TheresaMay's racist robbing of EU citizens' Human Rights

The Saudi Fuhrer of Saudi based islamofascist OIC

BBC's compulsory fee funded propaganda for Saudi sharia islam

Support Klevius' Atheist anti-fascism against islamofascism

This is what BBC's muslim sharia presenter Mishal Husain "forgot" to report. Mishal grew up in the very same theocratic medieval dictatorship which now harbors and rules all muslims world organization OIC and its Human Rights violating sharia. While also spreading islamic hatred over the world through a variety of channels.

Klevius to dumb (or just evil) alt-left "antifa" people who support the worst of Human Rights violating evil:

True anti-fascism in its purest form is laid down in the Universal Human Rights declaration of 1948. Islam (OIC) has in UN decided to abandon the most basic of these rights (the so called negative Human Rights).

Fascism is, according to Google's top hit, "a political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation*, and forcible suppression of opposition." 23 Aug 2017

So let's face islam with this definition.

A political philosophy, movement, or regime (islam) that exalts nation (Umma) and often race (muslims) above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government (Koran text/Mohammad's example) headed by a dictatorial leader (the caliph - e.g. the Saudi based OIC's Saudi leader), severe economic and social regimentation* (sharia), and forcible suppression of opposition (apostasy ban against muslims wanting to leave islam, and demonizing defenders of Human Rights by calling them "islamophobes").

And islamofascism gets away with it by calling itself a religion and thereby being protected by those very Human Rights it opposes.

* According to Cambridge dictionary, "extreme organization and control of people".

Sayeeda Warsi like all sharia muslims is against basic Human Rights

Theresa May is for sharia and EU - but against EU's Human Rights Court which condemns sharia

Klevius is probably now the world's foremost expert on sex segregation (sad isn't it), and islam (the worst cime ever) is the foremost expression of sex segregation. By 'islam' Klevius means the same as true sharia supporting (and therefore against the most basic of Human Rights) muslims.

British muslim jihadists: Samantha Lewthwaite, Mishal Husain and Michael Adebolajo (who murdered Le

Tuesday, May 27, 2014

Klevius question to BBC's Sharia presenter Mishal Husain: Should muslims be accountable for islam's crimes throughout 1,400 years?


Isn't it time for reparations for islam's unimaginable crimes against humanity - and wouldn't it be appropriate if Saudi Arabia (one of Mishal Husain's homelands) the "guardian of islam", started paying back with the help of its oil revenues from the West? 



And sentencing "king" Abdullah, Iyad Madini and all other supporters of islamofascism.

If you share an evil ideology from the past you should be accountable, shouldn't you.



 The main islamic body of today is Saudi initiated, Saudi based, and Saudi steered OIC. Its Saudi Fuhrer Iyad Madani demands the criminalization of Human Rights. OIC, thanks to its many Human Rights violating muslim member states, has managed to take over UN, which was originally created to defend us from such totalitarian and Human Rights violating ideologies.




If you defend Human Rights you automatically become a critic of islam


If one's guilt is defined by one's ancestors' past, then islam and muslims have a lot to answer - but a striking lack of interviewers and prosecutors.

And this lack is due to the very threatening and intimidating soul of islam itself (Sharia) when it comes tu scrutiny of its Human Rights violating tenets and deeds. Such criticism, no matter in what form or how well made, inevitably lead you to the blacklist titled "islamophobes", and being on that blacklist (Google etc) automatically excludes you from a variety of freedoms that non-critics still possess. Not only doesn't anyone dare to hire you, publish you, accept you socially (except for your real friends of course and those who don't know you are a Human Rights defender), some morons even call lt racist to propose equality!

According to the logic of ancestor guilt, muslims living today bear responsibility as long as they don't repent (in which case they only have to pay compensation for their ancestors' crimes). However, we see very little repentance but a lot of defensiveness.

Saudi Arabia is the main guardian of islam's crimes and should accordingly be the first to be prosecuted, sentenced  and ordered to give their oil money in compensation for islam's crimes against humanity. In fact, the Saudi dictator family stole the whole country in a raid on some handful of camels and jihadists.



Outside of Riyadh, Dammam, Jeddah and some other big cities, Saudi Arabia is still the same islamic slum it used to be before Western oil exploration.



What Klevius has said about Wahhab the father of Saudi islamofascism (2008):


The root man of Saudi islamofascism was Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahab who, during his studies in Basra in the 18th C, got seriously dazzled by glimpses of the European Enlightenment twinkling through the temporary crack to the West called the "Tulip period". He then retreated back into his medieval islamic darkness & as a result, came to position himself as the very opposite to the British "Glorious revolution" which fought against Catholic papacy, & which ended up in Lancashire's coal fueled textile industries as the beginning of the modern industrialized* world based on technology & rationality rather than on religious superstition & fundamentalism (also compare Shinto vs islam). A major outcome of industrialization was universal suffrage & the idea about negative human rights.
* isn't it an irony then that Britain, who started the series of modern revolutions as well as industrialization, came to deeply embed itself with the most intolerant, racist & sexist constitution, i.e. the Saudi islamofascist state which was incapable of producing anything by itself except hatred & more fanatic muslims!

Together with the criminal "house of Saud" Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahab then confined the Arabs in islamic backwardness &, in addition, the Arab women in an islamic burka of extreme Sharia sex segregation/apartheid.

After having robbed Mecca & Medina, the Sauds/Wahhabis run the stolen country by the help of what they fleeced from visiting pilgrims. This was the main source of income until Westerners found/drilled oil & made the lazy islamist looters even wealthier.

(analysis taken from Homo Filius Nullius by Peter Klevius).

Klevius comment: And today this evilness threatens the free world through spineless politicians & UN! The banner of Enlightenment is now upheld by heroic women, e.g. African Ayaan Hirsi Ali who has suffered as a victim of islam(ofascism) & escaped to the West, only to find that she was abandoned by those she thought would protect her! In fact, Western politicians & media are busy implementing that very Arab-islamic oppression so many muslims have escaped!









"Allah's" "monotheist" islam compared to godless Shinto

There are no "monotheist" gods in Shinto and war was never part of Shinto - but the very nature of islam from its origin to its end. When islam is "peaceful" it's equally dead as the parrot in Monty Python's famous sketch!
This is what Klevius wrote 2005:

Thursday, December 22, 2005 - and how Japan surpassed the West also in technology


Shinto meets Islam - Civilization vs "killing & raping fields"


HDTV-video of Honda's Asimo robot running etc.
How come that Honda is so much superior compared to BMW?
Out of Africa as "Pygmies" and back as global "Mongoloids"
Linda 13, sexually abused to death by a "school gang" & Swedish school policy & sex segregation.

Klevius comment: Look at those pathetic males (pathetic if they are racist/sexist pan-Arabic Islamist mosque-building oil-billionaires who trade in Islamic darkness in mosques, schools, universities, youth organizations etc?)! Too busy spending oil-money on technical wonders their own slave & oil-fuelled pan-Arabic/Islamic culture is uncapable of producing? Whereas Shinto (the world's oldest* religion) created the world's best high tech, Islam (the world's youngest "religion") created terror and Koran-brainwashed suicide-killers in the service of fascist and sexist pan-Arabism (i.e. true Islam)! For a better world in Darfur and elsewhere - bury Islam! Islam has caused more suffering than any other ideology (incl. Hitler's & Stalin's socialism/communism), yet it has always been excused (and surprisingly often by its own victims, i.e. the opposite compared to the "black"/"white" situation)!

Arabic racism in Africa: "They (Arabs) are the most racist people on earth" Klevius' comment: Isn't it logical then that their "religion" not only share the same feature, but also makes it essential?

While hypocritical Saudi Arabia, Egypt etc Arab Islamist nations dislike Islamic terrorism at home they continue to support it abroad. The further away the better! After all Islam is, from scratch, deliberatedly construed for limitless violent conquest and submission!

* i.e. ancestor warship - compare P. Klevius' Vagina gate in the atom of kinship.


The West (US, UK, Russia, France, and Holland demanded Japanese to buy their stuff - if not, they should bomb Japan!


Cannon diplomacy letter to the Japanese Emperor 14, July 1853


'For years several countries have applied for trade, but you have opposed them on account of a national law. You have thus acted against divine principles and your sin cannot be greater than it is. What we say thus does not necessarily mean, as has already been communicated by the Dutch boat, that we expect mutual trade by all means. If you are still to disagree we would then take up arms and inquire into the sin against the divine principles, and you would also make sure of your law and fight in defence. When one considers such an occasion, however, one will realize the victory will naturally be ours and you shall by no means overcome us.


If in such a situation you seek for a reconciliation, you should put up the white flag that we have recently presented to you, and we would accordingly stop firing and conclude peace with you, turning our battleships aside.'

Commodore Matthew Perry of the United States Navy




Klevius' comment: That's a bully's talk if I'm not mistaken.Please, do connect it to today by yourself so I don't have to write everything.


On July 8, 1853, Commodore Matthew Perry of the United States Navy appeared with his ships in Yokohama and threatened Japan on behalf of the U.S. government, hence forcing Japan to trade with the US on US terms.

Western powers such as US, UK, Russia, France and Holland, were all seeking new markets for their products, as well as new countries to supply raw materials for industry. At the time Japan had no navy with which to defend itself, and thus had to agree to the demands. UK, Russia, France and Holland followed suit with similar threats.

This was the background to Japan's powerful industrialization and militarization for the purpose of protecting itself from these powers. Moreover, this is also the root to Japan later being allied with ant-western movements in east Asia who asked for help against western colonialists.

Friday, May 23, 2014

Is BBC's muslim presenter Mishal Husain (with a Saudi background) an apostate or does she play taqiya?!


Only muslims can be truly islamophobic



To understand BBC's bigoted and hypocritical islam presenter Mishal Husain a short tutorial in muslim taqiya may be necessary


When the muslim taqiya organization Quilliam (sponsored by infidel taxpayers) pretend to criticize "extremist" islam they completely and purposefully miss the very worst one, Saudi Arabia!

Quilliam: 'Countries such as Sudan, Pakistan and more recently Brunei are increasingly lurching towards archaic and inane interpretations of Sharia and applying laws that undermine basic human rights and equality. This not only puts them at odds with the modern world, it puts them at odds with the trajectory progressive Muslim thinkers and reformists have been travelling in for the last 200 years.'

Klevius comment: In the lengthy rambling of the full article the word 'Saudi' is completely missing. Why?

Make no mistake - Quilliam is all for Human Rights violating Sharia. But what about Mishal Husain?! Why doesn't she openly say she supports Sharia (and thereby opposes the most basic of Human Rights) or, alternatively comes out as an apostate?!



Do note that Quilliam doesn't accuse Saudi Arabia as a nation as it accuses Pakistan, Sudan, Brunei etc. In the case of Saudi Arabia it's only the 'Saudi extremists' which are targeted. Also note that Saudi Arabia considers as 'extremists' and 'terrorists' individuals and groups which don't comply with Sharia.


Maajid Nawaz and Ghaffar Hussain of Qulliam Taqiya -

The pseudo-moderate and extremely disingenuous Quilliam Foundation

Atlasshrugs: His association with the Quilliam Foundation was and is problematic. The Quilliam Foundation’s anti-Israel stance and its unjustified attacks on counter-jihadists such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Geert Wilders abundantly establish that it is not what it claims to be - See more at: http://pamelageller.com/2013/10/tommy-robinson-vs-mo.html/#sthash.ApePLjOj.dpuf


Maajid Nawaz and Ghaffar Hussain of Qulliam:
The so-called "Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam," issued by Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) Foreign Ministers in 1990, contains the following clauses:

"Article 10: Islam is the religion of unspoiled nature. It is prohibited to exercise any form of compulsion on man or to exploit his poverty or ignorance in order to convert him to another religion or to atheism."

"Article 22(a): Everyone shall have the right to express his opinion freely in such manner as would not be contrary to the principles of the Shar'iah."

"Article 25: The Islamic Shari'ah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification to any of the articles of this Declaration."

The last two articles of this bizarre and highly-politicized declaration, allow Muslim-majority countries to violate the UDHR by invoking the Sharia as though there was a unified version of it.

Klevius: 'by invoking the Sharia as though there was a unified version of it'?! What has this to do with Human Rights? Every Sharia worth its name is per islamic definition a violation of Human Rights.

Not only is there no single interpretation of Sharia, but certain Muslim-majority countries seem adamant on re-invigorating some of the most regressive and outmoded interpretations of it in an almost defiant and aggressive manner.

Klevius: Some serious bug in the heads of these muslim clowns. If there is 'no single interpretation of Sharia' how could one then avoid 'the most regressive and outmoded interpretations of it'?! No, these guys can't be that stupid, can they - or do they play taqiya.

This lurch towards medievalism is largely driven by the global Islamist movement, which was born in 1928 when the Muslim Brotherhood was established, and gained real momentum after the Iranian revolution in 1979.

Klevius: This seems as a defense ordered from and for Riyadh against MB and an attack on Tehran.

It is time for the Cairo Declaration to be revoked and for the Muslim human rights discourse to catch up with, and contribute as an equal partner to, modern international human rights discourse.

Klevius: The Cairo Declaration has been burning for years on Klevius' blogs. However, 'for the Muslim human rights discourse to catch up with, and contribute as an equal partner to modern international human rights discourse' seems to be no solution but just a continuous islamic avoidance to fully comply with the very simple (and impossible to criticize) idea of universal equality.



Ali Sina exposes the lies behind Qulliam and Ansar’s charadehttp://pamelageller.com/2013/10/tommy-robinson-vs-mo.html/

Taqiyah Is Onion Shaped


Ali Sina: Who has not heard of taqiyah? But did you know that it is onion shaped? It is an Arabic word and it means dissimulation. Another word used synonymously is kitman, which means concealment.

This concealment has many layers.  The most common form of taqiyah is when Muslims deny that certain Islamic behaviors have anything to do with Islam.

On October 27, the BBC aired a documentary in which Mo Ansar, a Muslim activist in UK, was shown addressing a group of English Defense League members. He wanted to meet them in order to dispel their misunderstandings of Islam and to prove that Islam poses no threat to their country and their way of life.  How could he do that when Islam’s goal is to become dominant over all religions and nations? Well, he did it like any Muslim would do. He lied.  (Mo’s speech to EDL is at minute 10).

Mo starts by saying “as somebody who was born in this country and is British, I think I uphold British values. I am also a Muslim.  Islam is not here to take over the country. Islam is not here to take over the world. That is not the Islam that I know. Islam that I know is one that believes in co-existence and honors and respects British values.”

Nothing can be further from the truth. The British and Islamic values are diametrically opposed. They cannot co-exist. The British values are based on democracy. Democracy implies equality.  Iranian Journalist Amir Taheri says, “Equality is unacceptable in Islam. Un-believers cannot be equal to believers and women are not equal to men. Even the non-Muslims are not deemed to be equal. The People of the Book (Jews and Christians) are accepted as second class citizens and allowed to live in an Islamic state provided they pay the protection tax; Jizyah. But the pagans, atheists and idolaters are not regarded as fully humans. According to the Quran, the idolaters are to be killed wherever they are found.” (9:5)

Maajid claims to be a Muslim who rejects the Sharia. He is not alone. There are a few more in Canada and USA who make such claim. Among them are, Tarik Fatah, Irshad Manji, Zuhdi Yaser, just to name a few.  Can these people be trusted? Can a Muslim reject any part of the Quran?

We have to understand that there is a big difference between Islam and Christianity or Judaism. Muslims believe that the Quran is the verbatim word of God. Jews and Christians believe their sacred texts were written by humans who were inspired by God.  This is a crucial distinction. So while a Jew or a Christian can reject an outdated part of his scripture as the error of its authors, a Muslim does not have that luxury.  Muslims can’t pick and choose. Allah in the Quran asserts, “Today have I perfected your religious law for you, and have bestowed upon you the full measure of My blessings, and willed that self-surrender unto Me shall be your religion.” (Q.5:3).  How can one add or subtract to what God has perfected? That idea is preposterous to Muslims.

Another verse says, “Do you, then, believe in some parts of the divine writ and deny the truth of other parts? What, then, could be the reward of those among you who do such things but ignominy in the life of this world and, on the Day of Resurrection? They will be consigned to most grievous suffering. For God is not unmindful of what you do.” (Q.2:85)

It is unlikely that Maajid and his fellow so called moderate Muslims don’t know this. So how can they call themselves Muslim and reject the clear laws of the Quran? They are playing another layer of taqiyah. Their goal is not to reform Islam, something they know is impossible, but to buy legitimacy and more time for it until they become the majority and take over the world. I sounded the clarion about the danger of Islam 16 years ago, and now I warn you again that these so called moderates are wolves in sheep clothing. Don’t fear the terrorists. Fear the enemy within.

Muslims are allowed to reject part or all of Islam and even malign their prophet in order to deceive their victims.



In the April 9, 2002 issue, The Wall Street Journal published the concept of blood money in Saudi Arabia. If a person has been killed or caused to die by another, the latter has to pay blood money or compensation, as follow.
100,000 riyals if the victim is a Muslim man,
50,000 riyals if a Muslim woman,
50,000 riyals if a Christian man,
25,000 riyals if a Christian woman,
6,666 riyals if a Hindu man,
3,333 riyals if a Hindu woman.

According to this hierarchy, a Muslim man’s life is worth 33 times that of a Hindu woman. This hierarchy is based on the Islamic definition of human rights and is rooted in the Quran and the Sharia. How can we talk of democracy when the concept of equality in Islam is inexistent?

This is not a quirk of Saudi Arabia. The prophet of Islam advised Muslims not to aid non-Muslims to seek justice if they are abused by a Muslim. In his much celebrated edict of Medina, he declared, “A believer shall not slay a believer for the sake of an unbeliever, nor shall he aid an unbeliever against a believer.”  The same document states, “Whoever is convicted of killing a believer… the believers shall be against him as one man, and they are bound to take action against him.”

The Quran 3:28 prohibits Muslims to take non-Muslims as their leaders, or even as friends. If Muslims tell the truth about their hostile intention, they will be kicked out from the countries that they intend to overtake. The same verse allows them to lie, “by way of precaution, that ye may guard yourselves from them.”

Co-existence? Yes there is co-existence in Islam, but only if the non-Muslims are reduced into dhimmis, and accept to pay tributes to Muslims while feeling themselves humiliated and subdued. (Q. 9:29)

One characteristic of democracy is freedom of belief. This is utterly alien to Islam. The Quran 3: 85 says, “whoso desires another religion than Islam it shall not be accepted of him.”  The punishment of apostasy in Islam is death. No Islamic country allows its Muslim citizens to change their religion.

Mo also assured his audience that Islam is not here to take over the world. He lied. People often make the mistake of comparing Islam to Christianity and other faiths. All religions are personal. They are about enlightenment or relationship with God.  Islam is about world domination. The focus of Islam is on expansion. A hadith narrated by Bukhari (4: 53: 386) makes this clear. It says that when Umar sent Muslim army to Persia, “the representative of Khosrau came out with 40,000 warriors, and an interpreter got up saying, “Let one of you talk to me!” Al-Mughira replied, “Ask whatever you wish.” The other asked, “Who are you?” Al-Mughira replied, “We are some people from the Arabs; we led a hard, miserable, disastrous life. We used to suck the hides and the date stones from hunger; we used to wear clothes made up of fur of camels and hair of goats, and to worship trees and stones. While we were in this state, the Lord of the Heavens and the Earths, Elevated is His Remembrance and Majestic is His Highness, sent to us from among ourselves a Prophet whose father and mother are known to us. Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, has ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah Alone or give Jizya (i.e. tribute); and our Prophet has informed us that our Lord says:– “Whoever amongst us is killed (i.e. martyred), shall go to Paradise to lead such a luxurious life as he has never seen, and whoever amongst us remain alive, shall become your master.”

The order to fight till the non-Muslims worship Allah has not changed. Muslims will not abandon their quest for domination until they succeed or they are defeated. They have no choice in this.  They are programmed to spread Islam through deception or war.  They can’t be a Muslim and not advance their religion. The obligation to spread Islam is on every Muslim.  But we e have the choice. We can submit, or fight back and defeat them.  But how can we do that if we are not even aware that we are under attack? Taqiyah is what Muslims do to keep us in the sedated state.

Muhammad said al Islamo deenun va dawlah, (Islam is religion and state).  The goal of Islam is to take over the world and establish a world caliphate.  Without this goal Islam becomes meaningless.  The whole idea of jihad, which is an obligation on every Muslim, is to expand the Islamic domain.  It is also said that the bigger jihad is the struggle against one’s self. This is a lie too. Many scholars of Islam have refuted this as an innovation, something that was never said by Muhammad.

Jihad is through war, through financing the war (zakat) and through deception. The disagreement between Muslims is not in whether the west should become Islamic or not, but in whether it should be annexed through qital (fighting) or through taqiyah (deceiving).

The Quran 9:33 says, Allah will cause Islam to prevail over all religions. One does not have to read the history of Islamic conquest and oppression of their vanquished nations throughout the last 1400 years to know Muslims have no regards for the human rights of the non-Muslims. A look at how the minorities are treated in Muslim majority countries in the 21st century can make that point clear.

When Muslims become the majority, they deny the minorities any participation in political life. No non-Muslim is allowed to run for the head of any Islamic country and where they are allowed to become a member of parliament, it is only as a representative of their people. They are like ambassadors of their co-religionists in the Islamic state. They have no role in how the country should be run, but only as a liaison between the state and their co-religionists who are regarded as second class citizens.

Some of the EDL members expressed their concerned about their daughters who had to married to Muslims and brainwash to cut their ties with their family.  Mo Ansar responded with more lies. He said, “If there are girls who have converted to Islam and are told you cannot meet your family; if that happens, I’d say now clearly, that it is not allowed in Islam.”

Mo should know that Muhammad ordered his daughter Zeinab to leave her unbelieving husband Abul As, until he was forced to convert. He told his followers to cut their ties with their families and to emigrate from Mecca. These stories are all recorded in the Sira.

Everything Mo said in that meeting was a lie.  Of course he is not an ignorant Muslim.  He just considered that in that gathering lying was more beneficial that telling the truth and that too is acceptable in Islam.

Muslims are permitted to lie even under oath to promote Islam and when the necessity justifies it. All they have to do for expiation of lying under oath is to feed someone or fast for three days (Q. 5:89). The Quran also says, “Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness (vain) in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts; and He is Oft-forgiving, Most Forbearing.” (Q. 2:225). So if the intent is to advance Islam all lies are permissible.

Imam Ghazzali (1058-1111), arguably the greatest Islamic scholar noted, “Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If praise worthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible.”

Mo’s deception had no bounds. He even went as far as saying “I have been fighting for gay rights for 15 years. Many people are surprised by that.”  If it were true, it would be very surprising.  But it is not true.  In at least five places the Quran condemns homosexuality in the severest term and in 4:16, it says, punish them both, unless they repent and amend.

Mo’s audience however, was not fooled. One person noted, “He is just pandering to the audience, saying things he thinks the audience likes to hear. He thinks we are all dimwits.”

Was Mo Ansar really sincere? In the same documentary, (minutes 25) when Tommy Robinson said, there are certain verses in the Quran that glorify murder, rape and slavery and suggested that these verses should be phased out, Mo blamed the lack of understanding of the Quran and not the Quran itself. How can “slay the unbelievers wherever you find them, let them find harshness in you,” or beat your wife if you fear she is thinking of disobeying you” can be interpreted in any other way?   The Quran is a book of hate and violence.  Mo knows it, but he hides the truth.

Mo’s insincerity was put to the litmus test by a fellow Muslim, Maajid Nawaaz, who asked him whether he agreed with the Quranic law of chopping the limbs of a thief and other barbaric laws such as stoning. Mo first tried to play taqiyah and said he wouldn’t, but when pressed, he began stuttering and tried to evade the answer by saying he would seek the consensus of the ulama.  It became clear that he was lying all along.  He would not go against any of the teachings of the Quran, even when they are all barbaric and inhumane.

What about Maajid Nawaaz? He had no problem saying some of the teachings of the Quran are morally reprehensiblec. This is quite a statement for a Muslim. Is he sincere? Maajid is the chairman of Quilliam Foundation, a self-styled organization that claims to counter Islamic extremism.

He was a recruiter of Hizbul Tahrir, a terrorist organization, and an advocate for Islamic caliphate for 13 years. He says that he was reformed while serving a five years jail sentence in Egypt for his political activities. Now he claims that he rejects extremism and is a moderate Muslim.

Taqiyah is like an onion. One layer hides another layer, which hides yet another layer and so on and so forth.  There is nothing surprising for a Muslim to realize Islam is not compatible with our time and leave it.  I made the transition myself and have helped thousands to do it.  However, those who come to see the truth, leave Islam. They don’t go around promoting a moderate version of Islam. There is no such thing. You either accept the inhuman and backward teachings of Islam or you don’t accept Islam at all.

Maajid claims to be a Muslim who rejects the Sharia. He is not alone. There are a few more in Canada and USA who make such claim. Among them are, Tarik Fatah, Irshad Manji, Zuhdi Yaser, just to name a few.  Can these people be trusted? Can a Muslim reject any part of the Quran?

We have to understand that there is a big difference between Islam and Christianity or Judaism. Muslims believe that the Quran is the verbatim word of God. Jews and Christians believe their sacred texts were written by humans who were inspired by God.  This is a crucial distinction. So while a Jew or a Christian can reject an outdated part of his scripture as the error of its authors, a Muslim does not have that luxury.  Muslims can’t pick and choose. Allah in the Quran asserts, “Today have I perfected your religious law for you, and have bestowed upon you the full measure of My blessings, and willed that self-surrender unto Me shall be your religion.” (Q.5:3).  How can one add or subtract to what God has perfected? That idea is preposterous to Muslims.

Another verse says, “Do you, then, believe in some parts of the divine writ and deny the truth of other parts? What, then, could be the reward of those among you who do such things but ignominy in the life of this world and, on the Day of Resurrection? They will be consigned to most grievous suffering. For God is not unmindful of what you do.” (Q.2:85)

It is unlikely that Maajid and his fellow so called moderate Muslims don’t know this. So how can they call themselves Muslim and reject the clear laws of the Quran? They are playing another layer of taqiyah. Their goal is not to reform Islam, something they know is impossible, but to buy legitimacy and more time for it until they become the majority and take over the world. I sounded the clarion about the danger of Islam 16 years ago, and now I warn you again that these so called moderates are wolves in sheep clothing. Don’t fear the terrorists. Fear the enemy within.

Muslims are allowed to reject part or all of Islam and even malign their prophet in order to deceive their victims. Bukhari 5:59: 369 narrates that in Medina there was a young handsome man, a leader of the Jewish tribe of Bani Nadir, by the name of Ka’b ibn Ashraf. After Muhammad banished their sister tribe of Bani Qainuqa from the city, Ka’b went to Mecca seeking protection from the Quraish. When Muhammad heard the news he went on his pulpit and said, “who is willing to kill Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?”  Thereupon Muhammad bin Maslama got up saying, “O Allah’s Apostle! Would you like that I kill him?” The Prophet said, “Yes,” Muhammad bin Maslama said, “Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Kab). “The Prophet said, “You may say it.” Then Muhammad bin Maslama went to Kab and said, “That man (i.e. Muhammad) demands alms from us, and he has troubled us, and I have come to borrow something from you.”

The story goes on to say how ibn Maslama deceived Ka’b by badmouthing his prophet and when Ka’b trusted him, he and other Muslims, among them Ka’b’s own foster brother who had converted to Islam stabbed him to death.  By denouncing the Quran, Maajid is not doing anything unIslamic. He is taking his deception to a higher level.

The deception has paid off handsomely. Instead of serving time in jail Maajid now shakes hands of George W. Bush and Tony Blair, is a chairman of a respectable foundation, and has run for MP in UK.  He is far more effective in destroy the western civilization from within, through taqiyah than by placing bombs in buildings and busses.

Could I be mistaken? Have I come to a hasty decision? I invite Maajid Nawaaz to show my error and prove to the world that he is not deceiving them. Maybe I too will join his Quilliam organization and support his efforts. If he is sincere, he will accept this invitation. But based on my experience with “moderate Muslims,” I have a feeling that Maajid’s reply will be a deafening silence.

There is no such thing as moderate Islam. This is the ultimate taqiyah. Falling into this trap is deadly. It may cost your liberty and your life. Moderate Islam is an oxymoron. It is as attainable as perfumed dung; although I may be wrong about the latter.





In comparison to the above here is a muslim comment to Quilliam

from October 9, 2013

Quilliam Foundation: Never has a British Muslim organisation been more reviled
Posted by 5Pillarz (@RMSalih):

Founded in 2007, Quilliam styles itself as a Muslim counter extremism think-tank with the explicit goal of removing the “poison of Islamism” from British Muslim discourse and promoting a peaceful, spiritual form of Islam which is at ease with the modern western world.

It was fronted by two “ex extremists” and Hizb ut Tahrir activists Ed Husain and Maajid Nawaz but initially struggled to make any impact because of a lack of funding.

But the pair soon spotted an opportunity to secure government backing because the state was looking for a “Muslim partner” that would deflect attention from its wars abroad and their role in fomenting growing British Muslim radicalisation. Instead the government wanted a credible partner to put the focus on the Muslim community itself. Quilliam obliged.
Maajid Nawaz of the Quilliam Foundation

Maajid Nawaz of the Quilliam Foundation

In the following years  QF pocketed around a million quid a year, Husain and Nawaz paid themselves handsome salaries, expanded the organisation and were a regular feature of BBC studios and right-wing newspaper columns.

During their heyday they managed to annoy virtually every strand of British Muslim opinion from the salafis to the ikhwaanis and other Islamists, but also the  Sufis and the apolitical.

They did this by attacking virtually every active Muslim group and harping on relentlessly about Muslim extremism, while ignoring or minimizing the impact of British foreign policy. And they did this while pocketing a hefty cheque from the British government while implausibly claiming to be maintaining a distance from it.

But by 2010 the British government funding had dried up because of the necessities of economic austerity but also, I suspect, because Downing St  realised that Quilliam’s message wasn’t gaining traction with Muslims (and especially those vulnerable to radicalisation) and its impact on the ground was zero or minimal.

So with the dosh no longer readily available Ed Husain buggered off to the right-wing Council of Foreign Relations in America and Quilliam had to cut back on its staff and projects.

Meanwhile, Maajid Nawaz had time to pen a rather naff and vain autobiography and has announced he will stand as  a Liberal Democrat candidate at the next general election.

Yet Quilliam soldiered on, with less media attention and less obvious fanfare, but with the occasional blitz of publicity like yesterday’s fun-and-games with Tommy Robinson. It’s no longer the constant, offensive in-your-face presence it once was, but it’s still occasionally bloody annoying.

Failure

So why did Quilliam fail?

Firstly, Muslims don’t like seeing other Muslims going on national TV and the right-wing media constantly criticising their own while sucking up to the establishment. Even Muslims (like myself) who believe it’s necessary for us to look in the mirror quickly get turned off with relentless self-hating.

Secondly, the facts that Quilliam had no grassroots support, were hardly seen at community events (probably for their own protection), and were artificially created and amplified by  government finances made them transparent frauds in the eyes of the community.
Ed Husain

Ed Husain

Thirdly, they probably annoyed a lot of  “sell-out” Muslim organisations who were also after government money but couldn’t get it because Quilliam had cornered the market.

In many ways this was a shame because the Muslim community is getting more radicalised and insular as the years pass by and its relationship with the British state is getting more problematic.

And there is a need for an organisation which has roots in the community, is loyal to it, is critical of the government and Islamophbia, yet also still seeks to address the real problems that exist in the community itself.

But Quilliam – which is unrepresentative, disloyal and compromised by government finances – certainly ain’t that organisation.

Islamophobia

So I found myself watching the “Tommy and Maajid” show yesterday with a permanent ironic smile.

Here were two people who were theoretically polar opposites but who in reality are basically the same – extremists posing as moderates who should be given a medal by the Queen for services to Islamophobia.

But you know what, I think I prefer Tommy Robinson’s blatant, ignorant retarded form of Islamophobia to Maajid Nawaz’s subtle, suave and sophisticated version.


Here some comments to the above:

Petra Thompson · Top Commenter
of course @RMSalih doesn't mind 100s of other muslim organisations having their snout in the trough of government funding. But perish the thought one of those muslim organisations might have something critical to say about the rest being proponents of islamic nazism.
Reply ·
· 13 · October 9, 2013 at 10:39am

    Yusuf Ibrahim
    at the height of the muslim empire, the jews were flocking to jerusalem knowing full well that the muslims would protect them. go elarn history u dumb idiot
    Reply ·
    · 11 · October 9, 2013 at 2:49pm


Klevius comment: Who is the 'dumb idiot' really? History tells us that the expelled Jews and the muslims had one thing in common, the slave market which constituted the very backbone of islamic finance and prosperity!


And here's the bottomline: The Saudi initiated, based and steered OIC (all muslims' world organization due to its UN sanctioned Sharia) and its islamofascist Fuhrer Iyad Madani.



Also do note that Klevius has been the earliest and most successful critic of OIC on the web.




The majority of Google info on 'oic sharia' is there thanks to Klevius - not BBC etc! Since a decade back!

Thursday, May 15, 2014

Islam is today Human Rights violating Saudi Arabia (OIC) and its Salafist terror organizations around the world. And you can't do anything about it unless you subscribe to secular and universal Human Rights!




These women are fascists if they oppose Universal Human Rights and propose apartheid and sex slavery (Sharia)! Or are they just that stupid - or misled by their menfolk?!


Klevius says islam smears Human Rights!


Islam and Saudi Arabia made Boko Haram's* atrocities possible


The faith world in general (plus some remaining "third world" inferiority complex) is the main reason medieval backward islam is still allowed to exist. We don't allow National Socialist German Workers' Party** (called Nazism by socialists so to cover the socialist roots) either, do we! Btw, the socialist roots are clearly visible in their 25 points program (shown furthest down on this posting).



Is this man the world's most evil? His organization certainly is because it criminalizes the most basic of Human Rights, hence opening up for racist and sexist attacks around the whole world!


This is Iyad Madani, the Saudi Sharia fanatic Fuhrer of all the world's muslims' world organization, the Saudi based OIC. Its main objective is and has always been to violate Human Rights and to replace them worldwide with Sharia. This means that the most basic of Human Rights are criminalized in islam because they are against racist/sexist islamofascist Sharia. Got it!

Saudi initiated, Saudi based, and Saudi steered OIC (islam) was created as a bulwark against Universal Human Rights because islam is not possible if it has to remove its racism and sexism in accordance with Human Rights.

The most disastrous tipping point was when OIC managed to turn UN from a bastion for the defense of Universal Human Rights into its very opposite, namely in practice an islamic mosque (OIC now constitutes the biggest voting bloc within UN) based on Sharia (via the so called Cairo declaration on "human rights in islam").  

In Saudi Arabia a woman can earn a phd in Sharia islam while still remaining equally oppressed as the women at the alleged Mohammed's medieval time!


60% of university students in Saudi Arabia are women but almost all of them are then functioning  as Sharia teachers of girls to become obedient muslim Saudi sex slaves women (also compare the fate of the evil Saudi "king's" daughters). 85% of employed Saudi women work in (girl's) education, and 95% in the "public sector" mainly as Sharia guardians of girls and other women. The first group of women graduated from a law (Sharia) program in 2008 but they are not able to practice law, but 'possibly' work in courts to Sharia "assist" other women.

A few years ago an "expert on girls' education" (Sharia), Nora bint Abdullah al-Fayez, became the first female minister in Saudi Arabia. She was made deputy education minister in charge of a new Sharia department for female students.


The dirty bigoted and hypocritical thinking of Saudi Arabia's top cleric


Sheikh Abdulaziz Al al-Sheikh, Saudi Arabia’s grand mufti opens his bigoted and hypocritical mouth about Boko Haram: “These groups are not on the right path because Islam is against kidnapping, killing and aggression,” he said. “Marrying kidnapped (muslim) girls is not permitted.”

Klevius: No, it isn't. But enslaving infidels is ok. And no matter if you are an infidel or a muslim girl, you will be lawfully raped under Sharia. Either in accordance to the Koran's statement of 'what your right hand possesses', or in accordance to the lack of domestic rape in Sharia.

In 2012, Sheikh Abdulaziz Al al-Sheikh issued a fatwa allowing ten year old girls to marry insisting that girls are ready for marriage by age 10 or 12: "Our mothers and grandmothers got married when they were barely 12. Good upbringing makes a girl ready to perform all marital duties at that age."

Sheikh Abdulaziz Al al-Sheikh also announced plans in 2007 to demolish the Green Dome and flatten the tombs housed under it, including the alleged but not existing one of Muhammad.

In 2012, Sheikh Abdulaziz Al al-Sheikh declared that, "All churches in the Arabian Peninsula must be destroyed". Abdulaziz bin Abdullah cited an Islamic hadith quoting the Prophet Mohammed on his deathbed. However, most of the world overlooked the statement. Mehmet Görmez, the most senior imam in Turkey, saide that the announcement totally contradicted the peaceful teachings of islam. Görmez said that the mufti’s declaration ran "contrary to islamic teachings of tolerance".

Klevius: What peaceful teachings of islam?!

The sheikh has now ruled that further church building should be banned and existing Christian houses of worship should be destroyed.Archbishop Robert Zollitsch, chairman of the German Bishops Conference, said the mufti "shows no respect for the religious freedom and free co-existence of religions", especially all the foreign laborers who made its economy work.

Saudi Arabia bans all non-Muslim houses of prayer, forcing Christians there to risk arrest by praying in private homes. There are churches for Christian minorities in the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman and Yemen.
However, the Saudi "king" Abdullah (Obama's first call as "president") plans to open a controversial centre for interfaith islam diamonologue in Austria.

"How could the grand mufti issue a fatwa of such importance behind the back of his king?" stupid bishops asked. "We see a contradiction between the dialogue being practiced, the efforts of the king and those of his top mufti."

Klevius explanation: So, you don't seem to realize what is said in OIC's Human Rights violating Sharia declaration: Reaffirming the civilizing and historical role of the Islamic Ummah which Allah made as the best community ---  in accordance with the Islamic Shari'ah. - Everyone shall have the right to advocate what is right, and propagate what is good, and warn against what is wrong and evil according to the norms of Islamic Shari'ah.


Background to the continuing survival of barbaric islam and its Human Rights violating Sharia


Muslim countries aided by some other Human Rights violating countries criticized the Universal Declaration of Human Rights for its perceived "failure" to take into account the cultural and religious context of "non-Western" (read non-Human Rights) countries.


BBC's muslim sharia presenter Mishal Husain didn't even mention the real problem in Nigeria namely islamic sharia and that the hate crimes against non-muslims are committed under the sharia umbrella in the muslim majority north of Nigeria. Boko Haram is supported by muslim leaders and therefore more or less out of reach for the government's actions. Nothing about this in Mishal Husain's reporting. Could a journalist and a media company sink any lower.

Klevius: When islam started its enslavement campaign in Africa and elsewhere the main pattern was to bribe local leaders to become muslim slave traders. This is what is behind stupid historians references to 'local people welcomed the muslim invasions'.

BBC: But also muslims have been targeted in Nigeria.

Klevius: No "real" muslims have been targeted at all because Boko Haram follow exactly OIC's (Saudi) Sharia. It was no coincidence that muslim girls "managed to escape" whereas non-muslims did not. Only difference that the Saudis do it via the (dictator) state. Remember the barbaric and extremely intolerant laws against non-muslims in Saudi Arabia. And their bigot and hypocrite top imam who has asked for the destruction of all churchers and other non-islamic buildings and organizations, now pretends to condemn Boko Haram. Disgusting.

BBC: Islam is against forceful conversion.

Klevius: Not at all, islam is all about forceful conversion - except for them it wants to enslave. And in front of the "islamic world", the family, the society, the islamic state or whatever other means, a girl has no say of her own. There simply doesn't exist a Sharia version on this planet that would allow a muslim woman to marry a non-muslim man! Just to mention one of an endless pile of Human Rights violations emanating from evil islam.


A Nigerian voice on Boko Haram


Femi Fani-Kayode: Three years ago I called on the Federal Government to level any city or community that hosted, provided refuge or supported Boko Haram and many not only insulted me but also said that I was far too extreeme. At that time, whilst the doves continued to call for dialogue and understanding with and for Boko Haram I saw them exactly for what they were- evil islamist forces that had foreign-backing and a frightful agenda for our country which was not hidden. I also said that they would never stop until that agenda was effected or until they were utterly crushed and every single one of them was wiped out together with all traces of their evil philosophy. As usual most Nigerians did not understand at the time and they subjected me to all manner of insults. Yet I continued and I warned that if all these things were not done the situation would get far worse. Sadly, three years down the line, I have been proved right.

How did I know? Because I am a student of history and because what Boko Haram is attempting to do is nothing new. It has happened in many other countries over the ages and in those countries the people themselves were forced to make a hard choice- to either fight the evil or to succumb to it and allow it to overwhelm them.

Those that encouraged the Boko monster and fed the islamist beast at the outset and that silently supported and encouraged them in an attempt to destabilise the government and the nation have now become a victim of that hideous monster themselves.

Let us make no mistake about it: the agenda of Boko Haram and those that are behind it, both locally and their international backers, is not limited to northern Nigeria and neither has it ever been. Simply put they wish to conquer the whole country and establish their own caliphate. They wish to impose their strange values and barbaric beliefs on the rest of us by force. There are some leaders in Nigeria, backed by Al Qaeda, the Taliban, Al Shabab and emboldened by Arab money and salifist philosophies, that honestly believe that if Nigeria is not ruled by a northern muslim then there must be no peace or there must be no Nigeria at all

As far as they are concerned it would be better to establish a pre-historic islamic fundamentalist state, like the old Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, where full sharia law is practised and where Boko Haram leads and holds sway, than to have a modern-day secularist Nigerian state where a southern or northern christian or a moderate muslim rules. The underlying philosophy is that some were ”born to rule” and if ”they” cannot rule then they will use ”their” religion and ”their” considerable financial and political arsenal to ”make Nigeria ungovernable”. This is evil and we must resist it. I can never support such an agenda, such a philosophy or such people because as far as I am concerned they are of the devil.

Those that think like that and that espouse such views are worse than the white supremacist Boers of South Africa during the days of aparthied and they are worse than than the fascists of Nazi Germany under Hitler. I believe, and I have always believed, that if Nigeria is to remain one then ALL her ethnic nationalities must be treated as equals, no matter how big or how small, and that the secularity of the state must be preserved. I have always believed that we must keep religion out of politics and that faith, being essentially a personal matter, must never be used as a political tool or as a weapon of destabilisation. Evidently not all share my view. Some believe that religion and ethnicity can and must be used as a means to achieve and preserve political power. Worst still others believe that islamic fundamentalism has a place in our country.

They must either fight this evil called Boko Haram or submit and capitulate to it. They must either insist on a modern-day secular state where all are equal before the law and are protected by the constitution or they accept the violent imposition of the most cruel and barbaric form of an islamic fundamentalist state.


An amazingly stupid defender of the most disastrous of ideologies


Qasim Rashid (a nut head muslim on Fox): The ultimate test asks how well these teachings have played out in Islamic and world history. In one word—amazingly.

Klevius: Indeed. Islam managed during 1,400 years to be the ideology that has committed most slavery, genocides and rapetivism of all! By far! And a quick look at the islamic "world" map proves islam's disastrous effect on everything it has touched upon. Without Western abolishment, technology and oil nothing would be left. Just look at how the Ottoman slave empire sunk into the deepest misery after slavery was forbidden. The Ottoman slave empire's blood was that of its slaves.

Qasim Rashid (a nut head muslim on Fox): Prophet Muhammad’s wife Khadija was not only the first person to accept his claim to prophethood, she ran a thriving trade business as a CEO during his lifetime. She was a leader, an entrepreneur, a mother, and a wife—all in one.

Klevius: How come then that Khadiha was a prosperous CEO and run a thriving trade business BEFORE Mohammed and islam?!


A muslim "human rights lawyer" - the most laughable of oxymorons?


CNN's Arsalan Iftikhar (adjunct professor  imam at of religious studies at DePaul University in Chicago): As a Muslim human rights (sic) lawyer, it is obscene and absolutely un-Islamic for these lunatic human traffickers to invoke the name of God while kidnapping young girls and threatening to sell them into sexual slavery.

Klevius: As a muslim you can NOT be a Human Rights lawyer, only a sharia lawyer. This unchangable fact isn't altered by OIC (all muslims Saudi based and led world organization) calling sharia "islamic human rights"! So either Arsalan Iftikhar blatantly lies you straight up in your face or he is no muslim at all!

Arsalan Iftikhar: The leaders of Boko Haram have clearly never read the Holy Quran, which states quite clearly that “oppression is worse than murder” (2:191) and that nobody “shall force girls to commit prostitution” (24:33).

Klevius: The leader happens to be educated in islamic monotheism at a renowned university. I think he knows exactly what he is doing according to the Koran and Sharia. He actually gives us a modern copy of Mohammed to study!

Arsalan Iftikhar: They must have also missed the numerous times that the Prophet Muhammad categorically stated during his life that women or children were never to be harmed under any situation.

Klevius: No, because they should be used as sex slaves! Btw, by converting to islam Sharia makes it criminal for a woman to marry a non-muslim! This is just one of the "secrets" behind islam's "popularity".

Daniel Greenfield: Mohammed partly financed the expansion of Islam by enslaving and selling girls and women. Boko Haram in Nigeria is following in the way of their prophet by kidnapping and selling hundreds of non-Muslim schoolgirls.

    Qur’an (33:50) – “O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those (slaves) whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee”

This is Islam.

    Fears for the fate of more than 200 Nigerian girls turned even more nightmarish Monday when the leader of the Islamist group that kidnapped them announced plans to sell them.

    “I abducted your girls. I will sell them in the market, by Allah,” a man claiming to be Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau said in a video first obtained by Agence France-Presse.

    “There is a market for selling humans. Allah says I should sell. He commands me to sell. I will sell women. I sell women,” he continued, according to a CNN translation from the local Hausa language.

    “I will marry off a woman at the age of 12. I will marry off a girl at the age of nine,” he said elsewhere in the video.

    Leader Abubakar Shekau warned in a video obtained in March that all students should leave university and girls drop out of school to get married.

    “In Islam, it is allowed to take infidel women as slaves,” Shekau said. “In due course, we will start taking women away.”

    “Access to education is a basic right & an unconscionable reason to target innocent girls,” former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton wrote Sunday on Twitter. “We must stand up to terrorism. #BringBackOurGirls.”

    President Obama is being briefed on the attack, and pressure is mounting worldwide for the Nigerian government to act. Speaking during a visit to Africa, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said the United States “will do everything possible to support the Nigerian government to return these young women to their homes and to hold the perpetrators to justice.”

That’s funny considering how long the State Department resisted naming Boko Haram a terrorist organization and that the Obama contribution to Nigeria’s fight against Islamic terror was to pressure the government to appease it.

Boko Haram has murdered thousands, blown up churches and engaged in horrific atrocities. It’s the deadliest Islamic terrorist group in the region and almost certainly has ties to Al Qaeda.

Despite that, Hillary Clinton dragged her feet when she was Secretary of State and now has contributed nothing except a tweet.


Pamela Geller: On the very day that the devout Muslim group Boko Haram released a video of the kidnapped Nigerian schoolgirls, clad in burkas and being forced to recite the Qur’an, author Dean Obeidallah declared in the Daily Beast that “The Nigerian terrorist group that kidnapped hundreds of schoolgirls has nothing to do with Islam, and it’s grotesquely irresponsible of the media to suggest it does.”

Mr. Obeidallah, it’s not the media that suggests it; it is Boko Haram that declares it.

It is not grotesque to tell the truth. What is grotesque is that the widely-read Daily Beast would run such damaging propaganda by a failed yet self-described "comic."

The Daily Beast is doing an end run for Islamic jihad when these girls’ lives hang in the balance. That is a different kind of savagery. The Beast is more worried about Islam’s PR than it is in educating the public on the most grave threat to freedom, not just in Nigeria but across the world.

Clearly, the hashtag #BringBackOurGirls is just more empty rhetoric from hypocrites, not an honest clarion call for action.

The hashtag shouldn’t be #BringBackOurGirls. The hashtag should be #TellTheTruth.

The question we should be asking is, "Why do Muslims attack those of us that are merely reporting the truth? Why aren't these 'moderates' looking inwards and addressing the Islamic texts and teachings that command jihad instead of providing cover?" It is, in fact, complicity.

Dean Obeidallah and other dissemblers may say that Boko Haram is not Islamic, but Boko Haram (and al-Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Hezb'allah, et al.) says that Obeidallah and less devout Muslims aren't Islamic. In the Muslim world, outside of the ivory towers of media and academia, millions of Muslims agree with Boko Haram. Under Islam, secular Muslims are apostates, punishable by death.


Nonie Darwish: Students who invite experts on Middle Eastern culture and critics of Sharia, like myself, must endure horrific pressure to cancel our invitations. No matter what horror happens under Islam, we end up being dismissed by the Left as “Islamophobes.” The situation in America today is upside down, where we see the American Left tolerating Islamic intolerance and protecting Islam’s dirty little secrets from coming to light. We are not doing Muslims and Islam a favor with this cover-up and appeasement. Blatant atrocities against women by Muslims around the world must be exposed and rejected. It is time for the West to condemn Islamic Sharia law by name.



 * Boko Haram means 'everything non-islamic is bad', in other words not only "Western education". Boko Haram's official Hausa name means 'The Congregation of the People of the Tradition of the prophet Mohammad for Proselytism and Jihad'.


* *  The 25 Points of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NAZI) program (with some hasty islam comparison in brackets by Klevius):

        1. We demand the union of all Germans (muslims) in a Great Germany (world Umma) on the basis of the principle of self-determination of all peoples (muslims).

        2. We demand that the German people have rights equal to those of other nations; and that the Peace Treaties of Versailles and St. Germain shall be abrogated.

        3. We demand land and territory (colonies) for the maintenance of our people and the settlement of our surplus population.

        4. Only those who are our fellow countrymen (muslims) can become citizens. Only those who have German blood (are muslims), regardless of creed (background), can be our countrymen. Hence no Jew can be a countryman.

        5. Those who are not citizens must live in Germany as foreigners and must be subject to the law of aliens.

        6. The right to choose the government and determine the laws (Sharia) of the State (Umma) shall belong only to citizens (muslims). We therefore demand that no public office, of whatever nature, whether in the central government, the province, or the municipality, shall be held by anyone who is not a citizen (who is not a muslim).

        We wage war against the corrupt parliamentary administration whereby men are appointed to posts by favor of the party without regard to character and fitness (without regard to commitment for islam).

        7. We demand that the State shall above all undertake to ensure that every citizen (muslim) shall have the possibility of living decently and earning a livelihood. If it should not be possible to feed the whole population, then aliens (non-muslims) must be expelled from the Reich (muslim neighborhood).

        8. Any further immigration of non-Germans (non-muslims) must be prevented. We demand that all non-Germans who have entered Germany since August 2, 1914, shall be compelled to leave the Reich immediately.

        9. All citizens (all true muslim men) must possess equal rights and duties.

        10. The first duty of every citizen (muslim) must be to work mentally or physically (to follow Sharia). No individual (muslim) shall do any work that offends against the interest of the (muslim) community to the benefit of all (true muslim men).

        Therefore we demand:

        11. That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.

        12. Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in blood and treasure, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as treason to the people. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits.

        13. We demand the nationalization of all trusts.

        14. We demand profit-sharing in large industries.

        15. We demand a generous increase in old-age pensions.

        16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a sound middle-class, the immediate communalization of large stores which will be rented cheaply to small tradespeople, and the strongest consideration must be given to ensure that small traders shall deliver the supplies needed by the State, the provinces and municipalities.

        17. We demand an agrarian reform in accordance with our national requirements, and the enactment of a law to expropriate the owners without compensation of any land needed for the common purpose. The abolition of ground rents, and the prohibition of all speculation in land.

        18. We demand that ruthless war be waged against those who work to the injury of the common welfare. Traitors, usurers, profiteers, etc., are to be punished with death, regardless of creed or race.

        19. We demand that Roman law, which serves a materialist ordering of the world, be replaced by German common law (Sharia).

        20. In order to make it possible for every capable and industrious German to obtain higher education, and thus the opportunity to reach into positions of leadership, the State must assume the responsibility of organizing thoroughly the entire cultural system of the people. The curricula of all educational establishments shall be adapted to practical life. The conception of the State Idea (science of citizenship) must be taught in the schools from the very beginning. We demand that specially talented children of poor parents, whatever their station or occupation, be educated at the expense of the State.

        21. The State has the duty to help raise the standard of national health by providing maternity welfare centers, by prohibiting juvenile labor, by increasing physical fitness through the introduction of compulsory games and gymnastics, and by the greatest possible encouragement of associations concerned with the physical education of the young.

        22. We demand the abolition of the regular army and the creation of a national (folk) army.

        23. We demand that there be a legal campaign against those who propagate deliberate political lies and disseminate them through the press. In order to make possible the creation of a German press, we demand:

        (a) All editors and their assistants on newspapers published in the German language shall be German citizens.

        (b) Non-German newspapers shall only be published with the express permission of the State. They must not be published in the German language.

        (c) All financial interests in or in any way affecting German newspapers shall be forbidden to non-Germans by law, and we demand that the punishment for transgressing this law be the immediate suppression of the newspaper and the expulsion of the non-Germans from the Reich.

        Newspapers transgressing against the common welfare shall be suppressed. We demand legal action against those tendencies in art and literature that have a disruptive influence upon the life of our folk, and that any organizations that offend against the foregoing demands shall be dissolved.

        24. We demand freedom for all religious faiths in the state, insofar as they do not endanger its existence or offend the moral and ethical sense of the Germanic race.

        The party as such represents the point of view of a positive Christianity without binding itself to any one particular confession. It fights against the Jewish materialist spirit within and without, and is convinced that a lasting recovery of our folk can only come about from within on the pinciple:

        COMMON GOOD BEFORE INDIVIDUAL GOOD

        25. In order to carry out this program we demand: the creation of a strong central authority in the State, the unconditional authority by the political central parliament of the whole State and all its organizations.

        The formation of professional committees and of committees representing the several estates of the realm, to ensure that the laws promulgated by the central authority shall be carried out by the federal states.

        The leaders of the party undertake to promote the execution of the foregoing points at all costs, if necessary at the sacrifice of their own lives.

Wednesday, May 14, 2014

Borderline muslims and islam




BBC reports that 'some teachers' have stopped sex segragating etc islamofascist (i.e. against Human Rights) behavior in UK schools


Martin Parsons: It is not for non Muslims to say what is or is not a ‘true’ interpretation of Islam

Klevius: What utter childish nonsense from this "faith phd"! A spectrum of interpretations of islam by muslims can only be defined by contrasting to non muslims. And because muslims call each other "non muslims" (compare the case of Sayeeda Warsi calling muslims 'idiots') then the only ones capable of defining islam have to be non muslims. Just as the only ones capable of critically scrutinizing/researching islam have to be Atheists. However, with a phd in islamism Martin Parsons has excluded himself from understanding islam. He pretends being a non-muslim but is more of a muslim than most muslims.

How does he differ from BBC's muslim presenter Mishal Husain?! 2012 Martin Parsons wrote: Stopping the spread of sharia should be central to British foreign policy!

Klevius question: How does that comply with all muslims sharia organization OIC? A muslim without Sharia is a non-muslim, but unlike non-muslims s/he is also an apostate, i.e. someone who, according toi islam, has committed the worst of crimes. And although not all earthly islam representatives may propose the death sentence, Allah still considers it the worst of crimes.

Oh sorry about that, I forgot that Allah doesn't exist in islam other than as an excuse for earthly atrocities.




Or isn't Mishal Husain a muslim at all? Only a so called "cultural muslim", i.e. an apostate.



Mishal Husain's power position combined with her reluctance to take a stance about islam and Sharia (other than implying that islamic terrorists haven't killed enough Jews in Israel) and her muslimhood makes her the perfect example of a borderline muslim who paves the way for islamic atrocities worldwide while pretending not to be a crucial part of it

 

No wonder that uneducated (about islam and its violation of Human Rights) girls don't understand what a threat islam (and OIC) constitutes to them (many of them do understand it later on in life but then it's too late for them and therefore they usually impose the same on their daughters so not to feel ashamed themselves).

The logic here inevitably makes BBC's Mishal Husain an utter and disgusting hypocrite and bigot no matter whether she is a muslim or an apostate. Sorry about that all of you who have blindfolded yourselves from this important aspect.

Monday, May 5, 2014

It wasn't Boko Haram but islam that sex enslaved the Nigerian schoolgirls!




We do know every form of Sharia is evil because it ALWAYS violates the most basic of Human Rights. However, wouldn't it be interesting to know how BBC's muslim islam presenter Mishal Husain's Sharia differs from Boko Haram's - and who has more support in the Koran, e.g. re. "infidel sex slaves that your right hand possesses"!



Fani-Kayode (a former Minister of Aviation): When some people are prepared to use religion as a political tool, shed as much innocent blood as possible and pervert the very tenets of the faith that they claim to espouse, one must decide whether those of us that do not share their world view are prepared to remain in the same cage as those that are clearly nothing but ravenous beasts.

Klevius comment: They follow Mohammed by the help of their Saudi masters! You know, the Saudi "king" et co who applauded (by blaming the victims) the 9/11 Saudi muslim terrorist attack.



Fani-Kayode: And whether anyone likes to accept it or not there are quite a number of people who fall into the category of Boko Haram sympathizers even though they remain in the shadows. For example there is a very combative, visible and vocal individual from the north-western part of our country who has been accused of covertly funding and supporting the Islamist cause and terrorism for many years.

That same individual was described to the FBI as a ‘’trusted mentor’’ by Umar Faruk Mutallab, the Nigerian ‘’underwear bomber’’, who attempted to blow up a plane filled with passengers as it was about to land in the United States of America a few years ago.

Again that same individual has been accused of having a hand in one of the most heinous and brutal sectarian murders in the history of our country when a young man by the name of Gideon Akaluka, from Benue state, was cold-bloodedly beheaded by a rampaging mob in Kano for supposedly ‘’desecrating the Koran’’. Akaluka’s severed head was paraded on a long pole all over the streets of the city before a cheering and roaring crowd for many hours and the whole gory event was actually video-taped by the perpetrators themselves. Such barbarity has rarely been seen in the history of our country.

Yet this individual has not been brought to justice or even questioned about these matters. Is it any wonder that Boko Haram appears to be going from strength to strength? The truth is that they have many friends in high places and President Goodluck Jonathan himself once alluded to this. Another individual, who was a former Head of State, was quoted as saying the following in 2001-

”I will continue to show openly and inside me the total commitment to the Sharia movement that is sweeping all over Nigeria. God-willing, we will not stop the agitation for the total implementation of the sharia in the country. Muslims should vote at the next Presidential election only for someone who will defend their faith”.


I really do wonder whose freedom they seek to secure and who they are fighting for? Is it the freedom to kill our people and to abduct and enslave our children? Such sentiments and expressions of sympathy for the enemies of our people are a national disgrace and those that express them ought to be called out and held to account.

It is either that we succumb to them, accept their demands, bow to them and allow them to change our way of life or we fight them into the ground, eliminate every single one of them, flush them out, burn the Sambisa forest to the ground, avenge our people, preserve our way of life and restore our self-respect and dignity.

It is either that we accept their evil, concede to the establishment of a Taliban-style Islamic fundamentalist state in the whole of our country and espouse it wholeheartedly or we fight a brutal, bloody, long and righteous war to preserve the unity of our nation, to protect the secularity of our state and to enthrone righteousness and justice.

Klevius question: Wouldn't it save a lot of blood and suffering if you simply got rid of that creepy god you say you share with islam and therefore protect?! There's a crystal clear alternative: Human Rights! No religion can fully accept Human Rights! Religion is Devil's finger. There is no "moderate islam" says Erdogan!







Fani-Kayode: The Haramites of Boko have already made their choice and they made it long ago. And that choice is to subject the Nigerian people to terror, murder, humiliation, carnage and bondage and bring us to servitude and to our knees. They will continue to effect this satanic agenda unless and until we get off our knees, stand up like men and say ”enough is enough”. They will continue to do so unless and until we are ready to say that Nigeria is worth dying for and that we are ready to fight back. May God deliver Nigeria.

Klevius comment: God Allah already has!






Oh. I see Sharia as a means to commit Human Rights violations without being held responsible, thinks Iyad Madani, the Saudi Fuhrer of !


Boko Haram has a deep history of involvement with Saudi Arabia: Muhammad Yusuf found refuge in Saudi Arabia to escape a Nigerian security forces crackdown in 2004; Boko Haram has reportedly received funding with the help of AQIM from organizations in the United Kingdom and Saudi Arabia; and Boko Haram’s spokesman claimed that Boko Haram leaders met with al-Qa`ida in Saudi Arabia during the lesser hajj (umra) in August 2011. More recently, the leader of a Boko Haram cell that was responsible for the November 25, 2012, attack on a church inside a military barracks in Jaji, Kaduna, was in Saudi Arabia during the months prior to the attack.

Boko Haram even has a “diplomatic” presence in Saudi Arabia, in addition to other militant connections. In August 2012, a Boko Haram faction led by Abu Muhammed negotiated in Mecca with a Nigerian government team led by National Security Adviser Sambo Dasuki and advised by General Muhammed Shuwa. President Jonathan has rejected new talks with this faction, however, on the grounds that “there can be no dialogue” with Boko Haram because it is “faceless.” Abu Muhammed’s proposed negotiating team included, among others, the Cameroonian Mamman Nur, who lost a power struggle with Shekau to lead what became the main Boko Haram faction after Muhammad Yusuf’s death in July 2009. Therefore, Abu Muhammed’s claim to represent Shekau’s faction is likely false, and Shekau’s spokesman called Abu Muhammed a “fake” in August 2012.








Muslim born  (apostate?!) Mr X "president" Barry Barakeh Hussain Mohammad Dunham Obama Soetoro (or whatever) defends Boko Haram!


Jessica Rubin: Don't worry.  Boko Haram is not really a terrorist organization, says the State Department.

According to the Obama State Department, Boko Haram isn't really a terrorist organization.  Johnnie Carson, assistant secretary of state for African affairs, testified at subcommittee hearings chaired by Senator Coons, that Boko Haram is not an organized, ideologically driven movement like al-Qaeda and that the violence attributed to Boko Haram is the result of natural social dynamics driven by poverty, social inequality, and police and government brutality and corruption.

Carson dismissed the idea of designating Boko Haram a terrorist organization and claimed that -- despite Boko Haram's repeated statements about its goals of forcing Islam and sharia on Nigeria -- this conflict is driven not by religion, but by "social inequities."  In fact, he went on to urge that the U.S. step up development assistance to "Nigeria's restive Muslim-majority north" as it urged the Abuja government to address grievances underlying violence.
"Boko Haram," by the by, means "Western ways are evil."

If the State Department were to designate Boko Haram as a terrorist group, that would trigger a government-wide U.S. effort to isolate the group and cut off its finances.  But no, Boko Haram is just a "restive" Muslim group with "grievances" which need to be addressed.  Or else what?  Or else (hint, hint) they just might morph into a real ideologically driven terrorist organization like al-Qaeda.

The logic is mind-numbing.  Basically, it boils down to arguing that X is not really a terrorist group because its terrorist activities have a non-ideological basis, and the U.S. had better appease them, or they might just become a real ideologically driven terrorist organization.

This deep thinking is the foreign policy extension of the liberal domestic meme that so-called criminals are just misunderstood, unfairly treated, marginalized victims of social oppression driven by anger and resentment -- as any normal person would be.



Klevius' advice: If you're a Human Rights violating Sharia muslim - why don't you dare to openly admit it or, alternatively, openly commit apostasy. Don't be a coward like Obama! Think about the Nigerian schoolgirls and 1,400 years of continuous islamic enslavement, hate crimes against "infidels", genocides, rapetivism etc, in short, the worst ideological crime history knows about!


Thursday, May 1, 2014

Clayton Lockett who shot Stephanie Neiman twice and buried her alive after repeatedly having raped her friend, has been pitied for days on Google News! Why?




For some two days Google News pitied this black* murderous rapist thug (hate criminal?), with his pic always on top of the news, for possibly suffering some minutes before he died


*  Assuming a white similar thug hadn't got nearly as much - if any publicity other then condemnation for being a "white supremacist" had the victim been black.



Black African-American Clayton Lockett laughed as he murdered white Steve and Susie Neiman's only child, Stephanie Neiman, the teenage girl whom they had taught to stand up for “what was her right and for what she believed in.”  Compare what is said about George Zimmerman below.


Clayton Lockett was convicted of the extraordinary brutal murder of 19-year-old, Stephanie Neiman, in 1999. Neiman was shot during a home invasion, forced to watch her grave being dug, and was buried alive. Lockett was also convicted of raping her 18 year old friend during the violent home
invasion.

Steven and Susie Neiman said that the last 15 years have been "HELL":" Every day we are left with horrific images of what the last hours of Stephanie's life was like. Did she cry out for us to help her? We are left with the knowledge that she needed us and we were not aware of it therefore unable [to] help her."

Clayton Derrell Lockett murdered Stephanie Neiman on June 3, 1999. Stephanie, 19, had just graduated from Perry High School, where she played the saxophone in the band, two weeks earlier.

Neiman and a female friend had stopped to visit another friend named Bobby Boynt, 23, who was at his Perry home with his 9-month-old son.

Clayton Lockett, 23, his cousin, Alfonzo Lockett, 17 and Shawn Mathis, 26, were already there. While Boynt's baby son slept in another room, they had tied up and were beating Boynt.

When Neiman's friend went inside the home they hit her with a shotgun then forced her to call Neiman into the home.

They repeatedly raped Neiman's 18-year-old friend, tied up the two women then used Neiman's truck to take the adults and the baby to a rural part of Kay County. When Neiman refused to give Clayton Lockett the keys to her truck or provide him the alarm code, he ordered Stephanie to kneel while Mathis dug a grave.        

Lockett then shot her. While Neiman lay there screaming, Lockett shot her a second time. Even though she was still breathing, he ordered the other two other black attackers to drag her into the grave and bury her.

Alfonzo Lockett and Shawn Mathis are each serving life terms for their parts in the crime.

On February 28, 2014, the Oklahoma Attorney General's office presented a packet of information at a clemency hearing for Clayton Lockett. It details his long criminal history and the punishment he's received for making threats and misbehaving since being convicted of the murder, including throwing urine and feces at the corrections officers bringing him food.




To put this in a larger context consider what Klevius wrote


Saturday, August 31, 2013

Saudi islamofascists and OIC support war criminal Bashir (Sunni) while trying to murder Assad (Shia) - and so does muslim born (apostate?!) Mr X "president"


Not only is Obama an accomplice* to the 100,000 Syrians already killed - he now wants to kill and victimize even more


* His first call and his first bow as "president" was to the islamofascist Saudi muslim Sunni dictator in the world's worst hate mongering and intolerant nation! 


Muslim born (apostate?!) Mr X "president" Barry Barakeh Hussein Obama Soetoro Dunham (or whatever) said in Cairo many years ago that he "respects" islam. However, he didn't mention which islam and which muslims. Now we all know it is Saudi islam(ofascism)!


And how could anyone who subscribes to Human Rights possibly respect an evil ideology that has spread continuous evilness for some 1400 years and which in all its forms is completely incompatible with the most basic of Human Rights?! A disastrous parasitic slavery ideology that needs both history falsification and criminalization of its critics for its survival!

The racist election propaganda preceding US' by far worst "president" ever, as well as his own lack of moral standing, and bigoted and hypocritical racial hate mongering (compare his background with Jeremiah Wright), as well as his close ties to the worst criminals on Earth, the Saudi and other islamofascists, constitutes the background to understand why he so eagerly wants to cause even more suffering in Syria than he has already caused while blinking the long lasting suffering in Sudan etc.

The fruit of the promotion of black racism?



This proud African-American, Demetrius L. Glenn, together with his friend, beat a small 88-year old World War II veteran, Delbert Belton, brutally to death. What if Belton had managed to defend himself like Georg Zimmerman did?!

Klevius question: If this was a hate crime (and everything indicates it was), who taught him to hate? And why aren't his parents arrested for grave child neglect?! And why did Obama say Trayvon Martin could have been his son?







According to child abuse and neglect considerations Trayvon Martin's parents should be held responsible for their sons premature death.

Just like any parent who lets* their child become a threat to other people.

And just like muslims who pass their own hate raligion to their jihadist kids.

Saudi Mr. Gas? Why doesn't Obama bomb Riyadh?! A good guess is that most of the money paid to murderous muslim terrorists comes from Riyadh!





Wall Street Journal: Officials inside the Central Intelligence Agency knew that Saudi Arabia was serious about toppling Syrian President Bashar al-Assad when the Saudi king named Prince Bandar bin Sultan al-Saud to lead the effort.

Press TV (the main Shia world media which is now forbidden in e.g. UK):
Syrians in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta say Saudi Arabia provided chemical weapons for an al-Qaeda linked terrorist group which they blame for the August 21 chemical attack in the region, a report says.

The article co-authored by a veteran AP reporter, said interviews with doctors, residents, anti-government forces and their families in Ghouta suggest the terrorists in question received chemical weapons via Saudi spymaster Saudi Arabia's intelligence chief Prince Bandar bin Sultan Al Saud.

The report quoted the father of a militant as saying that his son and 12 others were killed inside a tunnel used to store weapons supplied by a Saudi militant leader, known as Abu Ayesha.

The man described the weapons as having a “tube-like structure” while others were like a “huge gas bottle.”


BBC (with tight financial ties to Saudi and other islamofascists via its commercial BBC World section) showcased its professional Saudi supporting propaganda timing for its compulsory license fee paying listeners


While the UK parliament voted on going to war against Syrians, BBC Radio 4 constantly played (al-Qaeda/al-Nusra?) recorded children's screams from an alleged school bombing (sic - why would Assad bomb schools unless it was a mistake or used by muslim terrorists) by the Syrian government that had happened long before. It was during a regular news hour show so chances were many of the MPs might have listened on their personal gadgets and out of curiosity before voting. I.e. an appeal to sidestep logic for emotions in the service of Saudi etc islamofascists use of innocent blood fot their own political agenda. And as we know, the result was very tight and could easily have changed in BBC's and the Saudis etc Sunni islamofascists favor.


And behind it all towers Saudi based OIC (all the world's muslims world organization) which, according to Kerry, now also supports an additional violent attack on the Syrians.





And here are the front soldiers in islam's continuing evil of its evil origin.


Only truly pious (so called "extremist") muslims are truly evil. However, all non-extremist (secularized) "muslims" aren't necessarily good either if they knowingly use the evilness of islam for their own satisfaction. Only ignorant "muslims" can be excused.

While contemplating the pic below, do consider the inevitable fact that islam (in any meaningful form) doesn't approve of our most basic universal Human Rights! That's the main pillar of the problem, dude!


So those muslims who don't fit in either category need to face Erdogan, OIC and Human Rights violating Sharia - or admit they are no real muslims.

Klevius comment: I for one cannot see the slightest space for political islam in a democratic society based on the belief in Human Rights. Can you?


What is it you should see behind the islamofascist smile? 1400 years of Koranic genocides and rapetivism?




Eric Reeves (http://allafrica.com/stories/201308300801.html):

As the world reacts with horror to chemical weapons attacks on civilians in Syria, and watches with grim anticipation as an American military response takes shape, there appears to be little "band-width" for other international news. It is all easy too overlook the much more widespread suffering and civilian destruction in Darfur, an ongoing catastrophe that is accelerating in such a way that humanitarian organizations may soon be compelled to withdraw, leaving an immense vacuum in the provision of food, primary medical care, and clean water. The UN/African Union Mission in Darfur (UNAMID) appears to be in a state of collapse, unable to protect itself or to serve any deterrent or civilian protection purposes. Several events in particular this past week give a sense of how weak this beleaguered force has become and the consequences of allowing Khartoum to create in Darfur an intolerable climate of insecurity. Their implications are analyzed briefly below.

It seems important as well, however, to understand just how misleading the implicit comparisons are between civilian victims of chemical weapons in Syria and the civilian victims of utterly indiscriminate aerial bombardment by the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) of the Khartoum regime-not only in Darfur but in Blue Nile and the Nuba Mountains of South Kordofan as well. In the case of Syria, the strenuous language deployed is a pretext for military action in a region of very considerable geostrategic significance. As a consequence, there has been much talk of how the Assad regime's chemical attacks on the outskirts of Damascus are a "moral obscenity," that they are somehow uniquely "gruesome," that such actions are the ne plus ultra of military barbarism. But such descriptions as used by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry are finally expedient; for presumably Kerry knows full well the consequences of aerial attacks on civilians in Darfur and greater Sudan as a whole. There have been more than 2,000 such confirmed aerial attacks on civilians and humanitarians over the past fifteen years, and this is likely only a small fraction of the actual number of bombings. Many tens of thousands have been killed in these attacks-directly or indirectly-dwarfing the number of casualties from chemical weapons attacks in Syria and even in Iraq during Saddam Hussein's infamous al-Anfal campaign against the Kurds in the late 1980s.

And any comparison of how "gruesome" death is by means of chemical attack on the one hand, and the shrapnel-inflicted wounding of children, women, the elderly on the other, will inevitably be invidious. Histories of the First World War have given us many images, narratives accounts, even poetry representing the agony of mustard gas inhalation; it is without question horrific, indeed "gruesome." But can this justify implicit claims that the nature of death from shrapnel exploding out of crude barrel bombs, inflicting ghastly wounds, is any less "gruesome"? Indeed, it is a pointless and misleading comparison. But if there are those who wish to see photographs of the agony endured by bombing victims-children and women are the most common victims, but they include any and all caught in the broad swathe of crude barrel bombs dropped from an Antonov cargo plane at a height of 5,000 meters-I have posted a number of them on my Tumblr account (caution: many of these are deeply disturbing images, even as they do not include the most "gruesome": http://www.tumblr.com/blog/sudanreeves).

No comments:


Klevius comment to no comments: Who would dare to when people are terrified by the prospect of being classified as "islamophobes" "racists" or whatever hence destroying their reputation and career if showing up on Klevius blogs (this tactics is the trademark of fascism - have you seen Mephisto)? Only the bravest and the stupidiest do.

There was a time when some socialists managed to produce some good politics. That time is no more (read Angels of Antichrist, the most important sociological paper from the last century and Klevius' scary thesis Pathological Symbiosis about the case of Sweden) because of socialism's inherent illogic which inevitably manifests itself through the growth of state etc bureaucracy. What socialists thought of as good socialism was in fact the idea about the (negative - i.e. against impositions and mistreatment) Human Rights, i.e. those very rights socialists have abandoned. Socialist schizophrenia hence is to talk nicely about the weak and the poor while arranging for tax money to end up in the not only useless but even dangerous (see Angels of Antichrist and Pathological Symbiosis) social bureaucracycrazy and its accomplices instead of using it for a general income redistribution. Today the social state is the by far biggest corporation - yet no one outside it regulates it because it gets its political support via an ignorant belief among its socialist voters that it stands for "good socialism".

Klevius also recommend Klevius' Psychosocial Freud Timeline for a much better historical grip on the development of the psycho-state (mainly dealing with children) within the social state.