The Saudi Fuhrer of Saudi based islamofascist OIC

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".

Mrs Theresa May digging a racist/sexist "British" sharia "empire" under the Brexit cliff

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

Wednesday, April 26, 2017

Why is Human Rights defending Klevius called an "islamophobia racist" while the openly racist/sexist war crime committing islamofascist Saudi dictator family is welcomed in UN "to protect women"?!


The world's muslims are kept in a Wahhabi/Saudi hate hostage against the most basic Human Rights. And pointing this out is called "islamophobia".

 
However, ŕecently most news media have joined Klevius in an "islamophobic" stance against that Saudi Arabia was approved as a member of the Commission for the 2018-2022 term by the 54 nations that make up the UN Economic and Social Council. It received 47 votes in a secret ballot, fewer than any other country under consideration but enough to pass the majority threshold.

Most media - except BBC - followed Klevius in condemning the Saudi membership approval.



Muslim identity all over the world is ruled by the islamofascist Saudi dictator family which possesses OIC and "islam's holy places" - and is aided by Western politicians. This fact is never weighed in in the frenetic campaign against "islamophobia" which the islamofascist Saudi dictator family itself has initiated and boosted - and which ignorant people around the world seem to believe in thanks to their politicians etc. "teaching" them to do so, and the simultaneous media suppressing and faking info about sharia islam and real Human Rights..

The Saudi weapons are:

1 OIC sharia against Human Rights via UN, politicians, universities, mosques etc.

2 Oil sharia via investments and weapons trade.

3 Although the Saudi military is among the most incompetent (especially compared to money spent) the real military power of the islamofascist Saudi dictator family resides in its sponsoring of worldwide islamic hatred - as well as much of the weaponry used for this hatred. But the real "smartness" of the Saudi military terrorist strategy is that it most often doesn't even need to arrenge for weapons because bombs (incl. fire-bombs), knives, acids etc. are cheap and easy to access/produce.

4 The Koran which is full of useful statements about how to hate, rape, murder etc. so called "infidels".

5 An illiterate Arabic speaking "prophet" whose main asset was the jhihad sword (compare the Saudi flag).

6 The status as "custodians" of Mecca with its muslim Haji idolatry points such as e.g. Kaaba and Mina, and Medina where islam started by slaughtering and raping all the Jews there..


The islamofascist war crimes committing and global islamic hate mongering Saudi dictator family not only attacks its Western "allies" by supporting islamic terror and sharia, it also keeps all the world's muslims hostage via it controlling OIC, UN, mosques, universities, politicians etc. around the world precisely by using its position as "the guardians of islam" (the so called "holy places" Mecca and Medina, where Mohammad started his slaughtering and raping conquest).


Drawing from 1979 by Peter Klevius

Peter Klevius has during all of his life fought for women's rights - as part of the overall fight for Universal Human Rights equality. However, he could never imaging that the world would be steered by oil wealthy Saudi islamofascist in 2017 - and that defending Human Rights would be called "islamophobia"..


Sunday, April 23, 2017

Muslims are fleeing islam - and carrying it with them


Is the Pope a 'useful idiot'?




William Kilpatrick: A reader asked for some specific practical ways that Catholics could resist Islam. I replied with a short list of steps Church leaders could take:

Break off dialogue with Muslim Brotherhood-linked groups such as ISNA and ICNA. Stop lending them legitimacy.

Stop backing the phony “Islamophobia”/hate crimes campaign manufactured by Islamist groups. The “Islamophobia” campaign is aimed at shutting down all legitimate examination and criticism of Islam.

Develop apologetics and educational materials that will provide Catholics with a fuller understanding of Islam.

Develop programs in Catholic schools, colleges, and seminaries that will better inform Catholics about Islam. Currently, most Catholic schools are acting as apologists for Islam—simply echoing the Islamic apologists.

Catholic refugee resettlement programs should concentrate on resettling Christian refugees from Muslim countries. Catholic encouragement of Muslim migration to Europe has already had disastrous results and may eventually lead to the extinction of Catholicism in Europe.

Catholic media need to present a more balanced picture of Islam. For the most part, the Catholic fourth estate simply seconds the Islam-positive view of the USCCB.

At that point I realized that these suggestions would not even be considered by the great majority of the Catholic leadership. They would be dismissed out of hand as both unnecessary and discriminatory. In short, Catholic leaders won’t take steps to resist Islam because they see no reason to resist it.


Klevius: Much like Harvard professors showered by Saudi sharia oil money.



No other country has a proportional influence over Harvard even close to that of the islamofascist war crime committing Saudi dictator family and its sharia hate mongering and intolerance.


Stephen M. Walt is the Robert and Renée Belfer professor of international (pro-Saudi) relations at Harvard University. He offers 'Top Five Reasons There Is No Islamic Threat'.

1: The Balance of Power Is Overwhelmingly in Our Favor. Let’s start with some good old-fashioned power politics. Imagine for the moment that all of Islam was in fact united in an effort to overwhelm the United States and the rest of the West. If they really were united, do the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims have the capacity to do so? Hardly.

Klevius correction of this fake (or just ignorant) "info": They are united under islam and islam's "custodian" is the islamofascist Saudi dictator family who also possesses all muslims' world Umma organization, Saudi based and steered OIC and its sharia "human rights" via UN.

There are 47 Muslim-majority countries in the world. If you add all of their economies together, they have a combined GDP of slightly more than $5 trillion. That sounds like a lot, but remember that the United States has a GDP of more than $17 trillion all by itself and so does the European Union. In terms of raw economic power, in short, the “West” has this fictitious coalition of Muslim states out-matched from the start.

Klevius correction of this fake (or just ignorant) "info": US economy is a house of cards glued together with printed papers called dollars and bonds. When Saudi & Co steered OPEC strands the dollar, its world currency status implodes while heavily staining the bonds. Effect being similar to when the World Trade towers came down by Saudi hands.

The imbalance is even more striking when it comes to military capability. This same imaginary coalition of Muslim-majority countries spent roughly $270 billion on defense last year, and if you take out U.S. allies like Saudi Arabia ($87 billion) and the United Arab Emirates ($22 billion), the number drops to less than $200 billion. By contrast, the United States alone spent roughly $600 billion — more than twice as much — and that’s not counting its various allies like the United Kingdom, Japan, Israel, or others.

Klevius correction of this fake (or just ignorant) "info": Islam has proved to be militarily much more effective than the US. The war on islamic terror sponsored by the islamofascist Saudi dictator family (plus some other muslim "states") has no end in sight.

But these raw figures on defense spending greatly understate the West’s advantage. The entire Muslim world produces no indigenous advanced combat aircraft (though Turkey produces some U.S.-designed F-16s under license) and no indigenously designed modern battle tanks (though Pakistan makes a modified Chinese tank and Turkey is working on one of its own). The navies of the Muslim world have no major surface combatants larger than a frigate (though Iran is reportedly building a single destroyer), no aircraft carriers, no long-range bombers, and no nuclear submarines. Indeed, the power projection capabilities of all of these states are extremely limited. And to the extent that these states have much modern military power, it is because the United States, France, the U.K., China and others have been willing to sell or license advanced weaponry, for various strategic reasons of their own. Yet Saudi Arabia’s unimpressive performance in its recent intervention in Yemen suggests that the Muslim world’s capacity to project power even short distances is quite modest.

Klevius correction of this fake (or just ignorant) "info": Well, in Yemen the islamofascist Saudi dictator family kills innocent children without coming any further precisely because the enemy is their own creation. The Saudi military efficiency is called islamic terror and extremely effective. Moreover, Mr. Walt has no clue about how effective because the numbers of "successful" street jihad resulting from Saudi hate mongering/sponsoring is impossible to estimate, not the least because of this strange dumbness and "sensitivity" about islam that Walt himself encourages.

Thus, even if one started with the wholly unrealistic assumption that the Muslim world is a single unified movement, it’s much, much, much weaker than we are. Maybe that explains why foreign powers have intervened in Muslim-majority countries repeatedly over the past couple of centuries, while the reverse hasn’t occurred since the siege of Vienna in 1529. Not once. It wasn’t Egypt that invaded France in 1798; Saddam Hussein didn’t send a mighty expeditionary force around the world and up the Potomac to occupy Washington and depose George W. Bush in 2003; and Muammar al-Qaddafi didn’t order his air force to bomb Paris in order to oust Nicolas Sarkozy in 2011. Surely this one-sided history tells you something about the relative power of Western states and those from the Islamic world.

Klevius correction of this fake (or just ignorant) "info": Incredibly stupid - what has happened with Harvard? On the contrary, we are much weaker, because of resting our moral on universal Human Rights and "freedom of religion"! So the only way out is to make the muslims respect us as much as we respect them. And yes, that would be the end of sharia islam in any meaningful form - sorry about that. Potomac? The enemy has long since already entered Harvard!

2. Islam Is, in Fact, Deeply Divided. From time immemorial, threat inflators like Bannon & Co. have portrayed adversaries as part of some grand unified coalition. Remember the “communist monolith” or the “axis of evil?” Today, fearmongers use phrases like “Islamofascism” or “radical Islam” to imply that our enemies form a tightly integrated and centrally directed movement working tirelessly to bring us to our knees.

Klevius correction of this fake (or just ignorant) "info": No need, islam is islamofascism! As Erdogan use to say, there's only one islam. And it's not so much that the Saudis want 'to bring us to our knees', but rather that the islamofascist Saudi dictator family's own survival and expansion rests on the evil (compare islam's bloody origin for the sole purpose of getting booty and slaves) religious tool called ïslam.

But in reality, the Islamic world is more disunited today than at any time in recent memory. It is divided among many different states, of course, and many of those states (e.g., Iran and Saudi Arabia, or Turkey and Syria) don’t get along. There are vast geographic and cultural differences between Indonesia and countries like Yemen or Morocco or Saudi Arabia. There’s also the core division between the Sunnis and the Shiites, not to mention a number of other minor schisms between various Islamic offshoots. And let’s not forget the sometimes-bitter rivalries within the jihadi movement itself, both across the globe and within particular countries. Just look at all the radical groups who hate the Islamic State, and all the jihadis whom the Islamic State regards as heretics because they don’t embrace its full ideology.

Klevius correction of this fake (or just ignorant) "info": Islam has since its origin been deeply divided in its hate based existence. But there has always been someone at the top benefiting the most - and today it's the islamofascist Saudi dictator family and its evil friends and collaborators.

These divisions do not mean extremists pose no danger at all, of course, but Bannon’s specter of a rising Islamic tide that threatens to overwhelm us is pure fantasy. Instead of treating all of Islam as a threat — which might eventually unite more of them against us — the smart move is to play “divide-and-conquer.” But that means recognizing that the danger we face is not a hostile “civilization” or an entire religion, but rather just a small number of extremists who are unrepresentative of the larger cultural category (and opposed by most of it). To beat them, we want the rest of the Muslim world on our side.

Klevius correction of this fake (or just ignorant) "info": Quite the contrary again! It's yours and other idiots' defense of "the great and peaceful religion" that keeps its evil ticking. And 'the rest of the muslim world' is on their side precisely by sharing this same sharia islam. Moreover, every muslim is, as it stands now, "excused" and even hailed  as long as s/he says 'it's not my islam' or 'you're no muslim, Bro'. However, islam has equally many different understandings as there are muslims, but only one book and only one "prophet" which both perfect models.

3: You wouldn’t know it if you listened to Trump, to CNN, to Fox News, or to most of our politicians, but the danger of terrorism is miniscule. Not zero, but really, really small. We’ve been obsessed with terrorism ever since 9/11 but the reality is that the risk it poses is way, way, way down the list of possible harms that might befall us.

Klevius correction of this fake (or just ignorant) "info": Especially if you only steer at the visible part of the iceberg.

For example, based on the evidence since 9/11 (and including that attack), the likelihood an American will be killed by a terrorist is less than 1 in 3 million per year, and the lifetime risk is about 1 in 45,000. That’s pretty damn good odds: You are much more likely to die from being struck by lightning, falling out of bed, a heat wave, or accidentally choking on food. But don’t expect Trump, Bannon, Flynn, Gorka, Gaffney, or any of the well-compensated “terrorism experts” to highlight this fact, because their livelihoods and their ability to seize more and more power depends on keeping you very, very scared. And don’t expect the media to downplay the danger either, because hyping terrorism whenever it does occur is a good way to get your eyeballs glued to the screen. (Among other things, this is why Trump’s recent statements suggesting terrorism was being “underreported” are so absurd.)

Klevius correction of this fake (or just ignorant) "info": What do you know about "under reported"? As a criminologist and sociologist Klevius knows for sure that crimes that are popular among politicians etc. are always considered "under reported" (compare the incest hysteria of the 1980s and 90s) whereas the opposite is true when there's a will to blink crimes (compare muslim sex abuse - allowed against "infidels" according to the Koran and the "prophet").

In some ways, in fact, terrorism remains the perfect bogeyman. It’s easy to hype the threat, and to convince people to worry about random dangers over which they have little or no control. Unscrupulous politicians have long understood that you can get a lot of leeway when the people are scared and craving protection, and it’s pretty clear that Trump and Bannon see this tactic as the ideal way to retain public support (and to consolidate more presidential power), and the specter of terrorism serves well because it scares people but isn’t actually an existential threat that might require a serious, sensible, strategic, and well-thought response. For would-be authoritarians, “terrorism” is a gift that just keeps giving.

Klevius correction of this fake (or just ignorant) "info": That's precisely why we should talk much more about the Saudi based and steered OIC and its world sharia via UN etc.

Don’t get me wrong: I’m not saying the danger is zero or that sensible precautionary measures should not be taken. But to believe that ragtag radicals like al Qaeda or the Islamic State constitute a threat on a par with Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, or some of the serious opponents the United States has faced in the past is silly. Frankly, it makes me question the guts, steadiness, and judgment of some of our present leaders, if they are so easily spooked by such weak adversaries. Let’s hope these fraidy-cats never have to deal with a truly formidable foe.

Klevius correction of this fake (or just ignorant) "info": Poor blind man who can't even see the enemy. How could he ever understand the threat?

4: “Creeping Sharia” Is a Fairy Tale. Die-hard Islamophobes have a fallback argument: The danger isn’t an actual military attack or a Muslim invasion of America or Europe. Rather, the danger is the slow infiltration of our society by “foreigners” who refuse to assimilate and who will eventually try to impose their weird and alien values on us. One sees this argument in the right-wing myth of “creeping Sharia,” based on trumped-up (pun intended) stories about “Sharia courts” and other alleged incidents where diabolical Muslim infiltrators have tried to pollute our pristine Constitution with their religiously inspired dogma. If we’re not ceaselessly vigilant, we are told, someday our daughters will be wearing hijabs and we’ll all be praying to Mecca.

Klevius correction of this fake (or just ignorant) "info": Or being killed, or mistreated in a variety of possible ways when the percentage of muslims in the public sphere - not to mention officials - increase and therefore also the chances for so called "extremist muslims" facing you.

Seriously, this anxiety almost sounds right out of Dr. Strangelove, and especially Brig. Gen. Jack D. Ripper’s rants about fluoridation and the need to protect our “precious bodily fluids.” To repeat: There is simply no evidence of “creeping Sharia” here in the United States, and no risk of it occurring in the future. Not only do we still have formal separation of church and state here (at least so far!), the number of Muslims in the United States remains tiny. According to a 2016 Pew Research Center survey, there are only 3.3 million Muslims living in the United States, a mere 1 percent of the population. That percentage might double by 2050 to a vast, enormous, dangerous, and overwhelming 2 percent. Being a tiny minority makes them ideal victims for ambitious power-seekers, but hardly a threat to our way of life.

Klevius correction of this fake (or just ignorant) "info": So why does UK have a problem with its many sharia courts? To an extent that even the PM is behind it - although missing the point by having a sharia muslim investigating sharia muslims. How exactly does US differ so much from UK's muslim sharia problem?

5: The “Clash of Civilizations” Is a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy. The final reason to reject Bannon and company’s depiction of a vast and looming Muslim threat to us is that this worldview encourages us to act in ways that make the problem worse instead of better. As George Kennan wisely observed in 1947, “It is an undeniable privilege of every man to prove himself right in the thesis that the world is his enemy; for if he reiterates it frequently enough and makes it the background of his conduct he is bound eventually to be right.” If U.S. leaders keep demonizing an entire religion, impose ill-considered bans on Muslim refugees, and most important of all, continue to intervene throughout the Arab and Islamic world with military force, they will convince more and more people that Osama bin Laden, Khalid Sheikh Muhammed and Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi were right when they claimed the West had “declared war” on their religion.

Klevius correction of this fake (or just ignorant) "info": 'Entire religion'?! What a classic in the hopeless strive to defend the undefendable. If the core and origin of the religion is its evil, then how would this evil be lesser by referring to a surrounding muslim gray zone? Hopeless because islamic sharia, in whatever Human Rights violating form, is unacceptable in a civilized society where we intend to respect each-others as equals. Klevius thinks so, the European Court of Human Rights thinks so, and no one can logically think differently without slipping into a racist/sexist hate swamp.

Despite the mountain of evidence that shows that anti-Americanism in the Muslim world is overwhelmingly a response to U.S. policy (and not because they “hate our freedoms”), people like Bannon, Gaffney, and their ilk want us to double down on the same policies that have inspired extremists since the 1950s and especially since the formation of al Qaeda. Frankly, given how often we’ve used our superior power to interfere in these countries, it’s somewhat surprising the reaction has been as modest and manageable as it is. Ask yourself how Americans might react if a powerful foreign country had repeatedly bombed the continental United States with aircraft and drones, or invaded, toppled our government, and then left chaos in their wake. Do you think a few patriotic Americans might be tempted to try for some payback?

Klevius correction of this fake (or just ignorant) "info": Islam hates the most basic Human Rights. This is the very allure of islam's original inborn racism and sexism.

Perhaps the most important task for any strategist is to figure out what the main threats and opportunities are, and then to devise policies that can defuse the former and exploit the latter. Making all of Islam our enemy and viewing the world through the lens of a vast “civilizational clash” fails on both criteria. If followed, it will bog us down in more interminable conflicts in places that are not vital U.S. interests, distract us from other foreign-policy issues, and sap the wealth and strength that we may need to deal with more serious challenges, including long-neglected problems here at home. I’m sure plenty of anti-Americans are hoping that we take the bait and do just that; what scares me is that there are now people in the White House who agree with them.

Klevius correction of this fake (or just ignorant) "info": Read my pen, dear Walt! The main threat is sharia islam and the main vaccine is Universal Human Rights equality exactly as stated in the 1948 Human Rights declaration which was agreed on to avoid any sort of totalitarian fascism rising its ugly head again. However, Mr. Walt has apparently missed this most important part in his education.

France is divided - only islam is not

The islamofascist Saudi dictator family's islamic hate mongering and its Saudi based and steered OIC world Sunni sharia constitutes the worst threat to France


Islam is a pure racism and sexism based totalitarian ideology protected by a disguise as a religion. Supporting the Saudi muslim hate spreading is against the most basic of Human Rights!






Klevius: When assessing islam, don't do it by assessing your muslim friend. S/he is your friend only because s/he either isn't a true muslim or s/he just covers her/his true identity (compare all the reports about muslim terrorists whose friends"never suspected it"). Instead, help your "muslim" friend by getting her/him "out of the closet". And perhaps most importantly, islam in whatever meaningful form of sharia, is always against the most basic of Human Rights in the Universal 1948 Human Rights Declaration.

'There's only one islam' is the message we are told.

And if we are to believe France's "best ally" in Mideast, the islamofascist Saudi dictator family, shia muslims are no muslims at all. And that the top imam was replaced as Haji preacher in Mecca with an other islamofascist imam with a lesser mouth, doesn't change anything.

Of the two islams, Sunni and Shia, the former is more dangerous because it's pan-Arabic and possesses the "holy places".

Moreover, Sunni islam tend to operate in a continuous, mid‐to‐high intensity manner, seeing war against infidels and apostates as a perennial condition featuring overlapping waves of soft and hard Sunni jihad (e.g. Saudi based and steered OIC on one hand and IS and the Saudi war crime machime on the other).

Importantly, violence perpetrated by Sunni "extremists" is carried out for reasons that are inherent to islam from its very origin. The Koran is pan-Arabic, totalitarian and full of racism against the "infidel" etc. Islam is a hate crime taking cover behind "freedom of religion", and the most dangerous islam supporters are the "reformers" because they only paint a meaningless glossy cover under which the original racist/sexist hate islam can expand.


The current Saudi Grand Mufti (the chief islamic jurist also called mufti al-a’azam in Arabic terminology), Abdul-Aziz ibn Abdullah Aal ash-Sheikh is also the head of the chief Islamic organization in Saudi Arabia established by the Saudi King called “The General Presidency of Scholarly Research and Iftaa”, which is popularly known among the Arabs as “al-Lajnah ad-Daa'imah lil-Buhooth al-'Ilmiyyah wal-Iftaa” (permanent committee for conducting Islamic researches and issuing religious decrees or fatwas).

In an intolerant and xenophobic reference to Zoroastrianism, the pre-Islamic religion in Iran, Grand Mufti Abdulaziz al-Sheikh stated, “We must understand that these (Iranians) are not Muslims, because they are children of Magi and their hostility towards Muslims is age-old, particularly with the people of Sunnah”, as reported in the Saudi daily “Makkah”, which covers local and regional news. It actually goes in Arabic as follows:
يجب أن نفهم أن هؤلاء ليسوا مسلمين، فهم أبناء المجوس، وعداؤهم مع المسلمين أمر قديم وتحديدا مع أهل السنة والجماعة

(We must understand that these are not Muslims, they are the sons of the Magi, and their hostility to Muslims is old and specifically with the Sunnis and the community)

In this religiously bigoted statement, the term 'Magi' implies Zoroastrianism — natively known as Mazdayasna, which is one of the world's ancient religions prevailing in Iran and other Persian lands in the pre-Islamic era. Combining a cosmogonic dualism and eschatological monotheism in a distinctive way, Zoroastrianism had emerged as a monotheistic religion. According to an Iranian census, there are still 25,271 Zoroastrians in the country, as the UAE-based daily The National reported.



Cathy Hinners: Just because the word “interfaith” indicates faith, doesn’t necessarily mean yours, but you can be certain it does mean Islam. Interfaith is to our religious institutions like the words diversity and culture are to our Education system, a disguise called Dawa.  Dawa is the proselytizing of Islam, an obligation that must be performed by all good Muslims. What is a good Muslim?  To infidels or kafirs (all non-Muslims) it would be a pious person that ascribes to the doctrine of their religion, and is accepting, tolerant and respectful of fellow human beings. Not quite. A good Muslim will ascribe to their religious beliefs, which is summed up in the first pillar, the Shahada. “There is no god but Allah, and Mohammed is the Prophet”. But looking deeper, they believe Islam is meant to dominate, not be dominated or equal to any other religion.

In a document called the “Methodology of Dawa” written by Shamim A. Siddiqui and published in 1989, the true objective is indisputably clear. There must be an Islamic Movement in the United States, and Dawa is the path to that goal. The below excerpts are from this book, and are some of the more revealing ones.

From the Introduction of the book (pg. 20) “That is why, it is very important that a full-fledged Islamic Movement is established in the United States of America and elsewhere in Europe and Latin America to serve the greater interest of Islam, the Muslim world and humanity at large. This is a game of strategy. We have to find out and create new friends for Islam and its cause on the side of the enemy, inside and at the rear of the forces fighting against Islam and its emergence as a force anywhere in this world is a future reality of great magnitude.”

Interfaith is a game of strategy.

(pg. 21)” A Muslim has to put all that he has either to change the society into an Islamic society or state or be perished for it. A Muslim has no other choice”.

Society must be changed into an Islamic society

(pg. 58) “Acting upon the foregoing process, the Islamic Movement will produce the team of workers which is essentially required to meet the following needs:

    To accelerate the pace of Dawa Ilallah to a greater and greater number of people in order to bring more and more individuals to the fold of Allah(SWT) and increase the number of workers till the movement becomes a force to be reckoned with”

The movement becomes a force to be reckoned with.

(pg.59) “The workers of the Islamic Movement will have to mobilize a relentless war against immoral practices, drugs, pornography, alcoholism, racial discrimination, homosexuality, and other like these. They will have to educate the public opinion, warn the society about their horrible consequences and mobilize people’s opinion through meet-the-people campaigns”

Relentless war against immoral practices, such as homosexuality

(pg.59) “In the initial stage there may not be any opposition to Dawa work. For some time, the Islamic Movement of America may have some smooth sailing. But with the increase in Dawa efforts, in the number of activities and growth of the strength of the organization, the anti-Islamic forces will take notice of the multifarious activities of the Movement.”

The multifarious activities of the Movement

(pg.60) “Through this process, the Movement will penetrate deep into the hearts of the common folk, gain sympathy against oppression and generate a befitting counter-offensive campaign against the false propaganda of Batil. Simultaneously, the movement may also seek legal protection from the court for fundamental human rights to propagate what its adherents believe to be correct and to profess the same through democratic, peaceful and constitutional means”

Penetrate deep into the hearts of common folk, and seek legal protection from the court

(pg. 109) The Christian community of America will need a special approach to make them understand their misguided concept about Jesus (PBUH). Prophet Jesus (PBUH) was also a messenger of God, as others were. He was born without a father as a miracle of God. There is nothing spectacular in it, if we believe in God, in His absolute power and in His total control over the natural phenomenon. He can create anything just by ordering “Be” and “it is done.” He created Jesus without a father. He created Adam without a father or a mother, and Eve without a mother. They do not ascribe the attributes of God to either one of them. How then, can they profess Jesus to be the Son of God. It is illogical and quite absurd. Jesus was a Prophet and a man. He had all the human needs and weaknesses. He ate food for his existence, slept for rest and did all the other things a human being needs for his survival. By their misconstrued conception innovated by St. Paul, Christians have made Jesus (PBUH) into a “Human-God.” This is clear idolatry. Making partners with God is a sin. He will never forgive this sin.

Each of these notions that have been captured in the first several chapters are evidence to the agenda, ideology and their position on the superiority of Islam.  Interfaith = Dawa, not exactly the impression they believe all religions are equal. So to sum it up:

Interfaith is a game of strategy.

Society must be changed into an Islamic society

The movement becomes a force to be reckoned with

Relentless war against immoral practices, such as homosexuality (remember they have embraced the gay community)

The multifarious activities of the Movement

Penetrate deep into the hearts of common folk, and seek legal protection from the court

Misguided concept of Jesus, Professing Jesus to be the son of God is Illogical and absurd

So far, the facade the Islamic community portrays as being open and respectful of your religion is quite untrue.


Klevius comment: Not to mention our Atheism...

Klevius wrote:


Thursday, August 28, 2014

The "islamophobia" campaigners continue protecting the worst ever ideological crime on the planet! Why?!


The Islamic State constitutes a perfect time machine for those who want to understand the origin of islam


Islam, an ideology based on parasitism and terror, is a monstrous hate crime throughout 1,400 years. Its victims can be counted in hundreds of millions. Its Sharia is ALWAYS against Human Rights. Yet criticism of islam is called "islamophobia"!

A central tenet of islam is rapetivism.




 Well, what do some women think about that?


Aliaa Magda Elmahdy from Femen protesting against islam  The text says: 'There is only one god, Allah, and the prophet Muhammad is his messenger.'


A Slav punishing islam in France with her breasts in true French tradition




 Vive la France


 Inna Shevchenko, the leader of Femen, used as a model for a French national (Marianne) stamp. Below in real.







Joan of Arc, a medieval French Tomboy burned at the religious stake


God's voice told her that it was her divine mission to free her country from the Brits and therefore she cut her hair short and round 'in the fashion of young men', dressed in man's uniform and picked up the arms. In May 1430 she was taken prisoner in battle, and later burned at the stake on a religious accusation of heresy, i.e. for insisting on wearing men's clothes. A custom she was used to and had realized was more convenient for her. She also found that trousers better protected her from rape.


Today's Tomboys have equally (or less?!) little chance surviving rigid sex apartheid as during medieval times

And it's all covered up in a frantic, almost desperate pro-"girly" anti'Tomboy sex apartheid. Here's what you get today on Google News on a 'tomboy' search:




Here's a British female "islamophobe". However, how come that she has missed OIC and their global Sharia declaration against Human Rights via UN?!







Julie Bindel maintains, as Klevius has always done, that "people should question the basis of the diagnosis of male psychiatrists, 'at a time when gender polarization and homophobia work hand-in-hand.'" She points out that muslim "Iran carries out the highest number of sex change surgeries in the world", that "surgery is an attempt to keep gender stereotypes intact", and that "the idea that certain distinct behaviors are appropriate for males and females underlies feminist criticism of the phenomenon of 'transgenderism'."

In her November 2008 piece written after the Stonewall protest, Bindel talked about her frustration with being in a movement that insisted she accept trans people, yet resulted in her being criticized whenever she spoke on trans issues. She said that as a longtime active member of the lesbian community she felt uncomfortable with the increasing inclusion of sexuality and gender-variant communities into the expanding LGBT 'rainbow alliance': "the mantra now at 'gay' meetings is a tongue-twisting LGBTQQI." "It is all a bit of an unholy alliance. We have been put in a room together and told to play nicely." "I for one do not wish to be lumped in with an ever-increasing list of folk defined by 'odd' sexual habits or characteristics." "I just want to be left alone. I am not in your gang, I did not ask to be, so please don't tell me I am one of yours, and then tell me off for offending your orthodoxy." In January 2009 she wrote about the radical lesbian feminism of the 1970s and 1980s, and her desire to return to those values. She concluded with an invitation to heterosexual women to adopt lesbianism, saying "Come on sisters, you know it makes sense. Stop pretending you think lesbianism is an exclusive members' club, and join the ranks. I promise that you will not regret it."

During her time as a Guardian contributor Bindel has begun to write more on issues about rape, such as drug rape and date rape. She is critical of how difficult life is made for women who report rape, how the investigative and legal process ends up with women being dealt with more like the offender than the victim. Bindel responded to the difficulties of reporting and prosecuting rape by saying she would not report it herself, "we may as well forget about the criminal justice system and train groups of vigilantes to exact revenge and, hopefully, deter attacks. Because if I were raped, I would rather take my chances as a defendant in court, than as a complainant in a system that seems bent on proving that rape is a figment of malicious women's imagination."


Klevius comment: Against this background, isn't it remarkable that she has missed that the world's main and strongest muslim organization, Saudi based OIC (led by its Saudi Fuhrer Iyad Madani) via UN has officially abandoned women's most basic Human Rights and replaced them with Sharia!? In other words, OIC has deemed muslim women to domestic rape by their muslim husbands while also sanctioning rape of non-muslim women by muslim men.

Friday, April 14, 2017

The holy "monotheist" Trinity of Yahweh, God and Allah may have originated in the homeland of Uralic/Aryan (Zarathustra etc) but is in urgent need of a Human Rights update today


The Jews celebrate Passover as a commemoration of their liberation by their god called Yahweh from slavery in Egypt and their freedom as a nation under the leadership of Moses.


Coptic Christian and muslim "interfaith dialogue" from the past.


 The majority of the Turkish Ottoman slave empire's eunuchs endured castration at the hands of Christian Copts at Abou Gerbe monastery on Mount Ghebel Eter. Slave boys were captured from the African Great Lakes region and other areas in Sudan like Darfur and Kordofan then sold to muslims in Egypt. During the operation, the Christian Coptic clergyman chained the boys to tables and after slicing their sexual organs off, stuck bamboo catheters into the genital area, then submerged them in sand up to their necks. The recovery rate was 10 percent. The resulting eunuchs fetched large profits - only beaten by white Slav girls (see Klevius Origin of the Vikings - first written in 2005/6 and in need of some serious updating/editing - why aren't you supporting Klevius? - although the basic message in still equally valid).

"Monotheist" faith "dialogues






Syrian Christians are not benefiting from British help as they avoid UN refugee camps, funded with UK aid, because of fears of persecution from rogue Islamist groups operating inside or muslim officials who are hostile to converts to Christianity. By staying away from the camps, Christians are missing out on food, shelter and opportunities to come to Britain in a relocation scheme.

Will Western politicians continue to allow its islamofascist "ally", the oil wealthy Saudi dictator family, to fund Islamic State agents and destabilize the world with islamist hate, terror and Human Rights violating sharia? In doing so they deeply betray their constituency which either is ignorant about the true nature of the islamofascist Saudi dictator family's crimes against humanity, or are similar haters themselves.

The growing religious intolerance and sectarian violence in the world of today is not only boosted by increased state emphasize on religion - quite contrary to the general trend towards less religion among the general population - it can actually be traced back to the very beginning and origin of "monotheist" religions.

Jews started by slaughtering the Canaanites. Why? Because Jews considered themselves "God's chosen people" and God asked them to slaughter the Canaanites. And when Christianity got its hands on the Roman weaponry they turned it against the "barbaric pagans". And the latest "monotheist" evil emerged out of these two as a hybrid that started its slaughtering and enslavement conquest by slaughtering all the Jews in Medina.

Human Rights Watch has noted "growing religious intolerance" and sectarian violence against Coptic Christians in recent years, and a failure by the Egyptian government to effectively investigate properly and prosecute those responsible.
The abduction and disappearance of Coptic Christian women and girls remains a serious ongoing problem. In just one province (Minya), 77 cases of sectarian attacks on Copts between 2011 and 2016 have been documented by the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights. And that's probably just the tip of the iceberg. What about Atheists etc.?

After the initial muslim attacks in Egypt the influx of muslim Arab immigrants and gradual conversions (mainly due to non-muslim women marrying muslim men thereby giving their children under sharia to islam) to islam over time changed Egypt from a mainly Christian to a mainly muslim country.

In Egypt of today the government does not officially even recognize conversions from islam to Christianity; also interfaith marriages are not allowed either, this prevents marriages not only between muslim women and non-muslim men but also between converts to Christianity and those born in Christian communities, and results in the children of Christian converts being classified as muslims and given a muslim education.

The government also requires permits for repairing churches destroyed by muslim terrorists or building new ones, which are often withheld. Foreign missionaries are allowed in the country only if they restrict their activities to social improvements and refrain from advocating or promoting a belief other than (Sunni) islam.

In 1981, President Anwar Sadat, internally exiled the Coptic Pope Shenouda III accusing him of fomenting inter-confessional strife.

Today there's anti-Christian pro-muslim bias of UK aid handouts in refugee camps. Former Archbishop Lord Carey launched attack on aid officials who are against helping Christians. The former Archbishop of Canterbury warned ministers risk breaking the law. He said that Syrian Christians do not benefit from help from the British.

Well, why would they. After all, according to Theresa May it's sharia that's good for the Brits.

The Aryan origin of "monotheisms"
























.

Wednesday, April 12, 2017

When Saudi initiated muslim terrorists attacked a player bus in Germany, BBC reveled in its "journalistic" capability of producing truly fake news for its compulsory fee paying UK listeners.


BBC's alternative fake news


Today, at a time when the world already knew the attack was an islamist one,  BBC News reported that "it could have been islamist or left wing extremists - or right wing extremists.

Klevius comment: What makes this BBC's fake "reporting" really beyond the lowest of journalistic standard is the fact that although a letter had been found connecting it to islam, and although there had been a fake news story in a German paper apparently wrongly indicating left wing extremism - why did BBC have to squeeze in the word 'right wing' out of absolutely nothing?! The only explanation seems to be that this kind of faking could possibly lure some older or just ignorant listeners and making them keep believing that islam is fine and terrorism and sharia has nothing to do with islam and Saudi islamofascism - it's just the evil Iranians, Syrians and Russians.


This is your politicians' best ally! Do you approve of Saudi islamofascist hate mongering spread all over the world for the purpose of keeping the islamofascist Saudi dictator family in power as the "guardians of (Sunni) islam"?

And here's one of its many minarets:

 This is BBC's muslim "diversity" presenter who was brought up in islamofascist Saudi Arabia and who later learned to talk and behave "nicely" at Cambridge, and who now helps protecting the evil of islam against Human Rights defending "islamophobes" by spreading fake info about mulims and islam via BBC's compulsory fee paid minarets.

How come a left wing Scandinavian news paper is less fake than BBC?


This is Åsa Linderborg, a hard core communist and defender of islamofasci sm who is chief cultural editor on Scandinavia's biggest news paper Aftonbladet. Klevius has often wondered about why left wing extremists are so attached to fascisms of different kinds - from Bolsjevism over national socialism (which sprung out of social democracy) to islamofascism.

Not even Swedish/Norwegian Aftonbladet, which is left wing and which considers a few confused neo-Nazi lunatics a much worse threat than Saudi sponsored (via islamic hate mongering/oil money sponsoring) worldwide islamofascism, managed to see any "right wing" connection today.

Monday, April 10, 2017

Saudi Arabia gas attacks Syrians (via its support of al-Nusra/Islamic State) and Syrians and Russians get the blame. How come?


Has Trump been "educated" (or "streamlined" into, if you prefer) by the very establishment he came to "clean up"?

How is it even possible that politicians from top nations now wants to go to war based on fake news? There's still no evidence whatsoever, yet firm "conclusions" are drawn.

From a winning formula



to a 'historical turning point' just before the gas attack and due Tomahawk throwing.


What could it be? Assad who got a shortcut in his brain - or a gas attack committed by the islamofascist Saudi dictator family via al-Nusra/Islamic State, for the purpose of getting the upper hand against Iran*?




* All the noise about Putin/Russia is created for the purpose of protecting the most dangerous dictatorship on Earth right now, the islamofascist Saudi steered part of the Arabian peninsula. And the only thing that limits the Saudi hegemony is Putin/Russia and its support of Iran.



Aircrafts in the sky dropping bombs + sarin on the ground = x.

1 x = Syrian aircrafts dropping sarin bombs?
2 x = Syrian aircrafts hitting sarin on the ground?
3 x = sarin delivered from the ground at the same time (e.g. by using ground launced grenades - as IS have loads of - see more further down)?

All of these will look the same. However, number one seems quite unlikely at a time when Assad was already winning both the muslim terrorists as well as a negotiation opening.

So why is Trump attacking Syria without knowing?

The only answer (no matter which x you choose) is the islamofascist Saudi dictator family - backed by Israel and the usual "Western" pack.


Klevius wrote:

Wednesday, August 21, 2013

Were Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, US and UK accomplices to the gas attack/s in Syria?


Acknowledgement: Klevius is no fan of Assad. Not only because of the accusation of Syrian involvement in the February 2005 assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and support for muslim anti-Jewish terror groups etc, but also because of him being a muslim who happily and shamelessly, like most others, utilizes islam (the worst crime ever against humanity) for his agenda.




And 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?

Not taking responsibility for the evilness in one's ideology is pathetic. Klevius will elaborate on this in the next posting. In a way so most muslims should understand - if they dare to admit it.



Why do Western politicians support islamic terrorists? Is it because Western tax payers are ignorant and misinformed about what islam really is? But the truth is that the victims' bodies are all labeled 'political islam'!

Fly Qatar islamofascism while bowing towards the Saudis


When George W Bush in a week managed to topple Iraq's chemical weapons using dictator Saddam Hussein (whose Sarin victims were counted in tens of thousands) he was spat on by many. However, in Syria everything seems the opposite. The Sarin is used by the terrorists but Obama & Co are asked to topple Assad. How come?! The answer is simple: Saddam was Sunni and Assad is Shia.


The fact that launching indiscriminate biological attacks makes absolutely no sense militarily for Assad means it’s far more likely that such attacks are being staged by rebels – many of whom are being led by Al-Qaeda/Al-Nusra islamic terrorists – with support from the likes of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey.




Gearóid Ó Colmáin, Global Research, May 30, 2013: According to a report in Turkey’s state media agency Zaman, agents from the Turkish General Directorate of Security (Emniyet Genel Müdürlüğü) ceased 2 kg of sarin gas in the city of Adana in the early hours of yesterday morning. The chemical weapons were in the possession of Al Nusra terrorists believed to have been heading for Syria.
Sarin gas is a colourless, odorless substance which is extremely difficult to detect. The gas is banned under the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention.
The EGM identified 12 members of the AL Nusra terrorist cell and also ceased fire arms and digital equipment. This is the second major official confirmation of the use of chemical weapons by
Al-Qaeda terrorists in Syria after UN inspector Carla Del Ponte’s recent statement confirming the use of chemical weapons by the Western-backed terrorists in Syria.
The Turkish police are currently conducting further investigations into the operations of Al-Qaeda linked groups in Turkey.
This further confirmation that the Syrian ‘rebels’ are using chemical weapons while also using Turkey as a base of terrorist operations against Syria, could cause further domestic problems for Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, whom Turkish opposition leader Kemal Kilicdaroglu has called the ‘chief of the terrorists’.
The Syrian National Coalition abroad has persisted in accusing the Syrian government of using chemical weapons. The Syrian National Coalition Head of Media Khaled Saleh told Al Jazeera on May 26th that Turkish authorities were certain about the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government.
Saleh also claimed that he was in contact with several ‘brigades’ fighting in Syria. Perhaps, Mr. Saleh should be advised to consult the Turkish police now that one of his ‘brigades’ has been arrested in possession of chemical weapons.
Unsurprisingly, this Turkish report failed to make international headlines. From the beginning of the Syrian war, the international press agencies have attempted to portray the Al-Qaeda invasion of Syria as a ‘popular revolution’, which started out as a ‘peaceful protest’ against a ‘brutal regime’. The fact that there was never a modicum of evidence to support such claims has not hindered the avalanche of vituperation and demonization of Syrian president Bashar Al-Assad and the Syrian Arab Republic.
France’s daily Le Monde published an ‘exclusive’ report on the 27th of May 2013 which claimed to have ‘proof’ that the Syrian government was using chemical weapons ‘against its own people’. However, the report simply relied on statements by ‘activists’ and ‘rebels’, who most serious commentators have described as unreliable sources of information.
Le Monde’s report came just in time as the French government was pushing the European Union to lift the embargo on arms to the terrorists in Syria. The confirmation by previous articles in Le Monde that the opposition in Syria is in fact Al Qaeda, together with the reluctance of EU partners Germany, Austria, and other countries to openly back the terrorists, has isolated Paris and London, exposing the British and French governments as state sponsors of terrorism.
In January 2013, Russian television station RT published leaked documents from British corporation Britam Defense, which revealed a plan by Qatar to deliver chemical weapons to Homs in Syria, with the aid of Britam Defense. The British company was to provide Ukrainian personnel to act as Russian military advisors in order to implicate the Russian government in the crime. The email suggested that the Qataris were providing ‘enormous’ amounts of money for the plan and that it was approved by Washington. 
The Japhat Al-Nosra terrorist organization has not hidden its desire to gas the Alawite minority in Syria. A video was posted on U Tube on December 4th 2012 showing terrorists testing chemical weapons on rabbits, while vowing to exterminate Alawite Syrians in a similar fashion.
Iran’s Press TV also published a report which showed terrorists using chemical weapons.
As the Western-backed terrorists lose ground to government forces in Syria, the likelihood of further massacres committed by the terrorists and blamed on the Syrian government grows. However, as more and more reports contradict the official media narrative on the Syrian war, the voices of truth are acquiring critical mass, threatening to bring down once and for all NATO’s oppressive media empire.

Jabhat al-Nusra, Obama's & Co's terrorist ally against Syria

Many of Jabhat al-Nusra's members are Syrians who were part of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's Jihadist network fighting the American forces in Iraq. Many of these Syrians remained in Iraq after the withdrawal of American forces, but upon the outbreak of Syrian civil war in 2011, the Islamic State of Iraq sent the Syrian Jihadists and individual Iraqi experts in guerrilla warfare into Syria. A number of meetings were held between October 2011 and January 2012 in Rif Dimashq and Homs where the objectives of the group were determined.
The al-Nusra Front released its first public statement on 24 January 2012 in which they called for armed struggle against the Syrian government. The group claimed responsibility for the 2012 Aleppo bombings, the January 2012 al-Midan bombing, the March 2012 Damascus bombings the murder of journalist Mohammed al-Saeed and possibly the 10 May 2012 Damascus bombing.
Patrick Henningsen: Chemical weapon only miles away from the very hotel that the UN weapons inspector booked into only a few days ago. They see this as a distraction and if we look at the history of this particular region where the attack is set to take place it is very active with Al-Nusra Front and they also have been implicated in using make shifts chlorine bombs in Aleppo back in March, so there is a track record there.
RT: It is still clear why the fingers are being pointed at the Syrian government, because it is the government which has chemical weapons.
PH: All this at this point is innuendo. This is why the UN team is in Damascus to investigate these claims. Unfortunately Washington, London and Paris drew a red line in 2012. They said that if any side deploys chemical weapons then that would be a pretext for a military intervention either by NATO or some sort of coalition force backed by US resolution. Who benefits from a chemical attack in Syria? The opposition benefits. It is quite obvious that the government does not benefit. The opposition benefits because that would be the key to unlock the airstrikes and bombing campaign over Syria, a la Libya. The opposition would like a Libyan-style coalition with NATO in order to force the regime in power out of Damascus. They benefit from any report of chemical attack in Syria.
RT: Al-Arabiya puts the number of killed at more than 600 while other main stream media talk about just dozen of victims. Why is there such a difference?
PH: You have to consider the source. I believe Al-Arabiya has certain affiliations with certain Gulf states who might also have some interest in this particular conflict already so might see a more exaggerated report on different sides. But again, there is no independent verification, it is simply anecdotal and innuendo to this point. But the timing of it is very suspect.



William Engdahl: In the text of (Saudi) Al Arabiya's article we read that the “Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said dozens of people were killed, including children, in fierce bombardment.” Now the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) has been the source of every news report negative against the Syrian Assad government since the war began in 2011. More curious about the humanitarian-sounding SOHR is the fact, as uncovered by investigative journalists, that it consists of a sole Syrian refugee who has lived in London for the past 13 years named Rami Abdul Rahman, a Syrian Sunni muslim who owns a clothing shop and is running a Twitter page from his home. Partly owing to a very friendly profile story on the BBC, he gained mainstream media credibility. He is anything but unbiased.

The other aspect of the suspicious reports is the “convenient” fact they coincide with the arrival two days earlier of an official UN weapons inspection team, allowed by the government, to investigate allegations of chemical weapons use in the Syrian war. It begs the most obvious question: What conceivably would Bashar al Assad stand to gain from using banned chemical weapons just at the time he has agreed to let a UN chemical weapons team into Syria? 




Sarin and its distribution



Paul from Allen Vanguard:

How long would it take Sarin to become harmless, or dissipate?  In general terms are we talking minutes, hours, weeks?

This is difficult to answer because of the variables that could exist but Sarin is a non-persistent and highly volatile liquid which disperses and vaporises rapidly dependent on conditions of temperature and air flow.  A single projectile of Sarin fired in a hot, sunny featureless environment during a windy day could feasibly take minutes to dissipate.  At the other end of the spectrum, a sustained bombardment/barrage in an urban area during a period of no wind and no sustained periods of sun would be more likely to create a scenario where pockets of exposed Sarin would last for days, unexposed Sarin could last for weeks and CW UXO could remain in the area for years.



Dan Kaszeta, a US Army Chemical Corps veteran:

Submuntions: A highly effective way of dissemination would be a munition that scattered bomblets or submunitions at some height, with the submunitions designed for ground impact detonation.  Other factors being equal (…but they often aren’t), submunitions are generally considered a more efficient method of dispensing Sarin. 

In Tokyo it had been intended initially to aerosolise but ended up being stabbed bags left to evaporate (which is pretty good due to the speed at which it evaporates).

 The canisters recovered from the scene of the attacks matched canisters also recovered from an attack reported in Sheikh Maqsoud in Aleppo, where there were again claims of them being dropped from a helicopter, with photographs showing the canister remains covered in white-grey powder. 
The same design of canister has also been filmed in a cache of weapons reportedly captured by the Syrian opposition from the Syrian military, and a journalist in Syria has shown the image of the canister to various armed group, many of which have claimed to have seen them in the possession of opposition fighters, claiming to have captured them from the Syrian army.
Another type of grenade, using an identical fuze, was also photographed in Syria, with the photographer being told it was a normal smoke grenade.

 The Russian government has claimed the Syrian opposition was responsible for the Khan al-Assal attack, with a DIY rocket delivering a payload of Sarin. 

What do you think would be involved in putting together a DIY chemical warhead for a DIY rocket?

Crude devices are not that hard. Removal of explosives or whatever payload had been carried, followed by introducing the agent. You would need protective gear and it wouldn’t be very safe doing the filling.
Accuracy would be lost (if a missile) and performance of rockets could be affected by different weight distribution. I don’t really want to go in to too much detail about the how, lest I give ideas or advice, but early CW munitions were very simple.

If you don’t really care where it goes then its achievable.

Considering the Russian government's claim that a DIY rocket was used  in the attack, what would be the most effective dispersal method once the rocket reached it's target? 

Air burst or base ejection were used by military munitions but require more complex fuses. If aimed at hard targets then you’d get a level of dispersal by simple impact, but if it hit the earth then the payload could just get driven in to the earth.




Syrian Rebels use D-30 Howitzers capable of distributing Sarin



The D-30 is a Russian-made 122 mm towed howitzer that first entered service in the 1960s with the Russian army. The D-30 is designed to defeat unsheltered and covered manpower, weapons and military equipment of the enemy at the forward edge of the battle area and to the regiment mission depth. The D-30 has been widely exported and used in wars around the world, notably in the Middle East, and particularly in the Iran-Iraq War.



President al-Assad in an interview by the German Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung after the previous chemical weapons attack:



Had they obtained a single strand of evidence that we had used chemical weapons, do you not think they would have made a song and dance about it to the whole world?, then where is the chain of custody that led them to a such result?
These allegations are ludicrous. The terrorist groups used chemical weapons in Aleppo; subsequently we sent an official letter to the United Nations requesting a formal investigation into the incident. Britain and France blocked this investigation because it would have proven the chemical attacks were carried out by terrorist groups and hence provided conclusive evidence that they (Britain and France) were lying. We invited them to investigate the incident, but instead they wanted the inspectors to have unconditional access to locations across Syria, parallel to what inspectors did in Iraq and delved into other unrelated issues. We are a sovereign state; we have an army and all matters considered classified will never be accessible neither to the UN, nor Britain, nor France. They will only be allowed access to investigate the incident that occurred in Aleppo.
Therefore, all the claims relating to the use of chemical weapons is an extension of the continuous American and Western fabrication of the actual situation in Syria. Its sole aim is to justify their policies to their public opinion and use the claim as a pretext for more military intervention and bloodshed in Syria.
Interviewer: The protests started in Syria peacefully before they turned into an armed struggle. Your critics claim that you could have dealt with the protests through political reforms, which makes you partly responsible for the destruction in Syria. What is your take on this?
President Assad: We started the reforms from the first days of the crisis and, perhaps even to your surprise, they were initiated years before the crisis. We issued a number of new legislations, lifted the emergency law and even changed the constitution through a referendum. This is a well-known fact to the West; yet what the West refuses to see is that from the first weeks of the protests we had policemen killed, so how could such protests have been peaceful? How could those who claim that the protests were peaceful explain the death of these policemen in the first week? Could the chants of protesters actually kill a policeman?
From the beginning of the crisis, we have always reiterated that there were armed militants infiltrating protesters and shooting at the police. On other occasions, these armed militants were in areas close to the protests and shot at both protesters and police forces to lead each side into-believing that they were shot at by the other. This was proven through investigations and confessions, which were publicised on a large scale in the media.

Thursday, April 6, 2017

How did Trump end up as a whore of Saudi islamofascism?


Only Klevius analysis of the origin of islam gives you the correct (and easy to see for yourself if you just check islam's history) answer. Avoid fake descriptions of islam!


Is this the man behind the sarin attacks in Syria?


There's absolutely nothing different with islam of today and in its beginning. Except perhaps that representatives of islam's victims today keep calling it "a great religion" and "the religion of peace".

Saudi islamofascism (the "guardians of islam's holy places") is backed by its 1.5 Billion (usually unwitting) "foot soldiers" collected under the Saudi based and steered OIC sharia against Human Rights.

The latest example of Saudi military strikes outside its borders (except for the Saudi atrocities in Syria and Yemen etc.) is the muslim terrorist from Kyrgyzstan who murdered innocent people in St. Petersburg. He was a Saudi product from a program that started less than a decade ago and now has resulted in more mosques than schools in Kyrgyzstan - a country that previously after the fall of USSR showed no extremist tendencies whatsoever before the Saudis entered the scene. Same might perhaps also be said about the latest muslim terrorist attack in London. However, most of the victims induced by Saudi hate mongering are never even counted for because they are usually explained away as "isolated incidents". However, these are just the openly violent attacks induced from Saudi Arabia. A much bigger problem is the spread of muslim sharia - and supported by many non-muslim Western politicians, such as e.g. Theresa May etc..

Jews and muslims were both collaborators and enemies in the past - just as they are today.

Just a very few examples from the top of the iceberg:

Jews helped the muslim raiders to conquer Medina.

Jews helped the muslim raiders to conquer Mideast.

Jews helped the muslim raiders to conquer Iberia.

Jews helped the Ottoman muslim raiders to conquer parts of Europe.

Jews are helping/cooperating with Saudi islamofascists for the purpose of defending themselves from Iranian islamofascists.

However, due to the Iranians not talking Arabic nor having access to Mecca and Medina, Saudi islamofascism is definitely more dangerous.

And Israel could easily negotiate both a strong defense against Iran as well as cooperating with it. An islam cut off from/balanced against pan-Arabism would create an ideological "terror balance" that might work as well as "the cold war" worked in the West, until islam is finally desarmed from its Medieval evil.

Islam was originally an ideological weapon in the service of terror for booty, slaves etc. And just as successful criminals get attention when flashing with stolen wealth, islam got a reputation for gaining wealth on robbing and enslaving people with Allah's permission. As a consequence islam created a criminal "aristocracy" bathing in wealth while ordinay muslim men were just happy with islam giving them unrestricted access to sex.

There is no religion without its usage. And referring to a "private religion" or individual "religious spirituality" is pure non sense and has nothing to do with real sharia islam.


Klevius wrote:


Wednesday, August 5, 2015


The Jewish origin of islam


Islam is a sect grown out of Judaism via Christianity.


According to Human Rights there are no "chosen people". Meaning that you may believe whatever you like as long as you follow legislation guided by the principle of Universal equality.

 Here's an approximate map of Judaism just before the origin of islam.


And below an approximate map of the violent muslim colonization in the foot steps of the Jewish slave trade routes.

 The above maps could be almost identical if produced with same techniques. This is no coincident but due to the "mysterious" code (the Jews) that made Arab imperialism possible and historical analysis impossible ("mysterious") if not included.  

Except for Khazaria, Jews were more business orientated than eager to waive swords compared to their copycats the Arab Bedouins. However, without wealthy and influential Jews leading the bloodthirsty and illiterate Bedouins (compare Ibn-Khaldun's description) and paving the way for the Arab looters (compare how the Jews used Turkic people in Khazaria in pretty much the same manner) the "Arab conquest" would have quickly dried out in the Arabian sand.

Dear reader. When reading Klevius analysis of the origin of islam, do always keep in mind the following important facts:

1 There was no Koran - only some Jewish/Christian text manipulations.

2  There was no Muhammad - only the old Jewish Messias (the rescuer/savior/leader) myth. Muhammad as described by muslims is a later invention snd doesn't appear in any official documents whatsoever before Malik.

3  Conventional "descriptions" of the "Arab conquest" are impossible and leave historians "amazed". Instead looting, booty, and sex slaves were the main incentives for the Bedouins. What was new was a more tight racist system of "we-and-the-other" (muslims vs. "infidels") which hindered (for a time) internal divisions. On top of this was the Dhimmitude taxation system under the sword. Money, slavery or death.

4 Understanding these points is also understanding that islam originated as a parasite and therefore never functioned as inspiration in itself for innovations etc. This is why every islamic colony has ended in backwardness. Africa is an example of how a parasitic ideology was able to drain a whole continent. Saudi Arabia is an other example of how islamic backwardness has managed to keep the oil wealthy country in a state of deep immorality and abuse of Human Rights and which islamic hate mongering has caused more suffering per capita than any other country on Earth. 9/11 was just a tiny droplet in comparison with what the islamofascist Saudi dictator family has caused around the world.










.