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.

Thursday, June 23, 2016

Why do friends of Syria hate Syria to an extent that they want to bomb it?

British EUphobia bigotry and hypocrisy

Cameron wants to stay in EU while being racist against EU citizens and while disconnecting UK from Human Rights so to pave the way for islamic sharia and keeping the financial flow to EU intact. And precisely because of EU's rapid islamization Klevius suggest leaving the sinking ship.

Being a muslim means having an ideology that encourages to fight the "infidel" and to violate the most basic of Human Rights.. Being, for example, Polish or "Eastern European", EU citizen etc. lacks any ideology. 
 
When one or two Polish individuals commit a crime then the Brits (mainly politicians and BBC) blame the whole group. Why doesn't the same apply to muslims? Muslims have "holy texts" and a mythic violent figure they believe in - and who encourages jihad against islam's "enemies"..




Jo Cox:  In 2015 the UN attributed 60 per cent of child casualties and 48 per cent of attacks on schools and hospitals to Saudi-led coalition airstrikes. And last week the UN secretary-general’s annual report on Children and Armed Conflict for the first time put the coalition on the “list of shame” for the killing and maiming of children. They joined other state armed forces and non-state armed groups known for their appalling record of grave violations against children, including the South Sudanese and Syrian governments as well as Isis and Boko Haram. The Houthis were also listed, as they have been for the past several years.

    However, in an unprecedented and deeply shocking move, on Monday night the secretary-general temporarily removed the Saudi-led coalition from the list after heavy lobbying from the Saudis and their allies. The removal is meant to be temporary pending a joint review of the UN and Saudi-led coalition, but Saudi Arabia’s permanent representative to the UN has already declared the decision “irreversible and unconditional”.

However, Jo Cox also said: We heard again from the government this week that only by working with Saudi Arabia can we influence them. I accept this. But it is surely now time for the government to prove that this influence can help Yemen’s children, as well as keep Britain safe.

Klevius question: Why is it ok to "work" with the hate mongering and terrorist supporting Saudi dictator family but not with Assad?

The Group of Friends of the Syrian People (sometimes: Friends of Syria Group or Friends of the Syrian People Group or Friends of Democratic Syria or simply Friends of Syria) is an international diplomatic collective of mostly OIC countries and bodies convening periodically on the topic of Syria outside the U.N. Security Council. The collective was created by the Saudi dictator family in cooperation with Turkey.


More than 50 U.S. mid-level diplomats have sent a memo through the State Department’s “dissent channel” to a likely sympathetic Secretary of State John Kerry, advocating an American bombing campaign to bring down Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. The memo concluded, “It is time that the United States, guided by our strategic interests and moral convictions, lead a global effort to put an end to this conflict once and for all.”

Many supporters of bombing Syria are precisely those who opposed taking down Saddam Hussein who had used chemical weapons to mass murder some 100,000 Kurds. Moreover, although there are no evidence of Assad having ordered the use of chemical weapons, there are strong evidence linking the Syria crisis and the bloodshed and suffering to the Saudi dictator family.

 Assad’s government is the only legitimate government in Syria and, as the sovereign, has the legal right to seek international support as it has from Russia and Iran. There is no such legal right for the United States and other countries, such as Saudi Arabia and Turkey, to arm Syrian rebels to attack Assad’s government.

The dissent cable advocates what it calls “the judicious use of stand-off and air weapons,” which, the signatories write, “would undergird and drive a more focused and hardnosed US-led diplomatic process.”

Inside Syria, both the United States and Russia are battling the Islamic State and other jihadist groups seek to overthrow the Assad government. But while the U.S. is supporting muslim terrorist groups, Russia is backing Assad and waging a broader fight against these terrorists, including Al Qaeda’s Nusra Front.


No comments: