The Irony of Saudi Arabia and Islam
UI – Part 410 – The Irony of Saudi Arabia and Islam
Saudi’s can be critical of America for treatment of Muslims. How can they possibly? This is the most apartheid country in the universe. No churches. No freedom of religion. No proselytizing, except for Islam. This is the nature of Islam in spades. Understand how the Saudi’s think and understand how Islam is promoted. Understand also how Muslims think.
In the United States there have been several complaints at universities of Muslim women being harassed. They were criticized for their religion or dress. Organizations such as C.A.I.R., even from areas as far away as Saudi Arabia, spoke out framing the verbal abuses as hate speech, thus causing mental harm to their adherents. One woman gave birth in a US hospital and heard reference to her baby as ugly, taking that comment as a slight against her Arab heritage. She suffered postpartum depression. She claims it is hatred towards her Islamic ideology in America that has engendered her mental state. Other instances have been reported and promoted by Islamic support groups in an effort to have laws promulgated restricting harmful words against religion, principally the Islamic religion. This is not new.
In March 2015 an Islamic televangelist from India, (Dr. Zakir Naik), declared publicly, “ ‘the Jews’ control America, that apostates can be killed, that the United States is the world’s ‘biggest terrorist’ and that the Sept. 11 attacks were an ‘inside job’ by President George W. Bush.” This man, this Islamist, was awarded one of Saudi Arabia’s highest tributes. At an elaborate ceremony King Salman gave him the “service to Islam” honor. So much for the relationship between America and Saudi Arabia as allies. Hatred towards the West is as a mantra heard in mosques and madrassas throughout the Middle East. How often have we heard cries from gatherings on the streets of Iran, “Death to America!”
Remember the Paris Charlie Hebdo attacks, the killings, and the criticism of the Draw Muhammad event in Texas outside of which two Islamic terrorists were killed by police attempting to bomb the event. Muslims are extremists when it comes to freedom of speech when that speech suggests anything they find offensive. However the opposite is not of equal concern, not in the Middle East, Paris, Belgium, Germany, Great Britain or America.
There is a double standard.
Until the leading Nations of the Muslim world can demonstrate tolerance towards the infidels (using their terminology), how can they expect others to ever have tolerance towards them. Change is needed. The Islamic ideology of hatred, which everyone not a Muslim rightly believes is ingrained in the heritage, culture and thinking of any Muslim, needs to stop. The poor treatment of Christians in Pakistan, Syria, Iran, Egypt, Afghanistan, Indonesia, and so forth, to include the burning of churches and killing of believers and their ministers, without proper punishment of the perpetrators exemplifies the attitude of the Islamist towards non-Muslims. How could they possibly be a critic of similar treatment of Muslims by those they constantly refer to as kafirs. Not only do they criticize, they demand blasphemy laws to protect Muslims. The scale of justice should not be that blind.
In response to a posting on a website and in newspapers as to clerics, Imam’s, Khomeini’s and Islamic autocrats, especially the Wahhabists, concern about the lack of liberal thought in their world, the comment was made, “Within the Saudi society racism is inherent against foreigners working in (the) kingdom. Foreign workers are seen as subhuman creature subservient to the locals. See how it feels” – Mohd Ali. This statement says so much!
Give credit to Iceland. Their Pirate Party proposed legislation recently stating, “Iceland’s parliament has now established the important message that freedom will not give in to bloody attacks,” by actively repealing its anti-blasphemy laws. This was in response to the vicious actions taken on the infidels. The infidels were expressing themselves in ways Islamists found offensive. Freedom of speech, and the sticks-and-stones idiom, aside. The terrorizing Islamists found support heralded by many Muslims worldwide.
The leaders of Islam, the cabal of Islamic organizations, especially those born out of the Muslim Brotherhood, and the OIC, seek to immunize Islam from criticism worldwide. Ask yourself why. The answer, once you understand Islam, is to avoid alternative truths being heard, the bell of freedom ringing, and paths more acceptable, more logical, more humane, more civilized, more modern, more pluralistic, more welcoming of others (non-Muslims), and less hateful being heard. This is why the texts of this ideology do not permit proselytizing by other faiths. The elite profit from their status in the Islamic umma (community) and have no desire to see their fortunes or power diminished. They are the major beneficiaries of the drum beat of Islamic hatred towards the non-Muslim, keeping the poor poor, maintaining an educated populace at a minimum, insuring the rote habits and mind-numbing practices of Islam continue, quelling dissent, excluding bibles in their homelands (not permitting churches and other worship centers also), and maintaining a closed black curtain between Islam and the modern world (the West). It is to their advantage to do so.
The most closed Islamic society is Saudi Arabia, yet America treats them as an ally. Even the Clinton Foundation, which states its purpose as paving the way for a more humane world, accepts their huge donation and turns their back on the unholy practices they continue, which includes beheadings as a form of punishment for many crimes, to include leaving Islam. Hillary Clinton, the Democratic candidate for President of the United States speaks out against inhumane treatment of women, campaigns as the women’s choice, yet says nothing of the abuses taking place in Saudi Arabia. Why did she allow her family Foundation to accept the donation from a country opposed in practice to her platform? That is as two-faced as the Islamists themselves.
How can the Islamist take a stand against the intolerance of Islam by non-Muslims, when they demonstrate every day their hatred and intolerance, even preaching this practice as part of the jihad, the holy war, the fight of Islam to have the world All for Allah? They are the masters of intolerance, the example, yet want to be wholly accepted, without criticism. They are as the snakes with the most deadly venom wanting to live in a forest wherein may live other snakes, but the others all must be defanged.
Those that attempt to defend themselves against the tyranny of Islam are labelled the aggressor. The defender by not permitting Islam to progress unimpeded is the enemy, the persecutor, and the intolerant party. This provides just the justification Islam needs to fight, attack, kill, and exterminate those who do not convert, who do not adhere to their ideology, or who do not subordinate themselves to this ideal.
Bizarre does not even begin to describe the dichotomy.
Grace and Peace
Saudi’s can be critical of America for treatment of Muslims. How can they possibly? This is the most apartheid country in the universe. No churches. No freedom of religion. No proselytizing, except for Islam. This is the nature of Islam in spades. Understand how the Saudi’s think and understand how Islam is promoted. Understand also how Muslims think.
In the United States there have been several complaints at universities of Muslim women being harassed. They were criticized for their religion or dress. Organizations such as C.A.I.R., even from areas as far away as Saudi Arabia, spoke out framing the verbal abuses as hate speech, thus causing mental harm to their adherents. One woman gave birth in a US hospital and heard reference to her baby as ugly, taking that comment as a slight against her Arab heritage. She suffered postpartum depression. She claims it is hatred towards her Islamic ideology in America that has engendered her mental state. Other instances have been reported and promoted by Islamic support groups in an effort to have laws promulgated restricting harmful words against religion, principally the Islamic religion. This is not new.
In March 2015 an Islamic televangelist from India, (Dr. Zakir Naik), declared publicly, “ ‘the Jews’ control America, that apostates can be killed, that the United States is the world’s ‘biggest terrorist’ and that the Sept. 11 attacks were an ‘inside job’ by President George W. Bush.” This man, this Islamist, was awarded one of Saudi Arabia’s highest tributes. At an elaborate ceremony King Salman gave him the “service to Islam” honor. So much for the relationship between America and Saudi Arabia as allies. Hatred towards the West is as a mantra heard in mosques and madrassas throughout the Middle East. How often have we heard cries from gatherings on the streets of Iran, “Death to America!”
Remember the Paris Charlie Hebdo attacks, the killings, and the criticism of the Draw Muhammad event in Texas outside of which two Islamic terrorists were killed by police attempting to bomb the event. Muslims are extremists when it comes to freedom of speech when that speech suggests anything they find offensive. However the opposite is not of equal concern, not in the Middle East, Paris, Belgium, Germany, Great Britain or America.
There is a double standard.
Until the leading Nations of the Muslim world can demonstrate tolerance towards the infidels (using their terminology), how can they expect others to ever have tolerance towards them. Change is needed. The Islamic ideology of hatred, which everyone not a Muslim rightly believes is ingrained in the heritage, culture and thinking of any Muslim, needs to stop. The poor treatment of Christians in Pakistan, Syria, Iran, Egypt, Afghanistan, Indonesia, and so forth, to include the burning of churches and killing of believers and their ministers, without proper punishment of the perpetrators exemplifies the attitude of the Islamist towards non-Muslims. How could they possibly be a critic of similar treatment of Muslims by those they constantly refer to as kafirs. Not only do they criticize, they demand blasphemy laws to protect Muslims. The scale of justice should not be that blind.
In response to a posting on a website and in newspapers as to clerics, Imam’s, Khomeini’s and Islamic autocrats, especially the Wahhabists, concern about the lack of liberal thought in their world, the comment was made, “Within the Saudi society racism is inherent against foreigners working in (the) kingdom. Foreign workers are seen as subhuman creature subservient to the locals. See how it feels” – Mohd Ali. This statement says so much!
Give credit to Iceland. Their Pirate Party proposed legislation recently stating, “Iceland’s parliament has now established the important message that freedom will not give in to bloody attacks,” by actively repealing its anti-blasphemy laws. This was in response to the vicious actions taken on the infidels. The infidels were expressing themselves in ways Islamists found offensive. Freedom of speech, and the sticks-and-stones idiom, aside. The terrorizing Islamists found support heralded by many Muslims worldwide.
The leaders of Islam, the cabal of Islamic organizations, especially those born out of the Muslim Brotherhood, and the OIC, seek to immunize Islam from criticism worldwide. Ask yourself why. The answer, once you understand Islam, is to avoid alternative truths being heard, the bell of freedom ringing, and paths more acceptable, more logical, more humane, more civilized, more modern, more pluralistic, more welcoming of others (non-Muslims), and less hateful being heard. This is why the texts of this ideology do not permit proselytizing by other faiths. The elite profit from their status in the Islamic umma (community) and have no desire to see their fortunes or power diminished. They are the major beneficiaries of the drum beat of Islamic hatred towards the non-Muslim, keeping the poor poor, maintaining an educated populace at a minimum, insuring the rote habits and mind-numbing practices of Islam continue, quelling dissent, excluding bibles in their homelands (not permitting churches and other worship centers also), and maintaining a closed black curtain between Islam and the modern world (the West). It is to their advantage to do so.
The most closed Islamic society is Saudi Arabia, yet America treats them as an ally. Even the Clinton Foundation, which states its purpose as paving the way for a more humane world, accepts their huge donation and turns their back on the unholy practices they continue, which includes beheadings as a form of punishment for many crimes, to include leaving Islam. Hillary Clinton, the Democratic candidate for President of the United States speaks out against inhumane treatment of women, campaigns as the women’s choice, yet says nothing of the abuses taking place in Saudi Arabia. Why did she allow her family Foundation to accept the donation from a country opposed in practice to her platform? That is as two-faced as the Islamists themselves.
How can the Islamist take a stand against the intolerance of Islam by non-Muslims, when they demonstrate every day their hatred and intolerance, even preaching this practice as part of the jihad, the holy war, the fight of Islam to have the world All for Allah? They are the masters of intolerance, the example, yet want to be wholly accepted, without criticism. They are as the snakes with the most deadly venom wanting to live in a forest wherein may live other snakes, but the others all must be defanged.
Those that attempt to defend themselves against the tyranny of Islam are labelled the aggressor. The defender by not permitting Islam to progress unimpeded is the enemy, the persecutor, and the intolerant party. This provides just the justification Islam needs to fight, attack, kill, and exterminate those who do not convert, who do not adhere to their ideology, or who do not subordinate themselves to this ideal.
Bizarre does not even begin to describe the dichotomy.
Grace and Peace
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment