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.

Wednesday, October 28, 2015

Is Oisin Cantwell on Aftonbladet now Sweden's most disgusting bigot and hypocrite? Competition is hard - but still...


Doe's this "man", Oisin Cantwell on Scandinavia's biggest newspaper, represent the very core of the most dangerous accomplices to ideological islamic crimes, i.e. to islamofascism?



Background: 1) An Eritrean "refugee"*, Abraham Ukbagabir, murdered two Swedish shoppers at IKEA because they were white** Swedes. That's what he allegedly said, i.e. that he targeted "Swedish looking people" to stab to death.
2) A Swede, Anton Lundin Pettersson 21, stabbed people on a school. According to the police, he had visited web sites with "racist content". He was also "slightly disappointed with Sweden's immigration politics" but CCTV didn't show him particularly targeting people with darker skin color. However, his farewell letter was about family issues and "gave a simple reason to why he did it" says the police without revealing more. Yet the police who didn't see any hate or racism on IKEA say "it was a racist hate crime".

Whereas Abraham Ukbagabir's crime was handled with the utmost "sensitivity" by media and police, Anton Lundin Pettersson's stabbing spree  was immediately broad-casted all over the world as a "right wing racist hate crime". BBC didn't miss a single opportunity to announce him as "right wing".

* Abraham Ukbagabir had been denied refugee status by the Swedish authorities. Whether it was because he was a Eritrean Christian and not a muslim we don't know, but still.

** It may be convincingly assumed that he wouldn't have targeted black Swedes. So the skin color and his assumption that the shoppers were Swedes (or at least "Westerners" from his point of view) seems undeniable, and therefore leads to the conclusion that it was a racist hate crime.


Oisin Cantwell's original statement from today in Swedish with brief translation and comments by Klevius:


Oisin Cantwell: Att jag anser att Anton Lundin Pettersson begick ett terrorbrott beror dels på att han gick till angrepp mot en av samhällets viktigaste institutioner, skolan. Dels på att morden var rasistiska.

Klevius translation: The reason I consider Anton Lundin Pettersson committed a terrorist crime is that it was against one of the society's most important institutions, a school, and that it was racist.

Klevius comment: Makes no sense at all that a school (with adult students) should constitute the defining line for terrorism. And there are no convincing facts showing the attacks were mainly motivated by racism but on the contrary loads of indications that it had other main motivations.

Oisin Cantwell: Dessa mord har skapat skräck. Skräck hos människor som redan är utsatta för att deras hudfärg inte är vit. Skräck hos föräldrar som har barn i skolåldern. Skräck hos elever runt om i landet.

Klevius translation: Anton Lundin Pettersson's murders have caused horror among colored people, among parents, and among students.

Klevius comment: So why hasn't the hateful and undoubtedly racist stabbing spree against completely unrelated and innocent shoppers at a public store full of children, students and other adults, caused such horror among white Swedes?!  

Oisin Cantwell: Lundin Pettersson bedrev politik. Han har skrivit in sig i en tradition av högerextremister som begår mord av ideologiska skäl. En ensamvarg, men inte ensam om sina åsikter.

Klevius translation: Anton Lundin Pettersson did politics in a tradition of right wing extremists who commit crimes because of ideology. A loner but not alone with his right wing views.

Klevius comment: Cantwell seems here to build a big castle on a quite slim foundatiuon - especially considering Cantwell's excusing or avoiding attitude when dealing with the thousands of hateful and racist Allahu Akbar ideological crimes.

Oisin Cantwell: Men det finns en avgörande skillnad mellan Ikea och Trollhättan. Det finns ingen krets kristna eritreaner som anser att mord är ett legitimt svar på avslagen asylansökan.

Klevius translation: The main point is that there are no Christian Eritreans who think murder is a legitimate answer to a dismissed asylum application.

Klevius comment: Does this moron really understand that what he wrote means that according to his own logic there are muslims who really think just that?! Shouldn't Swedish muslims now charge him with "islamophobia" and "racial incitement" etc.!

Oisin Cantwell: Ideologi saknas. Vita, svenska medborgare behöver inte frukta att bli mördade av detta skäl.

Klevius translation:  The IKEA murderer lacked ideology and therefore white Swedes have nothing to fear because of these murders.

Klevius comment:  With hundreds of thousands of colored or/and muslim asylum applicants! No fears for colored and/or muslim racism! Really!



Kevius wrote:

Tuesday, May 12, 2015


Klevius quiz to Aftonbladet: How many more have muslims murdered compared to Nazis?


Klevius corrections of Aftonbladet's headline today: Don't let (muslims and) Nazis spread hatred undisturbed. There's nothing normal with a movement(s) that have murdered millions of people




Klevius quiz to BBCs muslim(?!) sharia presenter Mishal Husain: Do you think there are more or less murderous muslims than Nazis in the world?


Klevius question: Why aren't muslims ashamed of their slave raiding/trading/owning past? And of the Koranic ideology that "justifies" it - instead of excusing islam with cherry picked "new interpretations"

Saudi Arabia itself suppresses Shia muslims and non-muslims without anyone seeming to react.


An estimated 16 million natives of Saudi Arabia are Shia muslims. The Saud dictator family demand (but not necessarily for themselves) strict Sunni islamic Wahhabism which states that muslims should return to the interpretation of islam found in the Koran and the Sunnah. They also believe that muslims who seek intercession from holy men—such as the Imams Shia revere—are not true muslims. While attempts to force conversion of Shia have been infrequent, Shia have alleged severe discrimination in Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia is also the home for all muslims' world organization OIC which is led by Iyad Madani, an islamofascist belonging to the Saud dictator family.

Calling oneself a true muslim automatically connects to sharia islam, the very opposite to Human Rights - e.g. as stated by all the world's muslims' Saudi based and UN sanctioned sharia organization OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation) and its islamofascist Saudi Fuhrer Iyad Madani.



A consequence of this is that a sharia supporting muslim's vote is undemocratic. OIC's 57 member state voting bloc in UN who supported Human Rights violating sharia as a guidance for muslim legislation all over the world was therefore also undemocratic.

Could there be any doubt that Mishal Husain isn't aware of OIC and its world sharia declaration? After all, it's even on Wikipedia.


Muslim hypocrisy like the one expressed by BBC's Mishal Husain could be just a laugh - were it not for its connection to islamic evil. Islam has only one authority and that is muslimhood. So declaring yourself a muslim automatically adds to the "democratic" support of islamic evil.

Samantha Lewthwaite, Mishal Husain and Michael Adebolajo have sharia islam in common - unless of course, Mishal Husain is an apostate and too cowardice to admit it.


As long as fascism is called good - how could we ever stop it? But Klevius, as a critical European ("islamophobe" if you like) feels extremely embarrassed in front of those true refugees escaping islam and hoping for protection under Western Human Rights. Sorry!







.

No comments: