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.

Tuesday, November 24, 2015

So-called BBC's extreme misrepresentation of islamic sharia

* Is so called BBC really British? Hasn't it "decontextualized" itself (see below)!

The horror of today's fascism


Saudi dictator family is behind most of islamic atrocities around the world and Erdogan & Co long for a neo-Ottoman conquest of Europe. He was even paid €2 billion for "guarding" muslims from entering EU (who mentioned the wolf guarding the sheep?). However, what fanatic Erdogan seems to have forgotten is that the Ottoman "empire" was completely dependent on its slaves. And when slavery was abolished by the West then the Ottoman "empire" sank into utmost misary and collapse. Just like the Andalus did long before when the muslims and Jews were forbidden from having Christian slaves (a main reason to the forceful Christianization of Europe).

So-Called BBC asks How Islamic is the So-Called Islamic State? Klevius answer: IS follows both original islam as well as contemporary islam in Saudi Arabia and the Saudi based and steered OIC's sharia declaration*.

* OIC's sharia declaration makes it possible for muslim countries like Saudi Arabia to freely refer to it when picking from the Koran, Hadiths, Sunnah etc.

So called BBC: In claiming responsibility for the Paris atrocities, the so-called Islamic State described the attacks as "a blessed battle whose causes of success were enabled by Allah". Last year, when the group's self-imposed Caliphate was declared, hundreds of Muslim leaders and scholars from across the world wrote an open letter to the self-professed Caliph, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, accusing him of heinous war crimes and a violation of the fundamental principles of Islam.

Klevius:  "The fundamental principles of islam" can historically best be described by Klevius islam formula (first presented on the Swedish radio after 9/11 and on the web since 2003): Slavery+"infidel" racism+sex segregated rapetivism+anti human rights Sharia/apostasy ban.

Islam originated as as a militant separatist movement. When the islamofascists cololized civilized territories they suck out taxes from wealthy "infidels" (non-muslims) and enslaved the poor, while themselves settling in garrisons meticulously separated from those whom they colonized and sponged on. This, btw, was the original idea of mosques (except for being the center of the slave market, of course).

So called BBC: So how Islamic is 'Islamic State'? Why have mainstream interpretations of Islam so far failed to provide an effective counter-narrative? What needs to happen for the group to be defeated?

Klevius answer: Stop allying with its root cause!

 Klevius wrote:

Sunday, November 16, 2014

Who is Allah's best friend - and the worst enemy of Human Rights?


There are now more British muslims fighting for the Islamic State than for Britain's military. And most true British muslims support Islamic State.

Islamic State rests on Saudi Wahhabism and Saudi funds. And Saudi Arabia is a close ally of Cameron (and enemy of Putin). Moreover, the Saudi initiated, based and steered sharia organization OIC is another close ally via Cameron's non-elected minister of faith islamofascism, Sayeeda Warsi whom he personally elected as baroness. In other words, Cameron's closest woman is a grave violator of the most basic of Human Rights because of her sharia support and UK representative in OIC. That's why Cameron hates Human Rights and paves the way for making Britain a Saudi Arabia outside the cradle of islam.



Islamic State to Putin: 'This is a message to you, oh Vladimir Putin, these are the jets that you have sent to Bashar, we will send them to you, God willing, remember that.

    And we will liberate Chechnya and the entire Caucasus, God willing," said the militant. "The Islamic State is and will be and it is expanding God willing.
    Your throne has already teetered, it is under threat and will fall when we come to you because Allah is truly on our side.


Paul J. Saunders: Putin often acknowledges the country’s significant Muslim minority, including during a major 2013 speech focusing on Russia’s national identity, during which he said that “Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Judaism and other religions are an integral part of Russia’s identity, its historical heritage and the present-day lives of its citizens.” Importantly, Putin went on to argue, “It is clearly impossible to identify oneself only through one’s ethnicity or religion in such a large nation with a multi-ethnic population. … People must develop a civic identity on the basis of shared values, a patriotic consciousness, civic responsibility and solidarity, respect for the law and a sense of responsibility for their homeland’s fate, without losing touch with their ethnic or religious roots.”

Apparently responding in no small part to controversy in the West, in the months prior to the Olympic Games in Sochi, over Russia’s law imposing fines on individuals or organizations that present “propaganda” about homosexuality to minors, Putin has increasingly emphasized Russians’ shared moral values and to connect Russia’s “traditional” values to those in the Middle Eastern, Asian and other non-Western societies. “We can see how many of the Euro-Atlantic countries are actually rejecting their roots, including the Christian values that constitute the basis of Western civilization … and people are aggressively trying to export this model all over the world. I am convinced that this opens a direct path to degradation and primitivism, resulting in a profound demographic and moral crisis. … We consider it natural and right to defend these values​​.” While clearly identifying Russia as a largely Christian country, Putin is attempting to establish a dividing line between the shared values of believers in many religious traditions and those of the decadent secular West.

Putin was explicit about his foreign policy objectives, saying, “Russia agrees with those who believe that key decisions should be worked out on a collective basis, rather than at the discretion of and in the interests of certain countries or groups of countries. Russia believes that international law, not the right of the strong, must apply. And we believe that every country, every nation is not exceptional, but unique, original and benefits from equal rights, including the right to independently choose their own development path.” Thus, Putin is attempting to exploit huge differences in social values between the West and predominantly Muslim countries in the Middle East and North Africa to make Western values into a liability rather than an asset for Western governments. If consistently implemented over time, this may become Russia’s most significant effort to date to develop a soft power strategy to combat Western influence in the Middle East and elsewhere in the Islamic world.

Klevius:The above, dear reader, is what you really need to focus on. Logically a true muslim should not be allowed to vote as long as s/he doesn't reject sharia. However, as it stands now it's precisely the anti-democratic sharia muslims who multiply fastest due to islamic rapetivism ideology. And as long as their votes count politicians try to get them (no matter that most voting fraud happens in muslim communities). Spice this with oil/gas and you start seeing why Klevius writings are essential, not the least because of Klevius lack of financial or political motives.

And to top it all, non-religious Klevius seems to be your best analyst due to his superior (sad isn't it) understanding of sex segregation and its connection to the origin of islam.
* * *

So called BBC: "The so called islamic state declared its self-imposed caliphate by its self-professed caliph."


Klevius: A lot of selfies here from the so called BBC (British Broadcasting Company), which should rather be called IBC (Islamic Broadcasting Company) - not the least because British tax and compulsory fees payers just got to pay even more for Arabic islam propaganda in Mideast and elsewhere outside Britain itself.

So called BBC: To what extent do you believe IS is part of the muslim family?

Imam Salah Al Ansari, an Imam, theologian and "academic"*, gives a long answer about what IS caliphate is about without even touching so called BBC's question. In doing so he protects himself from internal muslim criticism.

* You can't possibly be a true academic (like e.g. Klevius) when you base your thinking on loose fantasies (Koran, Sunna, Hadits etc) without historical relevance. And to be a really true academic you also need a good brain which obviously this imam lacks.

Haras Rafiq, Managing Director of the anti-extremism think tank, the Quilliam Foundation: IS has something to do with islam but not my islam.

Klevius: And you have something to do with Human Rights violating sharia, don't you!

Katherine Brown, an "expert" in Islamic Studies at King's College London: IS has decontextualized documents from the past.

Katherine Brown, an "expert" in Islamic Studies at King's College London: Sharia isn't codified but it has precedences just like the British legal system.

Klevius: What a load of crap! Don't you understand why it's not codified?! Ever heard about declarations and resolutions?! And yes, islamic sharia has precedences - in that very original islam you have "decontextualized"!



A commentator: "The problem is that Obama, Merkel, Cameron, Hollande, the EU, the elites, the media have the power, control the government and are favouring Islam and muslims. They are flooding and islamizing the whole west with muslim immigrants till a point of no return."


Klevius intellectual harem


Nonie Darwish (one of Klevius wives in his intellectual harem - see below): One of the reasons that the so-called “moderate Muslims” have become irrelevant and incapable of helping themselves or the West against Islamic terrorism is that over the centuries they have become tolerant of Islamic terrorism and considered it as part of normal life. Average Muslims have been led to believe that they are victims of the outside world and not Islam, and that is why many are either silent or sympathize with jihadists and even terrorists as having a legitimate cause; but they tell the West they don’t approve of using terror as a solution, even though Islamic books do support terror as a solution.

Just by reading mainstream Arab newspapers, the West should have known by now that Islamic culture has justified terrorism as legitimate to advance its cause. Muslim leaders who refuse to engage in the game of jihad are accused of treason, not considered to be good Muslims, and are often the victims of a coup or assassination attempts.

After 9/11, many moderate Muslim friends of mine from inside the Middle East told me with bizarre logic in Arabic: “Let the West get a taste of the terror we live in daily. Why only us?” What struck me was the way they viewed terrorism; to them it felt like a natural disaster or part of life that must be tolerated and dealt slowly with. To them, they must never openly reject or upset the terrorist.

Like the moderate Muslims, President Obama appears to have an approach of denial and tolerance of Islamic terrorism and is encouraging Americans and the media to do the same. He is advocating ignoring the threat of Islamic terror and denying it exists by not even calling the threat by its true name, “Islamic terrorism.” Obama puts on an air of being wise and honorable for doing that, and anyone one who does not agree is called racist and bigot. But this approach of forcing the victims of Islamic terrorism to tolerate terrorism as part of life is exactly what Islam wants from the West. It is Islam’s preferred technique to conquer and enslave.

That strategy by Islam rarely failed in its 1400-year history. The only nation that stood up to Islamic terror and enslavement was Israel. Historically, most nations in the Middle East caved in to Islam and abandoned the Jews. Eventually former Christian nations like Egypt and Turkey were given the kiss of death by the Dracula of Islam, but the Jews of the Middle East either escaped or lived under Islamic terror, but never compromised their beliefs. Muslims since the 7th century hated the Jews for that. Islam to this day uses its favorite tool, terrorism, to conquer and enslave, and that tool is working today on the last bastion of freedom, Western civilization. Terrorism works on both individuals and nations who become paralyzed like a lobster slowly cooking in heating water.

President Obama seems not to fear bringing inside America thousands of Syrian refugees who could be sympathetic toward and tolerant of ISIS, if not active members themselves. He recently told the American people: “the vast majority of these refugees are victims of the same violence and terror we have seen in Paris.” As though the Middle East is divided between the good victims of terror and the bad perpetrators of terror.

I have news for Obama. Everyone in the Middle East was or is the victim of terror; terrorists have themselves tasted Islamic terror, like Dracula tasting the blood of its victims. ISIS members who are Sunnis have lived in and tolerate terror, and use it on others as the solution of choice. Sunnis terrorized Shiites, and vice versa. Life under Sharia itself is a life under terror. Being a woman in the Muslim world is living in terror. Being a child strapped with explosives by your own parents is life of terror. If you read the Quran and Hadith, you are commanded to do and live by terror and dream of the great afterlife if you kill yourself and others for the sake of Allah.

Obama, like moderate Muslims, want us to tolerate Islamic terrorism instead of fighting and rejecting it, as Israel has done. That is perhaps why Obama hates Benjamin Netanyahu, not because of a personality clash, but because Netenyahu symbolizes the rejection of living as a slave under Islamic terror. Obama is obviously not on the side of Israel, because Israel will not tolerate Islamic terror and look the other way, as Obama is doing. Obama is most passionate when he defends Islam and ignores terrorism. He wears it as a badge of honor. To Obama, ISIS is contained, is no big deal, we can live with it and we must be cautious not fall into stereotyping Muslims. With no shame, he constantly lectures American citizens, especially Christians, not to judge Islam and Muslims.

But worse than just denial, Obama is forcing Homeland Security and Americans to regard obvious Islamic terrorism on American soil as just normal acts of workplace violence, or crime on the streets that can be handled by the courts. That is the same attitude that moderate Muslims want to force on us, to convince us that Islam has nothing to do with terrorists, that the Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam, while in their hearts they say that it is America’s turn to suffer terror as well; why only us?

The pathological tolerance of terror is just the beginning of the road to life in Islamic tyranny and humiliation. The next step will be forcing Americans to feeling guilty for rejecting Muslim refugees. Then the leftist American do-gooders will consider taking a look at and considering Muslim grievances against American society and its unjust Constitution as a legitimate religious right that should be given equal time by the media. Then a movement will develop defending the causes of the terrorists that might not seem legitimate to Americans but are considered legitimate by the Left. After that, some terrorists will become heroes and even adored for their bravery and courage.

That is not too far-fetched: Rolling Stone magazine portrayed the Boston bomber, Dzhokhar Tsamaev like a rock star on its cover a few months ago.

Before we know it, our children will be living in a full-blown Arab spring right here in America and Europe.


Klevius wrote:

Monday, November 16, 2009

BBC & other overpaid "executives'" IQ deficiency, islam's racist/sexist Caliph (& his puppet), the Angels of Antichrist & Klevius' islamophobic harem

Klevius intellectual wives: Oriana Fellaci (a true journalist - her photo ought to be in front of every BBC & other media "executive"), Wafa Sultan, Nonie Darwish, Hirsi Ali. Klevius intellectual concubines are so many so their pics won't possibly fit here. Klevius main rival: Mr X "president's" first call, islamofascist Don Abdullah Juan (see Klevius love letter to Edit Södergran to get it), the "guardian of islam". He & his pals have blood on their fingers, not only from Darfur, Iraq, Afganistan etc, but also from millions of victims for islamic street jihadism all over the world, fueled by Koranic infidel racism.























and here's a journalist that would never qualify in Klevius intellectual harem:



Samantha Lewthwaite, Mishal Husain and Michael Adebolajo all have sharia islam in common. And none of them has anything in common with Klevius!



.

No comments: