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.

Sunday, August 23, 2015

Socialist gate openers for islamofascism in UK


Declaring criticism of islamofascism "islamophobia" seems to be highest on the British socialist agenda.


There's no way to argue that criticism of Human Rights violating sharia muslims and sharia islam (aka "islamophobia") should/could be called a "hate crime" as long as that society adheres to Human Rights. Therefore, the only possible outcome of hate campaigns against "islamophobes" is support for islamofascism.

UK's former Labour leader Ed Miliband wants to root out "islamophobia" as a hate crime. And according to Jeremy Corbyn "islamophobia" is disgusting and deeply offensive".


Social state socialists* have never defended the rights of the individual because they are rooted in a mass movement (French revolution, Soviet Union, National-socialism, Mao's China, Cuba, DDR, Pol Pot etc.). This is why basic individual Human Rights freedom (the so called negative Human Rights) isn't defended by state socialists. As a consequence, these socialists are wide open for totalitarian systems like sharia islam. 

* The self-evident idea that we need a fairer distribution of wealth shouldn't be allowed to be monopolized by socialists who, in the end, prioritize themselves via the state rather than individuals in general. This is why Klevius throughout his adult life has proposed so called "citizen salary" for everyone. Initially the Green parties seemed to follow the same line of thoughts. However, when they turned out to be supporters of state socialism Klevius had to abandon them (see Klevius paper The Green Dilemma, 1984).



Some voices about Ed Milliband's sharia association


Leo McKinstry: Ed Milliband is far more dangerous than his awkward image suggests. An unprincipled, ruthless, opportunistic left-wing ideologue, he represents a serious menace to Britain’s future. Backed by the ScotsNats and Labour’s trade union paymasters, his regime would be one of debts, bureaucracy, mass immigration and constitutional chaos.

But now an even more sinister aspect to his leadership has emerged, one that threatens our essential freedoms. Miliband says he will make Islamophobia a serious crime to be prosecuted by the full might of the state. Flushed with self-righteous zeal, Miliband wants to ensure that the offence “is marked on people’s records with the police to make sure they root out Islamophobia as a hate crime.”

Anyone who believes in liberty will be truly alarmed. Miliband’s proposal goes against the entire tradition of western democracy, which holds that people should be punished only for their deeds, not their opinions.

In the name of tolerance, Labour wants to impose a form of totalitarianism, making a mockery of the concept of free speech. Like so many socialist policies, Miliband’s plan conjures up the dark, Orwellian world of the Thought Police, where all citizens are required to obey the ruling orthodoxy. I n January Miliband echoed the global outrage at the Charlie Hebdo massacre by Muslim terrorists in Paris, even joining other political leaders in the French capital’s official protest march. But his call for a British law against Islamophobia exposes the hollowness of his indignation.

Under his proposal, most of the Charlie Hebdo staff would have been in prison over their satirical cartoons.


Jeremy Corbyn acts "offended" for being called racist. Yet he's openly and covertly racist against Human Rights defender against sharia islamofascism almost every day!


Here together with an islamofascist called Dyab Abou Jahjah whom he said to BBC he had never heard about.



Samuel Westrop: In 2012, Corbyn agreed to speak at a Ramadan celebration with Abdur Raheem Green, a Salafist preacher who has spoken of a "Yehudi [Jewish] ... stench." Green urges Muslims to "push them [Jews] to the side." In addition, Green encourages men to hit their wives to "bring them to goodness," and has called for the killing of homosexuals and adulterers.

In 2014, Corbyn spoke at an event organized by representatives of the Iranian regime, to commemorate the Iranian revolution of 1979. Corbyn's fellow speakers included Hassan al-Sadr, who represents the UK office of Iraqi terrorist Moqtada al-Sadr; and Abdolhossein Moezi, the personal representative of Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Also in 2014, Corbyn hosted an event in parliament that featured the "neo-Nazi" speaker James Thring, who has appeared in a revisionist pro-Nazi documentary and has said that, "the Jewish lobby has so much power."

In the wake of Britain's general election, candidates with ties to anti-Semitic extremists and terror groups are standing for important political positions.


Boris Johnson: 'Sharia law in the UK is absolutely unacceptable'


"That is unacceptable to me. Everybody must be equal under the law, and everybody must obey the same law. That is absolutely cast-iron. The point is that the idea of a parallel system of law, a parallel judicature, people making the laws holding to a different system, is absolutely unacceptable, it's alien to our traditions

"I take grave exception to some of the support I see sometimes - and from clerics in the Church of England who've come out in favour of this, I've noticed, and said we should be a little bit indulgent of this.

"It's an interesting fact that we have some clerical fossils still in our legislature. Don't forget we have bishops sitting by right in our upper house.

"The separation of church and state is not perhaps as thorough-going in this country as you might like to think.

"The point is that the idea of a parallel system of law, a parallel judicature, people making the laws holding to a different system, is absolutely unacceptable, it's alien to our traditions.

"I won't have it in London and I'm worried sometimes by the faint bat-squeaks of support that I hear for that idea even from clerics in the Church of England."

Asked if the Beth Din would "have to go", Mr Johnson replied: "Yes, absolutely. Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander."

He said he accepted that Jewish couples could go to a Beth Din to seek sanction for their divorce, but added: "It cannot substitute for UK civil proceedings.

"They cannot replace the civil proceedings. If they want to have some ceremonial proceeding according to religious ritual or whatever, that is fine. But the actual implementation of the law has got to be done in British courts according to British law, agreed by Parliament.

"That is where the law emanates from. The law emanates in the end from people voting for MPs who enact the statutes which we all obey.

"That gives this country a vital equality."


Bubblegum commented 145 days ago: Bores had better get used to Sharia law on our streets... It will come whether he wants it or not as the Muslim birth rate produces more and more Muslims they will become future voting fodder, What does Boris expect ? That these hoards will not want to change everything to suite themselves ??

Klevius comment: The simple answer is to force politicians etc. to face muslims with the logical choice of Human Rights violating* sharia or apostasy from sharia islam. And, in case of the former, face them with hate, sexism and racism charges! However, the difficult part is to face politicians with this simple logic.

* Meaning truly basic Human Rights - not some silly "rights".






.

No comments: