Human Rights is diversity - sharia is the opposite
The evil of Sharia islam is what makes it incompatible with Negative Human Rights (i.e. why islamic OIC violates Human Rights by replacing them with Sharia, hence excluding women and non-muslims from equality). The evil of islam and its origin may be easier to grasp with historical examples, e.g. the Origin of Vikings.
It's racism and sexism even if proposed by a "god"! Klevius altruistic virtual volunteering for the world community in defense of Universal Human Rights . Yes, I know, it's unfair. Klevius vs islam, i.e. Universal Human Rights vs Sharia (OIC) racism/sexism! Of course Klevius will win. The question is just how long we should allow the dying beast to make people suffer. (Negative) Human Rights is not a ”Western” invention! It’s where you end up when you abandon racism and sexism, idiot! After you have abandoned islam! Your confused islamophilia and ignorance about Human Rights make YOU an accomplice to islam's crimes! Whereas Human Rights work as egalitarian and universal traffic rules (no matter who you are or what you drive you have the same rights as everyone else) islam/Sharia differs between muslim men and the rest (women and "infidels")!
Have you noticed that when the history of slavery is (PC) debated islam is always excluded/excused? Atlantic slave trade and Roman slaves are eagerly mentioned while the world's by far worst, longest and most extensive one is blinked, as is the fact that islam not only sanctions slavery but is itself built on slavery and sex slavery (rapetivism)! The core idea of islam is the most thoroughly elaborated parasitism ever, i.e. what in 1400 yrs has made it the by far worst crime ever. But thanks to islamic teachings muslims are kept extremely ignorant about the evil origin of islam (institutionalized parasitism based on slave finance, rapetivism and pillage). Ohlig: The first two "islamic" centuries lie in the shadows of history. Klevius: There was no islam or islamic Mohammad (that's why the Saudis have levelled Mohammad's "grave" etc), only the evil murdering, pillaging and raping Aramaic-Arabic Jewish("Christian") led illiterate Arab thugs chasing for booty and sex. The "success" of this formula became later institutionalized and codified as a one way (Koran/Sharia) moral excuse (Allah) for further racist/sexist genocides. The bedrock and currency of this system was racist slavery. However, with Enlightenment the new idea of individual (negative) Human Rights emerged (incl. abolishing of slavery) and were, much later (1948), written down in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights according to which everyone is equal no matter of sex, beliefs etc. Just like in traffic! But unlike traffic rules no one really seems to care about guarding our most precious asset as human beings. Instead racist sexist islamofascism (OIC and the Cairo Sharia declaration) is protected by Human Rights while they strive to undermine and eventually destroy these Human Rights! And most people don't seem to get it. Always remember, there is no islam without Human Rights violating racist/sexist Sharia. So a "vote" for Sharia-islam is AGAINST democracy and the freedom part of Human Rights!
Sayeeda Warsi (UK's non-elected OIC/Sharia politician) in essence doesn't differ from those muslim Saudi women who approve of sex slavery etc, other than that she is either ignorant or a traitor (against democracy and Human Rights) of the worst kind.
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Political heroes in Sweden victorious despite being hindered to speak, demonized, violently attacked and left without police protection
So you guys in fact like islam, although you try to cover it up by saying you like "difference" hence implying that Sweden Democrats are against foreigners when in fact their main point is that they are against islam (a totalitarian ideology that is the worst crime ever against humanity)! Why this skewed hypocrisy? Or are you just nuts?! Check out what OIC and their Sharia plans stand for before you make fools of yourselves!
You racist/sexist islam supporter! Islam inevitably means Sharia, and Sharia is completely incompatible with Human Rights! This is why OIC (57 islamic nations) has decided to violate Human Rights and replace them with Sharia "rights"! Is this simple and easily controlled fact so hard to get into your head you ignorant! And no, idiot! It's NOT abt cruel Sharia penalties, honor murders, clitorechtomy etc, no matter how disgusting these cultural phenomenon are (although often initiated/backed by islam). What it all comes down to in islam is infidel racism and sex segregation. The latter (which is a variant of the former) to an extent that women aren't considered fully human due to precisely those "obligations", "duties", and "dignities" referred to in OIC's Cairo declaration (Sharia), which btw also criminalizes criticism against islam. Whereas Human Rights don't make it possibly to refer to sex as a reason for limitating freedom, the Cairo declaration does, you moron! And if you don't submit to the (empty, i.e. not imposing) Negative Human Rights (Klevius distinction of these rights is still by far the best on the net) you end up as a racist/sexist pig! Negative Human Rights are btw the basis for the US Constitution as well as UNs Human Rights Declaration.
ISLAM DOESN'T MEAN YOUR NICE BUT IGNORANT MUSLIM FRIEND, ISLAM MEANS SHARIA FASCISM! ISLAM IS AN EVIL HATE CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY THAT WAS FUELLED BY A RACIST/SEXIST "MORAL" THAT DEFENDED PARASITIC SLAVERY AND RAPETIVISM AS "THE WILL OF ALLAH"!
This islamist, Abdirizak Waberi, fits the Swedish ruling party (Moderaterna) but not his critics! And this man fits (?) all those ignorants (and islamists) who rally in Stockholm against islam critics.
Swedish politician critical to islam (the worst crime ever against humanity) tortured in his home by Arab-muslim islamofascists
The evening before September 11 a Swedish politician, David von Arnold Antoni (Swedish Democrat, critical of islam), was savagely attacked and tortured for some 20 minutes by two masked men who spoke Swedish accented in Arabic and called him “Svenne bastard” and “Swedish devil” during the attack. After the men forced themselves into his apartment, they scratched his neck and one held Antoni down while the other carved a swastika into his forehead. When leaving they stole David’s laptop and money. However, after investigating the attack as a hate crime, police have concluded Antoni made the whole thing up and are contemplating charging him with filing a false report. Why? Because doctors who examined Antoni concluded (sic) his injuries are fake on a 9-out-of-10 scale (sic again). The certificate issued by the Office of Forensic in Lund, says, “Strong reasons concerning the location and appearance suggest that is self-inflicted injury.” Antoni said “I find it very interesting that the police chose to give this certificate just before the election. There are certainly those who can benefit from it in the election.”
Klevius comment: This follows a common pattern when islam is involved, doesn't it?!
In March 2010 David von Arnold (Swedish Democrat, critical of islam) was attacked by a man in a green military coat and covered with a Palestine scarf. The man tried to stab him with a knife but Arnold managed to avoid the attack by spraying the attacker with a red colored self-defense spray. However, the Swedish police closed the case without further investigation.
Sweden Democrat party leader, Jimmie Akesson, commented:
- My first reaction when I heard during the night that David was tortured in his home was an unreal feeling. It is difficult for me to come to terms with the idea that many socialists considered threats, violence and torture as a legitimate political tool. It is as far as one can get from the democratic values that I and my party represents.
Nina Kain, another Sweden Democrat, found a Swastika on her door. She concludes: Democracy in Sweden isn't what it used to be. You can't say what you want in Sweden anymore.
In the days leading to the election the Sweden Democrats were forbidden by the Swedish police to hold campaign meetings, allegedly because of the threat from islam.
According to Nina Kain, that's like giving the right to free speach with one hand and taking it away with the other.
Klevius comment: Also consider how an extremely important security analysis abt islam is presented on Google: