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?

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

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

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.

Saturday, November 24, 2012

The sickness called Islam


US rights or Universal Human Rights against islamofascist Sharia?


Devvy Kidd: Anyone who has taken the time to read and listen to the words of Muslim clerics and the Muslim Brotherhood fully and clearly understand the number one goal is to take over these united States of America and replace the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights with the sickness called Islam. The Islamic Movement in this country is sedition.

Why Islam Should NOT Be Protected Under the US Constitution 


"Lawmakers tell us Muslims have a First Amendment “Right” to build mosques, proselytize, and implement Sharia here. But that's not what the First Amendment says. "It says: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” "Now consider the verbiage very carefully. A lot of lawmakers and most Americans make the exegetical error that the First Amendment grants us rights.

The First Amendment doesn't grant any rights to anybody. All it does is prohibit Congress from making laws about religion, speech, the press, or assembly. "Therefore, Muslims do not have a First Amendment “Right” to build mosques, proselytize, and implement Sharia in our country. "As Publius Huldah correctly points out, “Not only do Muslims claim the “right” to impose Shariah in the Muslim communities springing up throughout our Country, they also claim the “right” to impose Sharia law in the public square: They demand Sharia compliant financial institutions, foot baths in public places, that wine, sausages, and the like be banned from their presence, that they be allowed to shut down public streets for “prayers”, etc.”


Why the US can ONLY be protected from islamofascist Sharia by defending Universal Human Rights


Klevius comment: Negative Human Rights (the bedrock of Human Rights, i.e. freedom from religious or other impositions), not "god", is our only defense against islamofascism! We need Universal Rights, not US or Sharia "rights". And these rights ought to be Human Rights not "god's" "rights". "God's" "rights" means human impositions whereas (the negative part of) Human Rights means precisely the opposite.

But sadly, the stubbornness of "monotheist god-people" based on the racist/sexist "chosen people" and sex segregation idea, instead of defending Human Rights, paves the way for islamofascism.

It's truly ironic that religious right-wingers in the US share the same reluctance against Negative Human Rights as do socialists/communists. The former because it clashes with Biblical sex apartheid, and the latter because it clashes with the social state (see Angels of Antichrist - social state vs kinship, the world's most important sociological paper written in the last century).


























 .








.

No comments: