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.

Sunday, April 28, 2013

Who is Samira Ahmed and does/did she have a muslim Dad?





Islamofascist terrorists and supporters may show up wherever and in whatever shape and background - but the blood and suffering they cause is the same




A fatherless little sex segregated girl in Diaspora confusion?!


"My dad found a way to get us on the Concorde on a short internal US flight when I was 11 year old".



It's a strange fact that it's difficult (with a normal brief search considering she is otherwise all over the web) to find anything about Samira Ahmed's Dad as well as about her views on Sharia and OIC including its demand to criminalize criticism against islam.

Samira Ahmed talks a lot - and fluently as wet soap in a bath tub - about islam and islamic feminism but is hard to find writing anything on the web about Sharia, islam's most important part according to Saudi based all muslim's world organization OIC. And according to this islamofascist UN organization women under no circumstances are allowed full Human Rights!

Left-winged Samira Ahmed's equally unintellectual (and fluent) right-winged twin Sayeeda Warsi





While the Catholic Church is in decline partly because various scandals have eroded the defense of the Church's cultural authority, oppressive cultures resting on islam, by contrast, are growing ever stronger in their rigidities.

As a British muslim, presenter Samira Ahmed has watched the rise of fundamentalist islam with bewilderment.

Klevius comment: Perhaps the very fact that she is "a British muslim" constitutes the main clue to the answer. The horrifying islamic fire in muslim land turns into a peaceful candle lit by her feminist fantasy in her London studio.

A "British muslim" could mean at least two things: 1) Someone living in one of the many more or less Taliban style Sharia ruled muslim communities in the UK, or 2) secular muslims (who are no real muslims in any sense) who pretend they can stretch islam to suite their personal lives.

Samira Ahmed: The ingrained hatred of women apparent in many aspects of Afghan society is undeniable.

The global power of women hating (islamic) clerics stunned me.

Much news analysis to mark the 10th anniversary has rightly pointed out that women and children have suffered disproportionately in the drone attacks increasingly used by NATO commanders.

Klevius comment: NATO commanders!? The man behind it is muslim born (apostate?!) Mr X "president" Barry Barakeh Hussain Obama Dunham Soetoro (or whatever). Why don't you say it Samira?!

Samira Ahmed says she is passionate about "telling the complete story". May I then suggest she takes a look at the origin of islam. Nothing peaceful as far as the sources can see. And the only explanation to the origin of islam that fits the sources (excluding muslim fairy tales, of course) is the formula suggested by Klevius: Slavery+"infidel" racism+sex segregated rapetivism+anti human rights Sharia/apostasy ban.

Hugh Kennedy (considered a foremost expert on the muslim atrocities in the vacuum left by previously retreating Byzantine forces): ”Before Abdul Malik, Mohammed is never mentioned on any official document whatsoever, nor any form of religious pronouncement”.

Samira Ahmed: I’ve found my British Indian/Pakistani and mixed religious background a huge asset to producing the most impartial and inclusive journalism.

Klevius comment: I've not! On the contrary your unfounded excusing of islam's atrocities only worsens and prolongs the suffering of islam's victims - including muslim women in muslim land.

BBC: Samira Ahmed investigates why a faith with over a billion followers is seen by many as misogynistic and intolerant.

Klevius comment: Perhaps because islam is misogynistic and intolerant.This is why islam cannot accept full Human Rights for girls/women.

BBC: As part of her journey across four continents and fourteen centuries, she searches out women who have re-interpreted the Koran to fight back against tribal and patriarchal practices.

Klevius: Islam IS tribal and patriarchal practices lumped together. Islam is oppressive, muslim men are sexist and muslim women are voiceless thanks to Sharia which deprives them from basic Human Rights.

Muslim feminists: "Our message has been loud and clear: Muslim women don't need to be liberated".

however

Muslim women's voice of agency is effectively drowned in Saudi based OIC's deliberate abandoning of Human Rights by replacing them with Sharia. So no matter what "voice" muslim women try to use it will be useless. The missing key is in the Human Rights declaration and is spelled:


Article 2. (Human Rights)

  • Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.


This article is the reason Saudi based muslim world organization OIC and its fanatic Fuhrer Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu replaced all muslim women's Human Rights with islamic Sharia. To allow this article would mean the death for all meaningful forms of islam.

So why is Samira Ahmed hiding? Klevius answer: Because "islamic feminism" is b------t and in essence pure islamofascism. Basically the only difference between Taliban women and Samira is the latter one's fluency.

However, Samira Ahmed and muslim feminists not only contribute to prolonging islamic crimes but also hinder muslim girls from true emancipation. Under Human Rights a girl/woman is free to lead her life as she wishes - under whatever form of Sharia she is restricted.

If muslim women want to continue aiding their own oppression it's ok for Klevius. However, it's not ok that they force female children into the same limitations.


Femen vs muslim feminists


Two slavs* and an ex-muslim kick islam in its groin.

* Islam enslaved so many slavic girls/women that it created the world 'slave' (see Origin of Vikings).

In an April 3 demonstration in Paris, on the eve of International Topless Jihad Day, three Femen activists--two French and one Tunisian--burned the islamic flag in front of the Grand Mosque. The flag contains the declaration of the belief in the oneness of Allah and acceptance of Muhammad as the prophet of Allah.

Femen's leader, Inna Schevchenko: "So, sisters (I prefer to talk to women anyway, even knowing that behind them are bearded men with knives). You say to us that you are against Femen, but we are here for you and for all of us, as women are the modern slaves and it's never a question of color of skin . . .You say you live the way you want. Being fifth wife in harem the maximum you can be is the favorite wife . . . Right? You say we talk about you because we are irritated only by bearded men who pray five times per day. Sisters, we don't care how many times your men are praying, but we care a lot what they do in between. We care a lot about violence and aggression, we care a lot when your fathers, brothers and husbands are raping and killing, when they call to stone your sisters, we care a lot when they burn embassies etc, and all that for Allah!"



Islamic feminism is connected with "islamic academia"


Klevius comment: And "islamic academia" is entirely connected to islamic fairy tales - like a microphone in front of a loudspeaker it just painfully repeats itself in an eternal loop!

Asma Lamrabet in "Islamic Feminisms": “Muslim women have come to accept discriminatory acts supposed to be established by God, whereas they simply result from human interpretations that became sacred with time.” The project is extensive. It consists — in theory — of revising the fiqh (Islamic jurisprudential law), practicing ijtihad (intellectual effort), differentiating universal verses from those whose scope is only temporary, and distinguishing the text of the Quran from its application on the ground. These practices led Ali and her female colleagues to draw radical conclusions. Hanan al-Laham, a Syrian activist who interprets Islamic texts and works as a teacher in Saudi Arabia (sic), called for ijtihad to solve the difficult question of inheritance. These women have concluded that the framework in which the distribution of inheritance was designed in islam is no longer compliant with our times. Hence, it must be amended to create more equitable inheritance.


Klevius comment: “Muslim women have come to accept discriminatory acts supposed to be established by Allah". Yes, muslim women like Shamira Ahmed and Sayeeda Warsi both seem to fully accept Saudi based OIC and its Sharia (the so called Cairo declaration on "human rights in islam (sic)" which is aimed to cover the whole world's muslims. OIC's islamofascist coup d'├ętat in the UN has resulted in a state of affairs that excludes muslim women from full Human Rights - no matter what "muslim feminists" try to do. The only possible way out for muslim women is apostasy, the worst crime known to islam! In this light pretend-to-be muslim women such as Shamira Ahmed and Sayeeda Warsi are hypocrites and bigots who earn their money on the behalf of all muslim women who continue suffering under islam. In fact, Samira Ahmed and Sayeeda Warsi have both already committed apostasy just like Obama (whose father was a muslim and whose father was also a muslim) unless, of course, they aren't committing taqiya, i.e. deliberately lying for the sake of islam!

Nothing of this nonsense addresses the main problem visavi full Human Rights! And the childish "differentiating universal verses" proposal can never free itself from equal but differing proposals from other muslim groups!




.

No comments: