* Is so called BBC really British? Hasn't it "decontextualized" itself (see below)!
The horror of today's fascism
Saudi dictator family is behind most of islamic atrocities around the
world and Erdogan & Co long for a neo-Ottoman conquest of Europe. He
was even paid €2 billion for "guarding" muslims from entering EU (who
mentioned the wolf guarding the sheep?). However, what fanatic Erdogan
seems to have forgotten is that the Ottoman "empire" was completely
dependent on its slaves. And when slavery was abolished by the West then
the Ottoman "empire" sank into utmost misary and collapse. Just like
the Andalus did long before when the muslims and Jews were forbidden
from having Christian slaves (a main reason to the forceful
Christianization of Europe).
So-Called BBC asks How Islamic is the So-Called Islamic State? Klevius
answer: IS follows both original islam as well as contemporary islam in
Saudi Arabia and the Saudi based and steered OIC's sharia declaration*.
* OIC's sharia declaration makes it possible for muslim countries like
Saudi Arabia to freely refer to it when picking from the Koran, Hadiths,
Sunnah etc.
So called BBC: In claiming responsibility for the Paris atrocities, the
so-called Islamic State described the attacks as "a blessed battle whose
causes of success were enabled by Allah". Last year, when the group's
self-imposed Caliphate was declared, hundreds of Muslim leaders and
scholars from across the world wrote an open letter to the
self-professed Caliph, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, accusing him of heinous war
crimes and a violation of the fundamental principles of Islam.
Klevius: "The fundamental principles of islam" can historically best be
described by Klevius islam formula (first presented on the Swedish
radio after 9/11 and on the web since 2003): Slavery+"infidel"
racism+sex segregated rapetivism+anti human rights Sharia/apostasy ban.
Islam originated as as a militant separatist movement. When the
islamofascists cololized civilized territories they suck out taxes from
wealthy "infidels" (non-muslims) and enslaved the poor, while themselves
settling in garrisons meticulously separated from those whom they
colonized and sponged on. This, btw, was the original idea of mosques
(except for being the center of the slave market, of course).
So called BBC: So how Islamic is 'Islamic State'? Why have mainstream
interpretations of Islam so far failed to provide an effective
counter-narrative? What needs to happen for the group to be defeated?
Klevius answer: Stop allying with its root cause!
Klevius wrote:
Who is Allah's best friend - and the worst enemy of Human Rights?
There are now more British muslims fighting for the Islamic State than
for Britain's military. And most true British muslims support Islamic
State.
Islamic State rests on Saudi Wahhabism and Saudi funds. And Saudi Arabia
is a close ally of Cameron (and enemy of Putin). Moreover, the Saudi
initiated, based and steered sharia organization OIC is another close
ally via Cameron's non-elected minister of
faith
islamofascism, Sayeeda Warsi whom he personally elected as baroness. In
other words, Cameron's closest woman is a grave violator of the most
basic of Human Rights because of her sharia support and UK
representative in OIC. That's why Cameron hates Human Rights and paves
the way for making Britain a Saudi Arabia outside the cradle of islam.
Islamic State to Putin: 'This is a message to you, oh Vladimir
Putin, these are the jets that you have sent to Bashar, we will send
them to you, God willing, remember that.
And we will liberate Chechnya and the entire Caucasus, God willing,"
said the militant. "The Islamic State is and will be and it is
expanding God willing.
Your throne has already teetered, it is under threat and will fall when we come to you because Allah is truly on our side.
Paul J. Saunders: Putin often acknowledges the country’s
significant Muslim minority, including during a major 2013 speech
focusing on Russia’s national identity, during which he said that
“Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Judaism and other religions are an
integral part of Russia’s identity, its historical heritage and the
present-day lives of its citizens.” Importantly, Putin went on to argue,
“It is clearly impossible to identify oneself only through one’s
ethnicity or religion in such a large nation with a multi-ethnic
population. … People must develop a civic identity on the basis of
shared values, a patriotic consciousness, civic responsibility and
solidarity, respect for the law and a sense of responsibility for their
homeland’s fate, without losing touch with their ethnic or religious
roots.”
Apparently responding in no small part to controversy in the West, in
the months prior to the Olympic Games in Sochi, over Russia’s law
imposing fines on individuals or organizations that present “propaganda”
about homosexuality to minors, Putin has increasingly emphasized
Russians’ shared moral values and to connect Russia’s “traditional”
values to those in the Middle Eastern, Asian and other non-Western
societies. “We can see how many of the Euro-Atlantic countries are
actually rejecting their roots, including the Christian values that
constitute the basis of Western civilization … and people are
aggressively trying to export this model all over the world. I am
convinced that this opens a direct path to degradation and primitivism,
resulting in a profound demographic and moral crisis. … We consider it
natural and right to defend these values.” While clearly identifying
Russia as a largely Christian country, Putin is attempting to establish a
dividing line between the shared values of believers in many religious
traditions and those of the decadent secular West.
Putin was explicit about his foreign policy objectives, saying, “Russia
agrees with those who believe that key decisions should be worked out on
a collective basis, rather than at the discretion of and in the
interests of certain countries or groups of countries. Russia believes
that international law, not the right of the strong, must apply. And we
believe that every country, every nation is not exceptional, but unique,
original and benefits from equal rights, including the right to
independently choose their own development path.” Thus, Putin is
attempting to exploit huge differences in social values between the West
and predominantly Muslim countries in the Middle East and North Africa
to make Western values into a liability rather than an asset for Western
governments. If consistently implemented over time, this may become
Russia’s most significant effort to date to develop a soft power
strategy to combat Western influence in the Middle East and elsewhere in
the Islamic world.
Klevius:The above, dear reader, is what you really need to focus
on. Logically a true muslim should not be allowed to vote as long as
s/he doesn't reject sharia. However, as it stands now it's precisely the
anti-democratic sharia muslims who multiply fastest due to islamic
rapetivism ideology. And as long as their votes count politicians try to
get them (no matter that most voting fraud happens in muslim
communities). Spice this with oil/gas and you start seeing why Klevius
writings are essential, not the least because of Klevius lack of
financial or political motives.
And to top it all, non-religious Klevius seems to be your best analyst
due to his superior (sad isn't it) understanding of sex segregation and
its connection to the origin of islam.
* * *
So called BBC: "The so called islamic state declared its self-imposed caliphate by its self-professed caliph."
Klevius: A lot of selfies here from the so called BBC (British
Broadcasting Company), which should rather be called IBC (Islamic
Broadcasting Company) - not the least because British tax and compulsory
fees payers just got to pay even more for Arabic islam propaganda in
Mideast and elsewhere outside Britain itself.
So called BBC: To what extent do you believe IS is part of the muslim family?
Imam Salah Al Ansari, an Imam, theologian and "academic"*, gives a long
answer about what IS caliphate is about without even touching so called
BBC's question. In doing so he protects himself from internal muslim
criticism.
* You can't possibly be a true
academic (like e.g. Klevius) when you base your thinking on loose
fantasies (Koran, Sunna, Hadits etc) without historical relevance. And
to be a really true academic you also need a good brain which obviously
this imam lacks.
Haras Rafiq, Managing Director of the anti-extremism think tank, the
Quilliam Foundation: IS has something to do with islam but not my islam.
Klevius: And you have something to do with Human Rights violating sharia, don't you!
Katherine Brown, an "expert" in Islamic Studies at King's College London: IS has decontextualized documents from the past.
Katherine Brown, an "expert" in Islamic Studies at King's College
London: Sharia isn't codified but it has precedences just like the
British legal system.
Klevius: What a load of crap! Don't you understand why it's not
codified?! Ever heard about declarations and resolutions?! And yes,
islamic sharia has precedences - in that very original islam you have
"decontextualized"!
A commentator: "
The problem is that Obama, Merkel, Cameron, Hollande,
the EU, the elites, the media have the power, control the government
and are favouring Islam and muslims. They are flooding and islamizing
the whole west with muslim immigrants till a point of no return."
Klevius intellectual harem
Nonie Darwish (one of Klevius wives in his intellectual harem - see
below): One of the reasons that the so-called “moderate Muslims” have
become irrelevant and incapable of helping themselves or the West
against Islamic terrorism is that over the centuries they have become
tolerant of Islamic terrorism and considered it as part of normal life.
Average Muslims have been led to believe that they are victims of the
outside world and not Islam, and that is why many are either silent or
sympathize with jihadists and even terrorists as having a legitimate
cause; but they tell the West they don’t approve of using terror as a
solution, even though Islamic books do support terror as a solution.
Just
by reading mainstream Arab newspapers, the West should have known by
now that Islamic culture has justified terrorism as legitimate to
advance its cause. Muslim leaders who refuse to engage in the game of
jihad are accused of treason, not considered to be good Muslims, and are
often the victims of a coup or assassination attempts.
After
9/11, many moderate Muslim friends of mine from inside the Middle East
told me with bizarre logic in Arabic: “Let the West get a taste of the
terror we live in daily. Why only us?” What struck me was the way they
viewed terrorism; to them it felt like a natural disaster or part of
life that must be tolerated and dealt slowly with. To them, they must
never openly reject or upset the terrorist.
Like the moderate
Muslims, President Obama appears to have an approach of denial and
tolerance of Islamic terrorism and is encouraging Americans and the
media to do the same. He is advocating ignoring the threat of Islamic
terror and denying it exists by not even calling the threat by its true
name, “Islamic terrorism.” Obama puts on an air of being wise and
honorable for doing that, and anyone one who does not agree is called
racist and bigot. But this approach of forcing the victims of Islamic
terrorism to tolerate terrorism as part of life is exactly what Islam
wants from the West. It is Islam’s preferred technique to conquer and
enslave.
That strategy by Islam rarely failed in its 1400-year
history. The only nation that stood up to Islamic terror and enslavement
was Israel. Historically, most nations in the Middle East caved in to
Islam and abandoned the Jews. Eventually former Christian nations like
Egypt and Turkey were given the kiss of death by the Dracula of Islam,
but the Jews of the Middle East either escaped or lived under Islamic
terror, but never compromised their beliefs. Muslims since the 7th
century hated the Jews for that. Islam to this day uses its favorite
tool, terrorism, to conquer and enslave, and that tool is working today
on the last bastion of freedom, Western civilization. Terrorism works on
both individuals and nations who become paralyzed like a lobster slowly
cooking in heating water.
President Obama seems not to fear
bringing inside America thousands of Syrian refugees who could be
sympathetic toward and tolerant of ISIS, if not active members
themselves. He recently told the American people: “the vast majority of
these refugees are victims of the same violence and terror we have seen
in Paris.” As though the Middle East is divided between the good victims
of terror and the bad perpetrators of terror.
I have news for
Obama. Everyone in the Middle East was or is the victim of terror;
terrorists have themselves tasted Islamic terror, like Dracula tasting
the blood of its victims. ISIS members who are Sunnis have lived in and
tolerate terror, and use it on others as the solution of choice. Sunnis
terrorized Shiites, and vice versa. Life under Sharia itself is a life
under terror. Being a woman in the Muslim world is living in terror.
Being a child strapped with explosives by your own parents is life of
terror. If you read the Quran and Hadith, you are commanded to do and
live by terror and dream of the great afterlife if you kill yourself and
others for the sake of Allah.
Obama, like moderate Muslims, want
us to tolerate Islamic terrorism instead of fighting and rejecting it,
as Israel has done. That is perhaps why Obama hates Benjamin Netanyahu,
not because of a personality clash, but because Netenyahu symbolizes the
rejection of living as a slave under Islamic terror. Obama is obviously
not on the side of Israel, because Israel will not tolerate Islamic
terror and look the other way, as Obama is doing. Obama is most
passionate when he defends Islam and ignores terrorism. He wears it as a
badge of honor. To Obama, ISIS is contained, is no big deal, we can
live with it and we must be cautious not fall into stereotyping Muslims.
With no shame, he constantly lectures American citizens, especially
Christians, not to judge Islam and Muslims.
But worse than just
denial, Obama is forcing Homeland Security and Americans to regard
obvious Islamic terrorism on American soil as just normal acts of
workplace violence, or crime on the streets that can be handled by the
courts. That is the same attitude that moderate Muslims want to force on
us, to convince us that Islam has nothing to do with terrorists, that
the Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam, while in their hearts
they say that it is America’s turn to suffer terror as well; why only
us?
The pathological tolerance of terror is just the beginning of
the road to life in Islamic tyranny and humiliation. The next step will
be forcing Americans to feeling guilty for rejecting Muslim refugees.
Then the leftist American do-gooders will consider taking a look at and
considering Muslim grievances against American society and its unjust
Constitution as a legitimate religious right that should be given equal
time by the media. Then a movement will develop defending the causes of
the terrorists that might not seem legitimate to Americans but are
considered legitimate by the Left. After that, some terrorists will
become heroes and even adored for their bravery and courage.
That
is not too far-fetched: Rolling Stone magazine portrayed the Boston
bomber, Dzhokhar Tsamaev like a rock star on its cover a few months ago.
Before we know it, our children will be living in a full-blown Arab spring right here in America and Europe.
Klevius wrote:
Klevius intellectual wives:
Oriana Fellaci (a true journalist - her photo ought to be in front of
every BBC & other media "executive"), Wafa Sultan, Nonie Darwish,
Hirsi Ali. Klevius intellectual concubines are so many so their pics
won't possibly fit here.
Klevius main rival: Mr X "president's" first call, islamofascist Don Abdullah Juan (see
Klevius love letter to Edit Södergran
to get it), the "guardian of islam". He & his pals have blood on
their fingers, not only from Darfur, Iraq, Afganistan etc, but also from
millions of victims for islamic street jihadism all over the world,
fueled by Koranic infidel racism.
and here's a journalist that would never qualify in Klevius intellectual harem:
Samantha
Lewthwaite, Mishal Husain and Michael Adebolajo all have sharia islam in
common. And none of them has anything in common with Klevius!
.
