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 islamofascist Saudi dictator family spreading its islamist hate and losses over you

The islamofascist Saudi dictator family spreading its islamist hate and losses over you
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 the 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!

Myth vs Truth

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

Monday, May 05, 2014

It wasn't Boko Haram but islam that sex enslaved the Nigerian schoolgirls!




We do know every form of Sharia is evil because it ALWAYS violates the most basic of Human Rights. However, wouldn't it be interesting to know how BBC's muslim islam presenter Mishal Husain's Sharia differs from Boko Haram's - and who has more support in the Koran, e.g. re. "infidel sex slaves that your right hand possesses"!



Fani-Kayode (a former Minister of Aviation): When some people are prepared to use religion as a political tool, shed as much innocent blood as possible and pervert the very tenets of the faith that they claim to espouse, one must decide whether those of us that do not share their world view are prepared to remain in the same cage as those that are clearly nothing but ravenous beasts.

Klevius comment: They follow Mohammed by the help of their Saudi masters! You know, the Saudi "king" et co who applauded (by blaming the victims) the 9/11 Saudi muslim terrorist attack.



Fani-Kayode: And whether anyone likes to accept it or not there are quite a number of people who fall into the category of Boko Haram sympathizers even though they remain in the shadows. For example there is a very combative, visible and vocal individual from the north-western part of our country who has been accused of covertly funding and supporting the Islamist cause and terrorism for many years.

That same individual was described to the FBI as a ‘’trusted mentor’’ by Umar Faruk Mutallab, the Nigerian ‘’underwear bomber’’, who attempted to blow up a plane filled with passengers as it was about to land in the United States of America a few years ago.

Again that same individual has been accused of having a hand in one of the most heinous and brutal sectarian murders in the history of our country when a young man by the name of Gideon Akaluka, from Benue state, was cold-bloodedly beheaded by a rampaging mob in Kano for supposedly ‘’desecrating the Koran’’. Akaluka’s severed head was paraded on a long pole all over the streets of the city before a cheering and roaring crowd for many hours and the whole gory event was actually video-taped by the perpetrators themselves. Such barbarity has rarely been seen in the history of our country.

Yet this individual has not been brought to justice or even questioned about these matters. Is it any wonder that Boko Haram appears to be going from strength to strength? The truth is that they have many friends in high places and President Goodluck Jonathan himself once alluded to this. Another individual, who was a former Head of State, was quoted as saying the following in 2001-

”I will continue to show openly and inside me the total commitment to the Sharia movement that is sweeping all over Nigeria. God-willing, we will not stop the agitation for the total implementation of the sharia in the country. Muslims should vote at the next Presidential election only for someone who will defend their faith”.


I really do wonder whose freedom they seek to secure and who they are fighting for? Is it the freedom to kill our people and to abduct and enslave our children? Such sentiments and expressions of sympathy for the enemies of our people are a national disgrace and those that express them ought to be called out and held to account.

It is either that we succumb to them, accept their demands, bow to them and allow them to change our way of life or we fight them into the ground, eliminate every single one of them, flush them out, burn the Sambisa forest to the ground, avenge our people, preserve our way of life and restore our self-respect and dignity.

It is either that we accept their evil, concede to the establishment of a Taliban-style Islamic fundamentalist state in the whole of our country and espouse it wholeheartedly or we fight a brutal, bloody, long and righteous war to preserve the unity of our nation, to protect the secularity of our state and to enthrone righteousness and justice.

Klevius question: Wouldn't it save a lot of blood and suffering if you simply got rid of that creepy god you say you share with islam and therefore protect?! There's a crystal clear alternative: Human Rights! No religion can fully accept Human Rights! Religion is Devil's finger. There is no "moderate islam" says Erdogan!







Fani-Kayode: The Haramites of Boko have already made their choice and they made it long ago. And that choice is to subject the Nigerian people to terror, murder, humiliation, carnage and bondage and bring us to servitude and to our knees. They will continue to effect this satanic agenda unless and until we get off our knees, stand up like men and say ”enough is enough”. They will continue to do so unless and until we are ready to say that Nigeria is worth dying for and that we are ready to fight back. May God deliver Nigeria.

Klevius comment: God Allah already has!






Oh. I see Sharia as a means to commit Human Rights violations without being held responsible, thinks Iyad Madani, the Saudi Fuhrer of !


Boko Haram has a deep history of involvement with Saudi Arabia: Muhammad Yusuf found refuge in Saudi Arabia to escape a Nigerian security forces crackdown in 2004; Boko Haram has reportedly received funding with the help of AQIM from organizations in the United Kingdom and Saudi Arabia; and Boko Haram’s spokesman claimed that Boko Haram leaders met with al-Qa`ida in Saudi Arabia during the lesser hajj (umra) in August 2011. More recently, the leader of a Boko Haram cell that was responsible for the November 25, 2012, attack on a church inside a military barracks in Jaji, Kaduna, was in Saudi Arabia during the months prior to the attack.

Boko Haram even has a “diplomatic” presence in Saudi Arabia, in addition to other militant connections. In August 2012, a Boko Haram faction led by Abu Muhammed negotiated in Mecca with a Nigerian government team led by National Security Adviser Sambo Dasuki and advised by General Muhammed Shuwa. President Jonathan has rejected new talks with this faction, however, on the grounds that “there can be no dialogue” with Boko Haram because it is “faceless.” Abu Muhammed’s proposed negotiating team included, among others, the Cameroonian Mamman Nur, who lost a power struggle with Shekau to lead what became the main Boko Haram faction after Muhammad Yusuf’s death in July 2009. Therefore, Abu Muhammed’s claim to represent Shekau’s faction is likely false, and Shekau’s spokesman called Abu Muhammed a “fake” in August 2012.








Muslim born  (apostate?!) Mr X "president" Barry Barakeh Hussain Mohammad Dunham Obama Soetoro (or whatever) defends Boko Haram!


Jessica Rubin: Don't worry.  Boko Haram is not really a terrorist organization, says the State Department.

According to the Obama State Department, Boko Haram isn't really a terrorist organization.  Johnnie Carson, assistant secretary of state for African affairs, testified at subcommittee hearings chaired by Senator Coons, that Boko Haram is not an organized, ideologically driven movement like al-Qaeda and that the violence attributed to Boko Haram is the result of natural social dynamics driven by poverty, social inequality, and police and government brutality and corruption.

Carson dismissed the idea of designating Boko Haram a terrorist organization and claimed that -- despite Boko Haram's repeated statements about its goals of forcing Islam and sharia on Nigeria -- this conflict is driven not by religion, but by "social inequities."  In fact, he went on to urge that the U.S. step up development assistance to "Nigeria's restive Muslim-majority north" as it urged the Abuja government to address grievances underlying violence.
"Boko Haram," by the by, means "Western ways are evil."

If the State Department were to designate Boko Haram as a terrorist group, that would trigger a government-wide U.S. effort to isolate the group and cut off its finances.  But no, Boko Haram is just a "restive" Muslim group with "grievances" which need to be addressed.  Or else what?  Or else (hint, hint) they just might morph into a real ideologically driven terrorist organization like al-Qaeda.

The logic is mind-numbing.  Basically, it boils down to arguing that X is not really a terrorist group because its terrorist activities have a non-ideological basis, and the U.S. had better appease them, or they might just become a real ideologically driven terrorist organization.

This deep thinking is the foreign policy extension of the liberal domestic meme that so-called criminals are just misunderstood, unfairly treated, marginalized victims of social oppression driven by anger and resentment -- as any normal person would be.



Klevius' advice: If you're a Human Rights violating Sharia muslim - why don't you dare to openly admit it or, alternatively, openly commit apostasy. Don't be a coward like Obama! Think about the Nigerian schoolgirls and 1,400 years of continuous islamic enslavement, hate crimes against "infidels", genocides, rapetivism etc, in short, the worst ideological crime history knows about!








.

No comments: