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.

Monday, June 05, 2017

Klevius recipe against muslim terror (sharia soft and sharia hard): Support "islamophobes"* and stop supporting islamofascists.




* I.e. defenders of the most basic of Human Rights.

Will more sharia muslims and sharia islam benefit the English people? And are "islamophobes" the religious "bitcoins" paid for "friendship" with Saudi islamofascists?



and will recruiting more armed  sharia muslim police under the "diversity" label make England safer?


The Archbishop admits the obvious: Islamic terror has to do with islam. However, Klevius points out that there is no terror at all inscribed in the Universal Human Rights Declaration. No "interpretation" needed.


Peter Klevius to Archbishop of Canterbury Justyn Welby:  The 1948 Univrsal Human Rights Declaration doesn't contain any links at all to hate, racism, sexism and violence. Except for one little loophole called "freedom of religion". However, for this "loophole" to work it also needs the appalling mantra that makes a monolith of 'muslims' and 'islam' - hence paving the way via sharia islam to the evil of original islam. And that's not a Human Right.


BBC's policy has for long belittled the Saudi influence on muslim terror and sharia. And in doing so BBC has been an eager accomplice to islamofascism.


Some BBC reporters now seem to have become more aware of the danger of islam when it 's getting closer to home and the street they walk every day. This has become apparent lately, and today showed up in the tone  of BBC R4 Today News when an almost shivering BBC reporter asked guests about how to tackle muslim terrorism and its connections to the islamofascist Saudi dictator family.

Klevius comment: It's easy - and truly disgusting - to utilize religious hate for one's own agenda, just like the islamofascist Saudi dictator family does, as long as it keeps away from one's own front garden, isn't it. However, does BBC see any problem with Saudi based and steered OIC's so called "soft sharia", when their own muslim presenter Mishal Husain ticks very few (if any) boxes when it comes to sharia islam.

BBC's muslim sharia presenter doesn't fast during Ramadan but can instead drink some alcohol. She doesn't use muslim attire either. However, how bigoted and hypocritical isn't her "Cambridge/BBC-style "muslimhood" in the eyes of e.g. Afgan, Syrian etc. girls/women living under sharia islam?

From the media: For eight agonizing minutes, the orders came from all directions, frantic and contradictory. Crowds scattered, sometimes directly into the path of the men trying to kill them. Police cars screamed past the attackers toward the van they had abandoned. Chairs, bottles and even a basket flew through the air as terrified onlookers tried to hold off the three men and make sense out of the senseless. Gerard Vowls was across the street from a Barclays bank branch when he heard someone moan, “I’ve been stabbed.” He thought it was a joke. But as the man leaned weakly against a wall, the blood was all too real. Moments later, as one bystander helped the wounded man, Vowls saw the three attackers fall upon a nearby woman with their knives.

“The three guys, yes, they were just stabbing this woman constantly, non-stop the three of them. Just stabbing her from every direction, the three of them around her. Lunging at her,” he said. “I heard them say one thing: ‘This is for Allah.’”



Klevius question: Freedom fighters?!

Karen Bradley on BBC answering the question about Saudi funding islamic terror: The (hate spreading and war crimes committing islamofascist) Saudi dictator family is our friend and ally.


Peter Klevius: Islam originated, as every historian knows (just read Hugh Kennedy etc. scholars), as a militant attacking ideology with terror as its basic means. So when it is now constantly described as a peaceful religion and when the islamofascist Saudi dictator family, who is the "custodians of islam" and which has been the most aggressive spreader of islamic hate propaganda, is described as a friend and important ally - what could possibly go wrong. It's the most senseless of corners to paint oneself in to blink the true nature of islam and its allure to the most evil of human instincts. And this fact is precisely the very reason that so many muslims feel an extra urge to "patch" this "religion of peace" with the very opposite of islam's very soul. And these peaceful muslims constitute the hangers for a naive interpretation of islam that not only leaves out the fact that 'humans' in original islam are muslims, i.e. that non-muslims aren't fully humans, but also twists this evil tenet to include all humans and therefore "justifying" a view that "islam is a great and peaceful religion".


Yes, Klevius is well aware of how high this threshold is if you, like the Saudi custodians, use 'muslims' and 'islam' as monoliths for particular usage. However, as Klevius has said publicly since 9/11, surgery is necessary. And yes, the surgery will kill the patient while the mourners are called "cultural muslims" - until they have to drop even this when facing logically inevitable (negative) Human Rights equality. So what's left? Traditions and individual experience. However, if you ask Klevius he will recommend that you face your nostalgia with the reality of today instead.

Karen Bradley on BBC News today: This attack was cheap and didn't need a lot of funding.

Peter Klevius: Vans and knives don't move without a motive. And almost everyone knows that the islamofascist Saudi dictator family has possessed most of the (oil)money used to spread the hate that is called "radical islam" (i.e. original islam).

It's precisely this schizophrenic "friendship" that convinces muslim terrorists (and sharia muslims) that they are right in their "cause". If Saudi Wahhabism/Salafism dictaorship is considered both the "guardian of islam" as well as "our friend and ally" then this is the ultimate sign of the tenets of the original islam being ok-ed.

So why is islam defended but not Human Rights? The islamofascist Saudi dictator family is a "friend" while Human Rights defenders are called evil "islamophobes".

The London mayor and his sharia is just one small part of the overall problem.

Klevius wrote:

Tuesday, May 10, 2016

Klevius: What's so great about Allahu when the hotline was shut down 1400 years ago - leaving 1.6 Billion muslims on their own?


BBC together with its muslim guests today criticized the use of "ALLAHU AKBAR" shouts when training against muslim terrorist attacks


This could allegedly "offend" other muslims. This, no doubt, worries considerate BBC a lot.




However, Klevius wonders at which meeting point Mishal Husain (not fasting Ramadan, drinking alcohol, etc), Sadiq Khan (sharia supporting practising muslim) and Ibrahim Mogra (UK's second highest sharia muslim) could possibly shout "ALLAHU AKBAR" together?


German Officials: Germany Stabbing Suspect Mentally Unstable


Klevius: Show me a muslim who stabs people while shouting ALLAHU AKBAR who isn't "mentally unstable"!

A woman reported hearing the words "infidel, you must die" as the attack began, and the suspect himself admitted yelling "Allahu akbar," Arabic for "God is great," senior police official Guenther Gietl said.

Senior police official Lothar Koehler said it was "difficult to get coherent, plausible and comprehensible information" during questioning of the suspect.

Investigators said there were no indications that the man had any accomplices or an extremist background.

There are "no indications from intelligence services so far that this person had any links in any form to Islamist or Salafist groups, people or organizations," Senior police official Lothar Koehler said. "We also have no indications that there was any radicalization or perhaps trigger for this act as a result of the consumption of (extremist) videos."

Klevius: Sadly, they missed Muhammad, the Koran and a long line of hadiths etc.


No comments: