been ideologically molested? Yes. But as I'm going to say, your public intellectual Oh, thank you. Oh, thank you very much.
Is that is that the way you want to earn respect in this world? how embarrassed you are? You're a joke, you are an absolute joke.
If the question is whether the West has the courage to defend itself has the will to defend itself, then you've just identified the central sub question within that question. And that is, will the United States of America stop wringing its hands? Yeah.
What do you think?
I hate to say it, but something has to happen to make us focus into stop wringing our hands. And looking at all of that, I think it is, I don't know, I feel a sense of urgency. I hope that you feel a sense of urgency that we have something to defend. Now, this actually boiled my blood, of the many things that she said maybe this is in the top three things that she said actually bought my blood, the West,
United States of America, which went into a land which was not theirs, let's say and completely destroyed the natives. Bill up and when it gets many a treaty,
and then after that had, I don't know 11 successive wars, in a span of I don't know how many years?
How many people have they killed? How many expeditions have they had Vietnam, North Korea? out Iraq? How many people have the innocents have died? I'm sorry, the superpower rain, the short superpower reign of the United States of America. And you have the audacity you and that idiot that's standing next to you to say, when the West will defend itself. You're using the word defend with a country that is the only always with the hemisphere, the Western Hemisphere, which is the only hemisphere responsible for nuclear deployment of nuclear weapons, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, you talking about that? defend itself? Are you sick in the mind? I'll use that mentally enslaved and intellectually
subservient and intellectually molested in the ideologically molested that you are actually talking about defense for the biggest bullies history has ever known.
You really should be ashamed of yourself, but you should be humiliated. You should be humiliated. You make me absolutely sick.
And this is the reason why those people who hang around together you imagine no was Sam Harris and Cole. You hang around together. But you'd never ben shapiro even I put them in there as well. You guys would never you don't have the fortitude or the courage to stand forward against the people that you're attacking.
While the Muslim community get someone from the Muslim community and debate them, you are coward. You are manipulating facts. How can this man just be sitting there from the Hoover Institute and allowing you to get away with so many blunders? And you will never forget this reputation and you should never forget this reputation. Your dejected individual
a sick person, a mental and ideological slave. And I want you to remember that well, Salaam Alaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh