Who are guilty of misinforming about sharia islam? How many victims of muslim supremacist hate crimes could have been avoided with some "islamophobic" warnings?!
Most victims of hateful supremacist muslims weren't naive - they were deliberately misled about the origin and true nature of islamofascist supremacist hate!
Klevius: Yes, it's perfectly normal. What a pity no one has told you before. Islam is the very essence of ultimate racism! This is why muslims are so sensitive about criticism against islam while showing extreme contempt and insensitivity against others. And this is also why OIC (all muslims world organization) not only have abandoned and even criminalized Human Rights (via UN) but also made it a crime to criticize islam (the worst ideological crime history knows about).
Katie Jemma Gee and her friend were later also thrown acid in their face by some male supremacist muslim haters - most probably connected to the first incident.
Consider that we have possibly millions of such hate crimes going on unreported around the world - often without the victims even knowing or understanding that it was islam that hit them.
The more politicians defend and legitimize sharia islam while spitting on Human Rights, the more it encourages muslim "radicalization"*.Islam can't be radicalized because it's already radical from scratch!
Muslims go West to a civilization superior to their sharia based homelands. The pattern is actually quite similar to how muslims some 1400 yrs ago moved to the civilized world with the Koranic hate sword as their ticket. Only difference is that the sword now arrives slightly delayed in comparison. And no, the Islamic State isn't the biggest threat to the West. Saudi based and steered OIC is a much more lethal weapon against Western democracies precisely because it has managed to sneak in Human Rights violating islamic sharia into UN - the organization that was supposed to defend Human Rights. And by doing so the Saudis have also managed to tie up many of Western politicians.
Klevius origin-of-islam equation vs. the peaceful-origin-of-islam equation
Historians are scratching their heads in their effort to understand the seemingly impossible equation of a nice and tolerant "prophet" with a "message" of looting, enslaving and raping, managing to conquer much of the Arabian peninsulain a short period of time. Why? The picture is crispy clear for everyone who is prepared to look. Are they really that stupid? Of course not. It's only when they try to squeeze in the "tolerant" and "peaceful religion" that the equation becomes unsolvable.
Klevius repeats his suggestion of the only solution: Differ between Human Rights violating sharia muslims and neo-muslims (i.e. muslims against sharia and for Human Rights)! If there are any such muslims at all when neo-islam has lost its original evil racist/sexist attraction.