Is the islamofascist Saudi dictator "prince" Mohammad bin Salman the world's most dangerous man?

Is the islamofascist Saudi dictator "prince" Mohammad bin Salman the world's most dangerous man?
Is the islamofascist Saudi dictator "prince" Mohammad bin Salman the world's most dangerous man?

Is Mrs Theresa May digging a miserable "British" sharia "empire" under the Brexit cliff?

Mrs May plays sharia with the islamofascist Saudi dictator family - skipping Human Rights. Right?

Saudi islamofascism attacks Buddhists - again and again - backed by Mrs May.

When will the world finally turn on the hateful Saudi dictator family - rather than on its victims?

The islamofascist Saudi dictator family spreading its islamist hate and losses while FEEding Lnd

The islamofascist Saudi dictator family spreading its islamist hate and losses while FEEding Lnd
The islamofascist Saudi dictator family spreading its islamist hate and losses over you

How an organization of islamic crimes (OIC) violates Human Rights

The Viking phenomenon started with bilingual Finns raiding/trading sex slaves to Abbasid (ca 750)

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")!

Ask yourself, why can't racist islam (OIC) accept Human Rights? The answer reveals the difference between totalitarianism and freedom. And even if everyone converted to islam we'd still have Sharia sexism.
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.

We're all born unequal - that's why we need Human Rights, not islam!

Audi then built by Jewish slaves - today dangerous quality problems

Myth vs Truth

Japan's Hayabusa landed and returned to Earth many years before Europe's Rosetta failed to do so.

Friday, March 23, 2012

Black victims are eagerly presented in media and cynically rallied for scum political aims, while black racists and white victims are kept out of light

Why are these white victims buried by the media while black victims are not? And why are the worst racists not exposed and arrested? Consider "Ms Lucy Black's comments below. Have you ever seen anything worse?




Kent Police in UK were called to Gloster Way in Aycliffe, Dover/UK (port to France) at 4.15am following concerns for 19-year-old Elisa Frank, sister to one of the slaughtered girls in Wakefield, West Yorkshire, and a previous girlfriend to Ahmed Otak. Her tip-off led to the discovery of two dead women, Samantha Sykes and Kim Frank, in Frank’s flat in Wakefield, West Yorkshire from where Elisa Frank was allegedly kidnapped by Ahmed Otak, who was in company with two others whom the Dover/Kent police then released (?!).

Klevius comment: Do I need to tell you that BBC, who first eagerly followed the French police chase of the alleged "right-wing" serial murderer, suddenly lost all interest in the case (2 min compared to 10 min for Humperdink's Eurovision song in a World News program) when he turned out to be a muslim jihadist, Mohamed Merah.

.

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

The web's most racist comments (made by "Ms Lucy Black") removed from Yahoo and from investigation?!











































These comments by "Ms Lucy Black" must be some of the most disgusting and racist comments ever posted on the net, yet no action, and a couple of days later it's nowhere to be seen nor is there any arrest made or effort to trace the racist. Is it because she's black, muslim or both?

Klevius comment:  This is just the tip of an enormous iceberg of anti-white racism mainly composed by islam (Saudi/OIC) and "political correctness".













Jihad victims made invisible after first being stabbed to death and then publicly racially abused


These UK girls were allegedly stabbed to death by Ahmed Otak who had also allegedly kidnapped one of the girls sister.

And while people are frequently chased, harrassed and arrested for almost whatever "racist" remarks the worst ones get free.

.
.

Sunday, March 18, 2012

When should Ms Lucy Black racist be arrested?

In UK a 21-year-old has been arrested after allegedly posting mocking comments about Bolton Wanders football player Fabrice Muamba who got a heart attack on the pitch and was brought to hospital for treatment.

However, when two white UK girls, Samantha Sykes and Kim Frank, allegedly were murdered by Ahmed Otak in what looks like a clear case of islamic hate crime inspired by Sharia, a black racist posted the following:











































Klevius question: Is she already arrested?!



.
.

Saturday, March 17, 2012

While Clooney is arrested and islam criticism is silenced islam (the worst of crimes) goes free and continues abusing, raping and murdering - and Mr X respects it

Sunni/Shiite, good muslims/bad muslims, terrorists/jihadists, imams/muslim dictators - the only thing that combines them is islam.

The worst crime in islam, and hence a basic definition of islam, is to leave islam. Hence respecting islam equals respecting its apostasy ban.



















Mr X "president" wouldn't dare to target Sudan's Omar al-Bashir on whom the International Criminal Court has issued an arrest warrant for war crimes etc. Despite the inevitable screaming fact that this muslim islamofascist is by far the worst in the whole of Africa. It's easier to arrest Clooney and help the islamofascist Saudi muslim organization OIC to silence "islamophobes".


Democracy has become popular among majority Sunni muslims who hate minority Shia muslims

Saudi supported salafists in Egypt aim to ban bikinis, alcohol, pornography, the teaching of English etc. And Mr X "president" respects it.


The continuing "low scale" (albeit cumulatively enormous) racist/sexist islamic assaulting raping and murdering

White girls and islam inspired murders, rapes, kidnappings etc.

Meredith Kerchner's convicted murderer and Amanda Knox (left) who suffered jail sentence despite she was comletely innocent. Ahmed Otak (middle) accused of murdering Samantha Sykes and Kim Frank (right) sister of Elisa Frank who had previously dated him and whom he allegedly kidnapped to Dover (where the tunnel out of England is). Due to the total lack of information (while BBC is full of programs and "news" about a back guy killed a couple of decades ago). The teenage girls who tried to defend Kim's siter were slaughtered with a big kitchen knife and it would come as no surprise if they were decapitated as well in accordance with islamic Sharia. But as always we are kept ignorant about the facts.



Here a black racist's comment to these murders.

Ms Lucy Black  •  4 days ago
If this is how white females who date out end up, I think they should do it more.

Ms Lucy Black  •  4 days ago
Neither of them are "beautiful". They're just white.

Ms Lucy Black  •  4 days ago
Who the hell cares. Just white females. There are plenty more alive unfortunately.


Lying about islam
Nick Cohen: The British Museum's current Hajj exhibition charts the history of Mecca as a destination for pilgrims with the wariness of a conscript crossing a minefield. The exhibition sticks to the authorised version of "religious scholars". It allows no discussion of the findings of historians of Islam – "true scholars who have read more than one book", as Richard Dawkins puts it – that the traditional account is as much a fairy story as the traditional accounts of Christianity and Judaism. Fear of bombs in the building or of staff receiving the same treatment as Salman Rushdie and Ayaan Hirsi Ali have kept evidence about the Muhammad of history far from public view.

The exhibition goes further than the standard tongue-biting editor or panicked publisher, however. It not only fails to question Islam's foundation myths but augments the myth-making by excluding evidence that might embarrass the Saudi royal family. In a piece for the American arts magazine Guernica, Joy Lo Dico embarrasses other critics by pointing out what was in front of their noses. Saudi Arabia provided exhibits. The Saudi royal family's King Abdulaziz Public Library partnered the museum. HSBC Amanah, a bank that issues sharia-compliant loans, sponsored the show. By negligence or design, nothing in the exhibition offends the Saudi state, which derives legitimacy from its control of sacred sites and income from pilgrims.

You might have thought that of all people the museum's director, Neil MacGregor, would deplore cultural vandalism. The author of A History of the World in 100 Objects would surely deprecate the destruction of buildings of historical significance. He must know that Saudi's monarchical dictatorship has wrecked Mecca with an abandon worthy of the Taliban. It has destroyed the remnants of the 7th-century city, most notably the houses of the prophet, his first wife and Abu Bakr, father of Aisha, one of Muhammad's other wives.

According to the Wahhabi monarchy's puritanical and iconoclastic version of Islam, anything that generates idolatry – images of the prophet, homes associated with him – is dangerous. So medieval Mecca had to go.

Klevius comment: The British Museum does not mention this at all and Mr X "president" respects islamofascism.
.













Wednesday, March 14, 2012

According to Google News septic tank wins over Santorum

Google and other media influenced by islamofascist oil money has since the election of muslim born apostate (?!) Mr X "president", been heavily biased against potential criticism of islam and sharia. Now the primary election follows the same rule. First they decapitated black presidential candidate Herman Cain, then Gingrich, and now every effort is made to eliminate the last sharia critic Santorum by promoting Mitt Romney.

Creative journalism



As you can see Santorum, despite his double wins, doens't manage to make it to Google's Top Stories list among septic tanks, Jews, Honolulu or Ron Paul (a candidate who has no possibilities to survive).



.
.

Thursday, March 08, 2012

Klevius on Women's Day: If you respect islam then you don't respect women's Human Rights!

This muslim born apostate (?!) says he respects the worst ideological crime ever against humanity!

While islam continues its Millennium+ of genocides, slavery and rapes in Sudan etc  Mr X "president’s" envoy to Sudan, Princeton Lyman declares: “Frankly we do not want to see the ouster of the [Bashir - wanted by ICC for crimes against humanity] regime, nor regime change... It is not in our interests to see the ouster of the regime in Sudan, for this will only create more problems.”

Klevius comment: Obama hence also supports Kony's LRA via Bashir.


Some old news (1870) from the same area and same islam

S W Baker: It is impossible to know the actual number of slaves taken from Central Africa annually; but I should imagine that at least fifty thousand are
positively either captured and held in the various zareebas (or camps)
or are sent via the White Nile and the various routes overland by Darfur
and Kordofan. The loss of life attendant upon the capture and subsequent
treatment of the slaves is frightful. The result of this forced
emigration, combined with the insecurity of life and property, is the
withdrawal of the population from the infested districts. The natives
have the option of submission to every insult, to the violation of their
women and the pillage of their crops, or they must either desert their
homes and seek independence in distant districts, or ally themselves
with their oppressors to assist in the oppression of other tribes. Thus
the seeds of anarchy are sown throughout Africa, which fall among tribes
naturally prone to discord. The result is horrible confusion,--distrust
on all sides,--treachery, devastation, and ruin.


 It appeared that slavery and the slave trade of theWhite Nile were institutions almost necessary to the existence of
Egyptian society.
   
It was obvious to all observers that an attack upon the slave-dealing
and slave-hunting establishments of Egypt by a foreigner--an
Englishman--would be equal to a raid upon a hornets' nest, that all
efforts to suppress the old-established traffic in negro slaves would be
encountered with a determined opposition, and that the prime agent and
leader of such an expedition must be regarded "with hatred, malice, and
all uncharitableness." At that period (1869) the highest authorities
were adverse to the attempt. An official notice was despatched from the
British Foreign Office to the Consul-General of Egypt that British
subjects belonging to Sir Samuel Baker's expedition must not expect the
support of their government in the event of complications. The
enterprise was generally regarded as chimerical in Europe, with
hostility in Egypt, but with sympathy in America.

It was freely stated that an Englishman was placed in
command because an Egyptian could not be relied upon to succeed, but
that the greed of new territory was the actual and sole object of the
expedition, and that the slave-trade would reappear in stupendous
activity when the English personal influence should be withdrawn. Such
unsympathetic expressions must have been a poor reward to the Khedive
for his efforts to win the esteem of the civilized world by the
destruction of the slave-trade in his own dominions.

Few persons have considered the position of the Egyptian ruler when
attacking the institution most cherished by his people. The employment
of an European to overthrow the slave-trade in deference to the opinion
of the civilized world was a direct challenge and attack upon the
assumed rights and necessities of his own subjects. The magnitude of the
operation cannot be understood by the general public in Europe. Every
household in Upper Egypt and in the Delta was dependent upon slave
service; the fields in the Soudan were cultivated by slaves; the women
in the harems of both rich and middle class were attended by slaves; the
poorer Arab woman's ambition was to possess a slave; in fact, Egyptian
society without slaves would be like a carriage devoid of wheels--it
could not proceed.

In the year 1870 the slave-hunting of Central Africa was condemned.
Since that time Englishmen have been honoured with the special attention
of the Khedive, and have been appointed to posts of the highest
confidence. European tribunals were established in the place of consular
jurisdiction, British government officials have been invited to reform
the financial administration, and Mr. Rivers Wilson has been induced to
accept the responsible office of Minister of Finance. Nubar Pacha has
been recalled to office, and he must regard with pride the general
confidence occasioned throughout Europe by his reappointment. The
absolute despotism hitherto inseparable from Oriental ideas of
government has been spontaneously abrogated by the Khedive, who has
publicly announced his determination that the future administration
shall be conducted by a council of responsible ministers.

I found lands varying in natural capabilities according to their
position and altitudes--where sugar, cotton, coffee, rice, spices, and
all tropical produce might be successfully cultivated; but those lands
were without any civilized form of government, and "every man did what
seemed right in his own eyes."

In this dislocated state of society, the slave trade prospered to the
detriment of all improvement. Rich and well-populated countries were
rendered desolate; the women and children were carried into captivity;
villages were burnt, and crops were destroyed or pillaged; the
population was driven out; a terrestrial paradise was converted into an
infernal region; the natives who were originally friendly were rendered
hostile to all strangers, and the general result of the slave trade
could only be expressed in one word--"ruin."

The slave hunters and traders who had caused this desolation were for
the most part Arabs, subjects of the Egyptian government.

These people had deserted their agricultural occupations in the Soudan
and had formed companies of brigands in the pay of various merchants of
Khartoum. The largest trader had about 2,500 Arabs in his pay, employed
as pirates or brigands, in Central Africa. These men were organized
after a rude military fashion, and armed with muskets; they were divided
into companies, and were officered in many cases by soldiers who had
deserted from their regiments in Egypt or the Soudan.







.
.

Sunday, March 04, 2012

Militant Judaic/Christian faith paved the way for militant islam (the worst hate crime ever) and, after islam's attacks, rigid* Catholicism




*In 756, after Martel (632) had defeated the muslim jihadists attacking Europe via Iberia Popes were granted independent rule (the Papal State) by King Pepin the Short of the Franks. This, and the aftermath of the Vikig age, constituted the basis for Catholicism as we know it today.

For a better understanding of the posting headline please see Origin of Vikings
And for a better understanding of the concept 'marriage' see Sex segregation, Marriage, Kinship and Friendship
About heterosexual attraction confusing the debate see From evolution, hetero-sexual attraction and bio-kinship to sex-segregation and racism

A senselessly ignorant Catholic Cardinal

 The UK government's plans for gay marriage have been criticized by the most senior Roman Catholic cleric in Britain. Cardinal Keith O'Brien, the leader of the Catholic Church in Scotland, said the plans were a "grotesque subversion of a universally accepted Human Right".

Klevius comment: Cardinal Keith O'Brien is a grotesque subversion of Human Rights! For his information Human Rights are UNIVERSAL unlike "religious rights" which are tied to "beliefs", "god's laws" etc. This means that Human Rights are aimed to protect same-sex relations from racists and sexists such as e.g. Cardinal Keith O'Brien.

Proposed reading for the Cardinal and others ignorant about the crucial difference between Human Rights and religion: What does Negative Human Rights mean?

Or is he so sly so he, like OIC and other islamists, uses the expression "human right" for the simple and cheap purpose of confusing those less informed?!

However, Keith isn't alone in his "religious" evilness. A much more important role is played by the world's main islamofascist muslim organization OIC (Organization of islamic Cooperation) which not only has replaced Human Rights with islamofascist Sharia but moreover, also has taken UN hostage for the purpose of criminalizing criticism/scrutiny of islam. the worst ideological hate crime ever against humanity. Islam's history of 1400 years of slavery, genocides and rapetivism is so immense that if you haven't started scatching it a yet you will be surprised beyond imagination of islam's original inborn evilness. In fact, this is why issues regarding islam are so "sensitive" that they have to be hidden behind a wall of denial! This is why your children are taught a perverted version of real, original islam! And this is also why the evil original islam is always surfacing after the "moderate islam" has paved the way (according to Turkish PM Erdogan "moerate islam" doesn't even exist).


Klevius' personal experience of Catholicism

In 2000 I met a nice mother of two in San Francisco with whom I and one of my children spent some lovely time. She, or at least her husband (who didn't show any interest in me), was a Catholic. Rooted in Scandinavia I naively happened to ask her whether they already had installed female priests there. The reaction this question had on her baffled me. She gave me a look full of embarrassed guilt when she told me such plans were quite far from immanent. And soon after she stopped showing up, I still wonder why...


Muslim born (apostate (?!) Mr X "president" together with OIC support violent muslim jihad by blaming it on non-violent non-muslim critics of islam. Islamofascists want to silence non-islamic scrutiny of islam

OIC has for long eagerly asked for an international law that would criminalize criticism, "stigmatization" or "stereotyping" of islam. Resolution 16/18 approved by Obama during a three-day conference in Washington, where he and Hillary Clinton committed to the key principal muslims have been seeking for years, i.e.  blaming “free speech” for “sectarian clashes”, i.e. muslim jihadist violence. The U.N. strategy, proposed by Pakistan “on behalf of OIC” seeks to blame any statement about islam to which muslims would react violently on what is described as “incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence”.


Klevius question: Doesn't the Catholic homophobe above fit in the “incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence” classification, especially when considering the widespread violent hostility out there against same sex relations, especially in muslim countries but also in muslim enclaves in the West?


How can we avoid "sensitive muslims" who occupy our surroundings in a for us intrusive and offensive way? Shouldn't non-muslims have the right to be served by a non-muslim instead of being harrassed by muslims?

At Gatwick Airport (London)a  muslim "security" guards wanted David Jones to apologize an "offensive" remark she overheard without being even there.
What actually happened was that while he placed his neck scarf, into the X-ray scanner he spotted a muslim woman in a burqa passing through without showing her face and then joked : “If I was wearing this scarf over my face, I wonder what would happen”.

Klevius question: If islam doesn’t demand burqas/hijabs and if a muslim (female) who doesn’t wear a burqa gets offended by a joke about a burqa then where’s the logic?!

The worst muslim dictators are still at large!



You may also be interested to read the latest news on brain research and how it still struggles to catch up with EMAH




.
.