Can't
Understand
Normal
Thinking
This bitch knows the truth, and she lies. She clearly does not care a bit about all the hundreds of millions of women who suffer under Islam.
Well, Queenie, here's my fucking stereotype; Arab rulers don't give a fuck about their own people. They think of the people as so many dogs to run over a cliff. You treat your people like dogs.
Fuck you, Rania.
UPDATE: It has been suggested to me that Queen Rania might benefit from viewing this video before she ventures to open her mouth and utter her foolish ideas again.
20 comments:
Great Post and love the Can't Understand Normal Thinking,
may I borrow that one, LOL.?
Rania, and so many like her,
truly expose the IMPERIALISM of ISLAM,
AND YOU NAILED IT,
THEY DO TREAT THEIR PEOPLE--ALL PEOPLE LIKE DOGS,
PHARAOHS, IS ALL THEY ARE, HARDENED HEARTS AND ALL
may the plagues be unleashed on them as they were in the day of Ramses.
Natasha
She's surprised, uh? Her attempt to bring race into this is a way for her to preempt an argument against her. While Islam's not a race and most Muslims are not Arabs, Arabic is the language of Allah/Islam and Jordan is officially a Muslim country. But her constant use of the term Arab to describe her part of the world tells us she's exploiting our culture's extreme sensitivity about race and that she's practicing Mo's lesson that 'War is deceit'.
And this ho is not representative of any woman in the Muslim world.
You got that right, Bosch. She lives a privileged life. It disgusts me that she is willing to sell hundreds of millions of women down the river just so she can go on being the vaunted whore of Babylon.
Natasha, I got the "can't understand normal thinking" thing from a radio show host here in LA, so it ain't mine, and go ahead and use it all you want.
;-)
A pretty face for Islam!
I'd like to ask why slavery wasan't abolished sooner in the Arab world?
Qatar: 1952
Saudi Arabia: 1962
Yemen: 1962
United Arab Emirates: 1963
Oman: 1970
Mauritania: July 1980 (still formally abolished by French authorities in 1905, then implicitly in the new constitution of 1961 and expressly in October that year when the country joined the United Nations), actually still practiced. Slavery in Mauritania was criminalized in August 2007.
Niger: 2003
It couldn't have anythig to do with slavery TO DATE is still sactioned by her beloved religion.
Jordan also has more than their fair share of honor killings.
It coudn't be because Jordans goverment refused to prosecute these killings as murder and in the cases they do have such short sentences as 9 months or less.
Yea there are lots of questions ... but I really doubt her sincerity in answering them.
But keep giving us that pretty face baby. You know we can't resist a pretty face.
jack,
Let's see when was slavery outlawed here in America? It was outlawed 1865. Off course that was only after the civil war and after the south was forced to accept the 13th amendment. But still, that beats Qatar by almost a century. In your face Qatar!
Since the times are pharaonic, it fits.
"...I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." Matthew 19:24.
oooo the C word LOL
Fuck her is right.
THRICE.
With fringe on top.
I saw her face!
Hmm... Pretty!
I can only imagine her bare arms and legs.
She's like a plate of tasty MEAT! Such immodesty means I can RAPE, RAPE her!
Me and my friends.
Well, "Bitch" of course....Lying, Middle-Eastern bitch!
Very pretty though.....and that sort are not confined to Jordan.
"It couldn't have anythig to do with slavery TO DATE is still sactioned by her beloved religion."
WAMI has been doing coverage on the SLAVERY IN ISLAM that is still going on today, and in fact that issue is one of the main ones we confront,
currently am working on a MARXIST critique, using MARX'S OWN WORDS AGAINST ISLAM AND AGAINST THE SLAVERY OF ISLAM,
which is PROOF, using Marxist theory--that the alliances between the far left and left with Islam today
is a betrayal to Marxism. Once completed feel free to use to counter those arguments of 'leftist relativism' not just by using the philosophies and principles of liberty and democracy [of which I am in 100% strongly in agreement with]
BUT too in using Marxist ideology to rebuke every single LIE the leftist relativists use to support their PROPPING UP AND SUPPORT OF
ISLAM.
In other words, for ANY Marxist or any who even Remotely believe in liberation against capitalism and imperialism to support Islam or the Islamists, is an oxymoron,
a betrayal of Marxism, and I'm going to prove it, and its not been hard to do, because in EVERY SINGLE ISLAMIC STATE-REGIME-MOVEMENT
there is not only condoning of slavery, including wage slavery, but they PROP SLAVERY UP AND THEY PROTECT SLAVERY AND THEIR ENTIRE ECONOMIC SET UP IS SLAVERY.
And not just slavery of adults, but slavery of children, as well as sex slavery,
Chattel slavery is the highest percentage of slavery in Islam,
Marx critiqued American Slavery--that stemmed from what he said to be capitalism, he did not critique the ancient slavery, BUT, even using his critique there,
there is enough PROOF that Islam is indeed,
a capitalist, slavery economy that is indeed,
IMPERIALIST.
And in measurement, Islam is far more imperialist, capitalist [in the worst form], and feudalist--aka slavery,
than US capitalism is.
Both on a domestic scale AND an INTERNATIONAL SCALE,
using Marxist theory to prove it.
For ANY leftist, socialist, communist, to be in alliance to Islam, to support the establishing of Islam or Islamic Regimes,
they are in fact ENEMIES OF MARXISM,
they can't be BOTH. You can't be both capitalist-imperialist and anti-capitalist-imperialist at the same time,
AS LENIN WOULD SAY--ITS STUPIDITY.
and it is TIME--TO CALL THE LEFT ON IT,
USING THEIR OWN PHILOSOPHY TO PROVE THEIR BETRAYAL...LET THEM ANSWER TO THE WORKERS WHOM THEY DECLARE THEY ARE IN SOLIDARITY WITH--
LET THEM ANSWER TO THEM AND EXPLAIN THEIR LIES...AND DECEPTION.
Not just Lies and Deception and Betrayals against human rights, liberty, democracy, we Know those things,
Let the LEFT have to answer, to their betrayals, to their own IDEOLOGY...TO THOSE THEY PREACH TO.
so Bottom line to Any LEFTIST [far left] who reads this, IF you support Islam, if you are allied with Islam,
then you in no way shape or form, can be anti-capitalist or Marxist,
no way--and the proof, is in the theories you, leftist/far leftist, lay claim too.
See WAMI blog for Anti-Slavery Campaign and the WAMI INTERNATIONAL ABOLITIONIST CAMPAIGN.
Natasha
Director of WAMI
Hi Natasha,
Please always leave links for us to anything you think might be good as a post here at IBA.
I added WAMI to our sidebar, if you hadn't already noticed.
Thank you,
there is a photographer, with a fatwa on his head,
for
photographing slavery in Islam,
I'll go through our archives and send it to you. Also, we are investigating,
what the law is in Sharia, in regards to dowries being returned, in case of divorce. Reading a case in Saudi a while back, a man was having a problem coming up with thousands of dollars to 'buy back his daughter' from an abusive old man,
now I am not sure if this is just Saudi or if this is Islamic custom/hadith,
but someone asked Chesler, what distinguishes Honor Killing from Domestic Violence,
because there are cases of domestic violence that are identical in many forms,
but I suspect it has MORE to do with the monies, in other words, and I'm going to get crass here,
but women are just ass for sale, basically in Islam, no ands, ifs, ors, butts, about it, even in cases of gang rape/rape in Afghanistan, where one 11 year old girl was gang raped and exchanged for a dog [with money value attached] and one seven year old girl gang raped, and the perps offered up a six year old girl from their family as pay back,
so, girls are sold, basically or traded back and forth,
as property.
[which is why for leftists to support his is just, well, a total reversal of leftist beliefs--just goes to show as one man puts it, another who walked away from the far left, they've become psychotic and I couldn't agree more],
but anyway, I suspect that these honor killings are NOT about shame, but more about anger over loss of 'income',
monies that would have been made in the 'sale' of girl-woman, and even in the divorce case/honor killing in Georgia,
Would he have had to pay back that dowry money?
So we are looking into this, because we do believe that the attempt to paint this picture that honor killings are just culture or are just like those domestic violence cases is in fact,
completely false, not just because they are Islamic, but because they have to do with the money value placed on Chattel SLAVERY,
if Just looking at Mohammed in a historical lens, taking out religion completely,
he comes across to me as a military type of pirate, warlord who utilized as military strategy, concubinage but in addition chattel slavery, similar in how he and his followers in their use of 'Janissaries',
[taking examples of war and warlords such as the Hans and so forth],
no doubt Islam is an Expansionist system, a junta centered on of course, religious belief,
and in fact, this may explain the stress or cult type of emphasis on both men and women to be sacrificial 'martyrs' because Islam is a very militarized system,
and women's controlled behavior and the lure of controlling women and women's sexuality, as how I see it is a type of militarization and expansionist imperialism.
So therefore, even the economy in Islam, is stratified towards empire, imperialism, and expansionism, and in that, honor killings would be not so much about male violence towards women only, such as in domestic violence,
but would be about the defying of a woman's role in the army of Islam, particularly in that as chattel and as mare [breeding mare] she is defying the totalitarian and militarized infrastructure of Islam.
In conclusion, honor killings have to do more with the defiance of slave against 'master' than about male dominance over women,
especially in that as chattel, she is or her ass, to put it blunt, is a source of income for both family And for Empire.
This is important too in that if honor killings can not be overturned, then that sends a very powerful message, not just in terrorizing women to force them into both subjugation and into their 'militarized chattel role' But, it sends a powerful message to any slave or servant, that says,
do not revolt against your chattel and/or slave status.
Everything ordered in Islam, from the jizya (sic) tax to the ban on usury to the exchange of dowries on the backs of 'chattel' to the sanctioned slavery of infidels, children, racial minorities or just flat out dark races [because that is fact, the slavery in Africa started not by Europeans, Americans or Spaniards, but by the Arab Muslims],
is all centered around building an imperialist and expansionist wealth economy.
And what is more interesting, in just going back and rereading Marx's analysis on the development of capitalism and the relationship of slavery and class antagonisms, excluding his lack of foresight into things such as Kenysian economics, so forth,
but, his anaysis, the more I read about the economic structure in Islam,
Islam is identical to every thing that Marx was opposed too. [something the left should Think about the dumbasses]
Because it may 'appear' that Islam is just this feudalist type of Tsarist type of economy that is communal, and they lure people into believing that with their protests against usury and their 'giving alms to the poor',
BUT, their economy CREATES THE POOR,
as well as their infrastructure which is why they've always had to adapt, readapt, and/or compromise to catch up to Western civilization, prior to oil, but even with the oil wealth the poverty in their empires is just astounding,
in both Iran and Saudi, beggars everywhere.
North Africa too, in every single Islamic country not only is there slavery there is poverty and beggars, even beggars that were created by their own barbaric punishments AGAINST THE POOR.
And I do question if its more about the economy with why the EU and the US [corporations, etc., not all of US gov],
is in fact kissing the ass of Islam not just because of oil but because of the global market and the need for expansion.
Two things of interest here and why its relevant,
one, in Algeria, women make more income GDP than the men do, they are more likely to be employed and because they earn more than the men they demand more rights...this has been pissing off the fundies obviously,
and in Saudi, more women are being urged to work to keep up with the lifestyle the men are accustomed too [upper class] because the monies belong to the male-family, etc., not sure how dowries/divorce plays into this,
but this has been causing a lot of resentment and strain, also fueling the anger of fundamentalists But,
the structure of Islamic society/economy, from what I can gather thus far, cannot survive on its own without eventually just coming to a failure simply because its own reliance on slavery and chattel slavery may at first boost wealth but then, the economy goes stagnate due to overpopulation and no diversity or freedom of mobility,
in other words, if there were no investments whatsoever in Islamic nations, they'd crumble, they'd be on the same level that Afghanistan was prior to the development and drug economy they have now. [corruption]
Before oil even, they were at such a backwards state, worse even than the Russians prior to the Soviets.
What inspired me to look into this, was a very old book I had, on mission work, believe it or not, and there was a history of Islam in this book, written like in the 30s I believe, but it stated something in regards to the poverty/backwardness of the Arab world and the rise of trade, between east and west, spices, etc., in that era and that what they believed was part of the inspiration of Islam in its beginning,
was to pull Arab society to the level that the west was at at that time--then of course came the conquests/invasions, so forth.
Islam is about greed, all there is to it, using religion/as the means to that greed. Everything about Islam centers around money,
from tax to depopulation of enemy territories to gain land/resources, to the chattel slavery to slavery and expansionism to building up wealth.
Its in no way about the benefit of their people or the benefit of their poor--there is just Too much evidence showing contrary,
way, way too much.
If it wasn't for the oil and if it wasn't for the military expansionism and war, just like for the Soviets,
they'd be screwed. Literally financially screwed, because even if all they did was sell carpets made by CHILD SLAVES, which they do,
Bangladesh is perfect case example,
with the population explosion in Islam and the numbers of infidel slaves, they'd starve to death because they couldn't keep up with the demand of the society, no way,
not if they didn't have the oil revenues and the tourism and the arm sales and black market drug/sex trade economy [and of course, horse races, aka Dubai].
Anyway not to go off on a tangent here,
but I do think, it would be beneficial, to really start looking at the way dowries and the economy of the chattel and mare slavery, i.e., trade and sale of women, and why or how it has more to do with Honor Killings,
because people see Islam they see a religion,
I see Islam, I see nothing but an empire that is nothing but greed built on slavery.
and if That isn't idolatry, what is?
Natasha
director of WAMI
Even if it was just about domestic violence, which is not, nowhere, nowhere in a civilized country you will find something like this:
Tabari IX:113 "Allah permits you to shut them in separate rooms and to beat them, but not severely. If they abstain, they have the right to food and clothing. Treat women well for they are like domestic animals and they possess nothing themselves. Allah has made the enjoyment of their bodies lawful in his Qur'an."
http://www.prophetofdoom.net/Feedback_Muslim_Woman_Defends_Oppression.Islam
It's a book full of incitement to violence, full of incitement to the violation of Human Rights.
Natasha,
Anonymous' point is well-taken.
However, the question of what distinguishes Honor Killings from "Domestic Violence" (for instance, the OJ kind, where the Brown family clearly knew their daughter was being mistreated, but were still friendly with OJ), is a good question.
The reality is, many women are ass for sale.
There is a saying, why buy the cow if you can get the milk for free. As long as people, on both sides of the gender divide, continue to think of sexual relations in such terms, women will be ass for sale in any society.
However, as Anonymous points out, the Krayon dictates that women are ass for sale. The Bible does not (at least not to the same degree and not in the same kind).
And, Western Democracies have moved even further along. Women are treated fairly equally, or at least relative to history.
Still, the quality of a society is always going to be determined by how it treats its women, because the fact of the matter is, when you cut morals out of life, we are animals, and men are bigger, stronger, and our desire is to fuck and possess everything we see.
Morality can help that. But, nothing is going to change that.
The anonymous has something else to add. It's a blatant disrespect to every suffering human being to say "it's just domestic violence". If someone works for human rights and stands for such a point of view, obviously that person is not fit for the task.
I agree with Natasha. There's much more to it than "just" domestic violence. It's slavery.
Anonymous,
I'm in agreement with you.
The Burqa is the chains of modern female slavery. The Burqa is a portable concentration camp for women.
yes, they are. It's terrible.
The book is the manual.
Qur'an 33:59 "Prophet! Tell your wives and daughters and all Muslim women to draw cloaks and veils all over their bodies (screening themselves completely except for one or two eyes to see the way). That will be better."
http://www.prophetofdoom.net/Feedback_Muslim_Woman_Defends_Oppression.Islam
Yeah, why isn't the freaking Queen wearing a burqa to show solidarity with her Muslim sisters?
Why? Because she's special and privileged?
Yes, that's the reason.
She doesn't care about her people. They can rot in their portable concentration camps for all she cares.
This hypocritical bitch has a You Tube account, which is supposed to 'foster understanding' between cultures, or some other PR bullshit tag.
The whole idea is to show the ruling regime in Jordan - a non elected autocratic family - as hip and cool.
She talks with the platitudes and clichés and the meaningless language of a tourist brochure, or a flashy corporate advert on CNN.
That is precisely because her dialogue is written for her by her PR lackeys to positively spin the Hashemite regime (like that fat fawning female gofer in the BBC doc on the Queen Rania You Tube 'phenomenon', whose every other sentence contained the phrases "Her Majesty this" or "Her Majesty that").
She whines about Arabs having bad stereotypes in the world, when actually, the stereotypes which she complains about, like many stereotypes, are broadly true.
To prove the point, her husband (like his father) is a hereditary autocrat who rules a nasty little pseudo-country with a terrible human rights record. Like his daddy, he remains in power because he serves the interests of an American imperial strategy. So from Go, she can't claim the stereotype of the crooked and derelict Arab leader is slander - she's married to one.
If you want to call yourself an Arab queen, the best move would be to keep quiet and stay in the background, silently enjoying the high-life your unaccountable autocrat husband offers you, instead of tripping over your hypocrisy, and making ridiculous phony proposals on a public arena.
~Tronix
Post a Comment