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.

Wednesday, December 12, 2012

Sharia confusion


Here an example of how youth, ignorance and brainwashing paves the way for the worst ideological crime ever

Islam without Human Rights violations (Sharia) is of no interest for Klevius because it's not islam anymore!








































 Useful idiocy



LSE (you know, the place that harbored Gadaffi's son Saif al-Islam on the side bar) Masters student Jonathan Russell who works as the islamic studies intern at Quilliam Foundation (a self proclaimed interpreter of islam founded by former (?) Hitzbut Tahrir terrorists): Most Muslim-majority countries including Egypt, Iran and Pakistan signed the UDHR in 1948, but crucially Saudi Arabia, where the King must comply with Shari’a and the Qur’an, did not sign the declaration, arguing that it violated Islamic law and criticising it for failing to take into consideration the cultural and religious context of non-Western countries. Saudi Arabian law is completely at odds with the UDHR as all citizens are required to be Muslim. Therefore, non-Muslims risk everything from arrest to torture and the death penalty for their beliefs.

Klevius comment: Islam and “the muslim world” cover the same. You can't have islam without muslims and where there are muslims there's islam. So talking about islam without incl. OIC (the muslim world Umma based on its Sharia declaration) is just laughable, or worse, Taqiyya. Islam needs to be re-contextualised, in order for it to be in accordance with Human Rights. OIC surely won't support this. The deep intellectual schizophrenia in the Quilliam Foundation just underlines Klevius simple but undeniable truth: Islam is dead without its Human Rights violations!

Jonathan Russell: Islam is a pluralist religion and contains a spectrum of belief system and therefore has a great tradition of freedom of thought and tolerance of the beliefs of others...

Klevius comment:  Give me a break! There were many different ways and nuances muslims slaughtered , enslaved and raped during their "conquest" but all were in accordance with the Koran, i.e. islam! That was the very original idea of islam that worked so well. And the only one with explanatory power to spread light in the darker in which these atrocities happened. Islam was born as a parasitic ideology and its original currency was slaves. That's why islam started rottening when West forbade slavery. Sadly, oil demanded by Western technology, then paved the way for a renewal of these atrocities mainly steered by Saudi Arabia and its allies.

Jonathan Russell: ...so for the OIC to produce the CDHRI, a document published under the auspices of Islam that limits this intellectual tradition, introducing absolutist judgements and presupposing certain aspects of the faith for citizens in countries that do not even implement the Shari’a to its full extent, is a tremendous oversight. To pass such a document off as declaration of human rights is incongruous.

Klevius: I agree but what's your point? Sounds incredibly hypocritical (or naive) to slash OIC while defending an islam you can't even conceptualize. You know very well that it's safe now to bark at OIC when it's already established in the UN as an evil islamic alternative to Human Rights. And by raving about some fictional non-Sharia islam you try to avoid being an "islamophobe". Is this why you are now writing about it? Where were you when people like Littman and Klevius almost a decade ago warned for it but were called "islamophobes"?! Learning about islam from an imam?!

 

.

 .

 .

No comments: