When should islam/its "custodians" (i.e. those who have and still benefit from islam induced evil) pay for its genocides, colonialism, enslavement, institutional rapetivism etc, throughout 1,400 years?

Useful idiots and bigoted/hypocritical cowards is what keeps evil sharia islam ticking

However, instead of answering this most relevant question today, BBC and other media and politicians desperately shun the real evil of Saudi steered sharia islam that is easily discovered by anyone openminded enough to see through the islamofascist Saudi boosted sandstorm of "islamophobia" accusations, through its many sharia hubs such as OIC/UN, mosques, Saudi steered media, universities, politicians etc..

BBC seems to use islam's oldest trick in the book, i.e. inviting/threatening with terror against those who dare to criticize sharia islam's lack of the most basic Human Rights.

According to Pamela Geller, a Jew that was denied entry to the UK by Theresa May (who says sharia is good for the Brits and who dislikes Human Rights), a muslim is threatening critics of islamofascism by "warning" them.

BBC's disgusting hypocrisy and bigotry in the service of evil Human Rights violating sharia islam

Today BBC asked UKIP's leader Paul Nuttall whether he would allow Ann Mari Waters campaigning for the party because she says exactly what not only the European Court of Human Rights say but also what islam's own worldwide sharia organization OIC say, namely that sharia islam is incompatible with Human Rights.

Klevius question to BBC's muslim sharia* presenter Michal Husain and her co-"reporters": Instead of exposing individuals to muslim (some of them mentally disturbed others ideologically/islam disturbed) islam/Koran/Mohammad induced sharia violence threats to brave individuals who defend Human Rights equality, why don't you support a wide front against islamofascism? It's the lowest of cowardice behavior to direct a general threat against the free world on the shoulders of a few "islamophobes".


* There's no islam without sharia that violates the most basic of Human Rights! This is the very core of the matter with islam - and therefore blamed on "islamophobes". And in Mishal Husain's (and many others) case it's deeply immoral to out of cowardice sell oneself as a "muslim" while happily eating the fruits of everything opposite to sharia islamic evil. She wittingly swims in polluted waters protected by Human Rights and the "1.6 Billion muslims" Potemkin village. And she would probably stand safe in a crowd confronted by a muslim terrosist who asks if she is a muslim.

BBC's muslim "diversity" presenter, who was raised in Saudi Arabia and who learned to talk and appear contemporary "PC posh" at Cambridge, BBC etc., says she doesn't fast during Ramadan but rather drinks some alcohol, nor does she want to wear islamic clothing.

Extremely bigoted and hypocritical Mishal Husain rightly says there's no threat to her way of life (as long she doesn't commit apostasy, that is), while Klevius says that's entirely thanks to Human Rights - not sharia islam.

Interestingly, BBC's muslim sharia presenter Michal Husain usually keeps a low profile in certain islam issues while instead talking about e.g. housing. And as usual, BBC manages to fake its reporting by naming only "Chinese" as the buyers of London properties while the muslim Gulf states and oil wealthy muslims for long have been and are the main property investors and buyers of holiday homes for themselves while visiting London in the most thought after London areas. And unlike most Chinese investors the muslim investors carry with them a stench of Human Rights violating sharia islam. Even the UK Parliament faces this if moving to such a sharia property.

Financial muslim sharia oil wealth ghettos in London.

Over the last decade, the Arab muslim oil wealth funds from muslim Gulf countries have bought some of the most iconic and historic properties and whole blocks in prime areas of London like Mayfair, Chelsea, South Kensington, Knightsbridge, Belgravia, Holland Park, and Notting Hill.

Many muslim investors like the Saudi/Jeddah-based sharia bank, Sidra Capital, are also acquiring historic neighborhoods, as in Hamilton Drive, a 1.2 hectare development in St John’s Wood consisting of 10 luxury town houses and a villa, close to what used to be the Beatles Abbey Road Studios.

These oil wealthy muslims have also in recent years been increasingly buying properties in London as holiday homes for their stays there.

Andrew Prince, the British Business Group Dubai and Northern Emirates Director of Focus Groups: 'There have been very close historical, cultural and economic relationships between the Gulf countries and the UK over the last four decades, and these continue to strengthen with time. These relationships have developed over generations and have resulted in, among many other things, a desire to invest in the UK, and specifically London which many Arabs would consider their home-away-from-home, and to where there are now a staggering number of daily flights arriving from the GCC.'

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"?!

BBC and their Saudi raised muslim sharia "diversity" presenter Mishal Husain seem to have missed, sorry, faked that it didn't matter.

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"..

Muslims are fleeing islam - and carrying it with them

Faking BBC reporters and "useful idiots" all plays into the hands of Saudi led islamofascism

BBC reporters aren't "useful idiots" - they are deliberate accomplices in muslim genocide against non-muslims.



Here a self-evident problem that BBC fakes it can't even see as connected to islam:

Coptic Christians try to flee Egypt, the country hailed by BBC because "it has so many Arab muslims and such an important Sunni sharia university'. 

However, during their escape they are hindered by all sorts of muslims from criminals to officials.

 Klevius proposes: Give an automatic visa to non-muslims and to muslims only after thorough vetting for islamic hatered against non-muslims.

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.

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

Peter Klevius Spring Festival greeting to BBC's muslim sharia presenter, Saudi raised Mishal Husain, who was taught to talk and  behave nicely at Cambridge while studying law, but who apparently never managed to learn the difference between islamofascist sharia law and Human Rights based law. As she is used to BBC's sttrange policy of not talking to its listeners, Klevius will use the same method - just trying to be helpful.

Mishal, have you Mishal ever thought about the origin of Eastern, Mishal. Mishal, it's quite interesting, Mishal. You see Mishal, everything isn't PC and true at the same time, Mishal. Mishal, do continue reading, Mishal.

Klevius Eastern egg

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"

.

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.

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 BBC's 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.










.

BBC again faking its "news" reporting by not reprting about the Obama/Rice scandalous and deeply criminal use of a state agency to spy on a US citizen named Donald J. Trump.

Is BBC waiting for "a better angle" to present it for UK compulsory license fee payers? And if BBC manages to report something about this in short and more or less hidden and of course angled, news windows, this will in no way balance BBC's extremely speculative, pushy and deliberately misinforming policy about President Trump and his administration.

Susan Rice Ordered (on behalf of Obama) Spy Agencies To Produce ‘Detailed Spreadsheets’ Involving Trump

Michael Doran: “This is a leaking of signal intelligence.”

    “That’s a felony,” he told TheDCNF. “And you can get 10 years for that. It is a tremendous abuse of the system. We’re not supposed to be monitoring American citizens. Bigger than the crime, is the breach of public trust.”

    Waurishuk said he was most dismayed that “this is now using national intelligence assets and capabilities to spy on the elected, yet-to-be-seated president.”

    “We’re looking at a potential constitutional crisis from the standpoint that we used an extremely strong capability that’s supposed to be used to safeguard and protect the country,” he said. “And we used it for political purposes by a sitting President. That takes on a new precedent.”

“Somebody blew a hole in the wall between national security secrets and partisan politics.” This “was a stream of information that was supposed to be hermetically sealed from politics and the Obama administration found a way to blow a hole in that wall.”

The unmasked names of Trump aides were given to officials at the National Security Council (NSC), the Department of Defense, James Clapper, President Obama’s Director of National Intelligence, and John Brennan (see about this guy below), Obama’s CIA Director.

    Joining Rice in the alleged White House operations was her deputy Ben Rhodes, according to Fox.

    Critics of the atmosphere prevailing throughout the Obama administration’s last year in office point to former Obama Deputy Defense Secretary Evelyn Farkas who admitted in a March 2 television interview on MSNBC that she “was urging my former colleagues,” to “get as much information as you can, get as much intelligence as you can, before President Obama leaves the administration.”

    Farkas sought to walk back her comments in the weeks following: “I didn’t give anybody anything except advice.”

    Col. (Ret.) James Waurishuk, an NSC veteran and former deputy director for intelligence at the U.S. Central Command, told TheDCNF that many hands had to be involved throughout the Obama administration to launch such a political spying program.

    “The surveillance initially is the responsibility of the National Security Agency,” Waurishuk said. “They have to abide by this guidance when one of the other agencies says, ‘we’re looking at this particular person which we would like to unmask.’”

    “The lawyers and counsel at the NSA surely would be talking to the lawyers and members of counsel at CIA, or at the National Security Council or at the Director of National Intelligence or at the FBI,” he said. “It’s unbelievable of the level and degree of the administration to look for information on Donald Trump and his associates, his campaign team and his transition team.  This is really, really serious stuff.”



Klevius wrote:

Who has been the main "hacker" of the US election and politics?

The Obama administration uses everything it still has* to hurt Americans and support the evil islamofascist Sunni muslim Saudi dictator family. It's not about Russia being a threat to the US - it's Russia being an obstacle for the Saudi dictator family's wars and terror in Mideast and around the world.

* There's nothing like a "neutral" CIA. And Obama's CIA has been the one most open for foreign (mainly Saudi) influence. Sadly, the evil islamofascist Sunni muslim Saudi dictator family also has its deep tentacles among Republicans.

Peter Klevius: Look at them! Obama administration plus  some other friends of Saudi islamofascism (McCain, Ryan etc).

Nor are the Iranians a threat to the Saudis. However, because of Iran the Saudi dictator family can't commit full blown genocide against its and its neighbors Shia populations - although quite close when considering Yemen, Bahrain etc. as well as how Shias are treated in Saudi Arabia.

Ray McGovern: I would say that John Brennan’s record for credibility or even veracity is rather thin. Brennan is largely responsible for the chaos in Syria. He and Defense Secretary Ashton Carter were against the ceasefire. Ashton Carter sent his air force to scuttle the ceasefire that was agreed to between Secretary Kerry and Lavrov in September.

The current CIA director John Brennan, who joined the CIA in 1980 and was a station chief in Saudi Arabia and the chief of the national counterterrorism center, thinks Mohammad bin Salman is a nice guy:

Mohammad bin Salman did not go abroad to university, choosing to remain in Riyadh where he attended King Saud University, graduating in sharia "law". Associates said he neither smoked nor drank and had no interest in partying.

BND, the German intelligence agency, portrayed Saudi defense minister and Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, as a political gambler who is destabilizing the Arab world through proxy wars in Yemen and Syria.

On 24 September 2015, 2,236 Hajj pilgrimage attendees were killed by an event now called the Mina Stampede, which sources claim was due to attempts by the personal convoy of Mohammed bin Salman to force itself through the crowd, and due to several road closures in the area.

Here's an other close friend of John Brennan

 and here's what he's doing

Paul Sperry, author of “Infiltration: How Muslim Spies and Subversives Have Penetrated Washington.”: Counterterrorism experts have long suspected Saudi Arabia’s “rehabilitation” center for terrorists does a poor job of de-radicalizing jihadists. But a Saudi detainee at Guantanamo Bay now reveals it’s actually a recruiting and training factory for jihad.

According to recently declassified documents, senior al Qaeda operative Ghassan Abdullah al-Sharbi told a Gitmo parole board that the Saudi government has been encouraging previously released prisoners to rejoin the jihad at its terrorist reform school, officially known as the Prince Mohammed bin Naif Counseling and Care Center.

The Obama administration has praised the effectiveness of the Saudi rehab program — which uses “art therapy,” swimming, ping-pong, PlayStation and soccer to de-radicalize terrorists — and conditioned the release of dozens of Gitmo prisoners, including former Osama bin Laden bodyguards, on their enrollment in the controversial program.

To date, 134 Saudi detainees have been transferred to the Saudi reform camps in Riyadh and Jeddah. Last year, nine Yemeni detainees were sent there, as well, and more are expected to follow over the next two months, as President Obama strives to meet his campaign goal of closing Gitmo.

Al-Sharbi dropped a bombshell on the Gitmo parole board at his hearing earlier this year when he informed members that the Saudi kingdom was playing them for suckers. “You guys want to send me back to Saudi Arabia because you believe there is a de-radicalization program on the surface.

“True. You are 100 percent right, there is a strong — externally, a strong — de-radicalization program. But make no mistake, underneath there is a hidden radicalization program,” al-Sharbi added. “There is a very hidden strong — way stronger in magnitude — broader in financing, in all that.”

Al-Sharbi is one of the longest-serving, and most unrepentant, prisoners at Gitmo. A Saudi national with an electrical engineering degree from King Fahd University, he attended a US flight school associated with two of the 9/11 hijackers. He traveled to Afghanistan in the summer of 2001 and trained at an al Qaeda camp, building IEDs to use against allied forces.

Al-Sharbi was captured March 28, 2002, at an al Qaeda safehouse in Faisalabad, Pakistan, with senior al Qaeda leader Abu Zubaydah. According to his US intel dossier, he told interrogators that “the US got what it deserved from the terrorist attacks on 9/11.”

Given a chance at parole after 14 years, however, al-Sharbi was surprisingly frank with the board.

He explained that Riyadh is actively recruiting and training fighters to battle Iranian elements in neighboring Yemen and Syria. Saudi views Shiite-controlled Iran as a regional threat to its security.

“They’re launching more wars and the [United] States is backing off from the region,” he said. “They’re poking their nose here and here and there and they’re recruiting more jihadists, and they’ll tell you, ‘Okay, go fight in Yemen. Go fight in Syria.’ ”

Al-Sharbi said the Saudis also are “encouraging” former detainees “to fight their jihad in the States.”

“It’s not like a past history,” he said. “It’s increasing.”

A growing body of evidence backs up his claims. Last month, for example, a WikiLeaked email from Hillary Clinton revealed, citing US intelligence sources, that Saudi Arabia has provided “clandestine financial and logistic support to” ISIS and other Sunni terrorist groups in the region.

Al-Sharbi said the kingdom is playing a double game.

“They will proudly tell you they will fight terrorism,” he said. “That means they will support it.”

Al-Sharbi told the Gitmo board he doesn’t want to enroll in the Saudi rehab program, because he would be used to “fight under the Saudi royal cloak.”

“This is in the cause of a king. This is not a true jihad,” he said. “And I’m not going to Saudi unless I am sure they’re not gonna be using me.”

The Saudi rehab ruse has carried a lot of weight with the Gitmo parole board. Earlier this year, it released “Saudi al Qaeda recruiter and fighter” Muhammed Al Shumrani after his lawyers insisted that repatriating him to Saudi Arabia and enrolling him in its “well-established reintegration program” would cure his admittedly “problematic behavior.”

Last year, the defense team of longtime bin Laden bodyguard Abdul Rahman Shalabi insisted that the same Saudi rehab program would make sure he’s reformed. In approving his release, the board said that it was “confident about the efficacy of the Saudi program.”

In both cases, US intelligence warned the board that the hardened terrorists would more than likely “re-engage in terrorist activity.”

By Riyadh’s own numbers, some 20 percent of the terrorist enrollees at its rehab club — which features golf carts, palm trees and an Olympic-size pool — go back to the jihad, returning to the ranks of the Taliban or al Qaeda. US officials believe the recidivism rate is much higher, but Saudi Arabia does not disclose criteria for evaluation.

One high-profile failure was Said Ali al-Shihri. After his graduation from the Saudi program, he returned to Yemen, where he ran an al Qaeda branch and helped plan the deadly bombing of the US Embassy and mastermind the failed plot to blow up a 2009 Christmas flight over Detroit, before a drone-fired missile finally caught up to him.

The Saudi center is more holiday resort than halfway house for paroled inmates. Jihadists are rewarded with gourmet meals, video games, ping-pong, jacuzzis and newly furnished private apartments reserved for conjugal visits. They also are allowed unescorted visits to family members. In September, the center granted “beneficiaries” Eid al-Adha holiday vacation for 12 days.

Graduates are further rewarded with young brides and new cars.

Lending credence to al-Sharbi’s charges, the three-month program includes a few hours a day of lessons in Islam from Saudi clerics and “Shariah specialists.”

“Beneficiaries spend 15 hours a week in the Shariah program,” according to a local Jeddah press report, which is triple the amount of time devoted to psychological counseling.

Al-Sharbi’s parole was declined; he is still in Gitmo, along with 60 detainees — down from the 241 who were there when Obama started his term.

But with the administration rushing to reduce that number even further before the end of Obama’s term, how many more jihadists will be released into this highly suspect program?

Congress has an obligation to ask hard questions: Is this a pre-emptive campaign to prevent terror attacks or more likely an incubator for facilitating more attacks?

The CIA’s director John Brennan told Al Arabiya News Channel that “there was no evidence” of a Saudi involvement in the 9/11 attacks.

However, there are 29 pages, not 28, numbered 415 through 443 in the congressional inquiry into the 9/11 attacks. And deletions on the pages — sometimes words, often whole lines — add up to the equivalent of a total of three pages. So we still are not being given the full story.

It is instantly apparent that the widely held belief for why the pages were not initially released — to prevent embarrassing the Saudi royal family — is true.

The pages are devastating:

Page 415: “While in the United States, some of the September 11 hijackers were in contact with, and received support and assistance from, individuals who may be connected to the Saudi Government.… [A]t least two of those individuals were alleged by some to be Saudi intelligence officers.”

Page 417: One of the individuals identified in the pages as a financial supporter of two of the 9/11 hijackers, Osama Bassnan, later received a “significant amount of cash” from “a member of the Saudi Royal Family”during a 2002 trip to Houston.

Page 418: “Another Saudi national with close ties to the Saudi Royal Family, [deleted], is the subject of FBI counterterrorism investigations.”

Pages 418 and 419: Detained al Qaeda leader Abu Zubaida had in his phone book the unlisted number for the security company that managed the Colorado residence of the then-Saudi ambassador to the United States, Prince Bandar bin Sultan.

Page 421: “a [deleted], dated July 2, 2002, [indicates] ‘incontrovertible evidence that there is support for these terrorists inside the Saudi Government.’”

Page 426: Bassnan’s wife was receiving money “from Princess Haifa Bint Sultan,” the wife of the Saudi ambassador. (Her correct name is actually Princess Haifa bint Faisal.)

Page 436: The general counsel of the US Treasury Department, David Aufhauser, testified that “offices [of the Saudi charity al-Haramain] have significant contacts with extremists, Islamic extremists.” CIA officials also testified “that they were making progress on their investigations of al-Haramain.… [T]he head of the central office is complicit in supporting terrorism, and it also raised questions about [then-Saudi Interior Minister] Prince Nayef.”


And here's the Saudi dictator family's "peaceful" branch.

Saudi based and steered OIC is all Sunni muslims Umma organization, which has declared the most basic Human Rights obsolete if they aren't sharia compliant.

Mr X ”president” Mohammad Hussein Barakeh Obama, who “respects” islamofascism and wants it to conquer the US and the UN by supporting OIC, the world’s main Sharia organization against Universal Human Rights.

And the muslim Washington sniper John Allen Williams, aka John Allen Muhammad who joined the Nation of Islam in 1987 and changed his surname to Muhammad and became a muslim serial killer as part of a jihad for Allah.





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 100,000s 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).