Saying islam is "a great religion" is a grave insult to secularism* and secularized religions

* No religious or other superstitious and spiritual basis for legislation etc. The only guidance for legislation is the most basic of Human Rights, i.e. the universal equality principle that makes sexism and racism (and due hate) redundant (Klevius 1992).

Who is a muslim - and who isn't?

Where does "extremist/radical" islam end and "moderate" islam start?

Samantha Lewthwaite, Mishal Husain and Michael Adebolajo

Mishal Husain pretends to be a "Brit" yet shares values that are as far you can get from Britishness and basic Human Rights. Or is she just pretending to be a muslim - i.e. an apostate? In the latter case she has committed the worst crime islam knows about.

It was considered "racist abuse" when BBC's Mishal Husain was told by a shopper in supermarket (about her children fooling around) that 'Your tribe need to behave like proper English children'.

So what about Communities Secretary Eric Pickles who has been challenged by British muslims (see below) for writing to mosques in England urging them to do more to fit a "British identity" and that there was “more work to do”? Racist?

Muslim born (apostate?!)* Mr X** "president"*** Hussain**** Obama Soetoro (or whatever)***** who wants to criminalize criticism of islamic hate speech (sharia), and who has made himself sharia compliant and therefore against Human Rights: 'Our biggest advantage is that our muslim populations, they feel themselves to be Americans. However, there are parts of Europe in which that is not the case and that's probably the greatest danger that Europe faces.'

* Born to a muslim father who hadn't committed apostasy (the worst crime in islam) made him a muslim. Moreover, he was also raised as a muslim because his adoptive father Soetoro was a muslim.
** All his records are labeled secret.
*** His mother was too young as the only US parent for to fulfill the constitutional criterion. He listened for some 20 years to one of the worst black supremacist racists' preachings. He used the race card in the election and he has violated the spirit of the US Constitution ever since.
**** more in line with his muslim heritage
***** sarcasm:

Klevius: Shouldn't muslim born (apostate?!) Mr X "president" and the news channels which broadcasted his nonsense, now for it as did Steve Emerson and Fox News who actually didn't say anything wrong in principle?! After all, Saudi based and Saudi led OIC is openly pushing for a worldwide sharia Ummah.


Why talk about islamic violence when the real subject should be islamic sharia causing not only violence but also all sorts of other Human Rights violations?

A new guide written by students at Michigan State University aims to educate the public about muslim Americans. Kate Kerbrat said that all the muslims she interviewed for the guide "denounced terrorism and wanted to ... convey that islam is not a violent religion, that the extremists misinterpret a few verses in the Quran."

Klevius: Like the Saudi based and Saudi steered 57 member state OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation) which has abandoned the most basic of Human Rights all together and replaced them with sharia via UN?!

Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam,Aug. 5, 1990

Recognizing the importance of issuing a Document on Human Rights in Islam that will serve as a guide for Member states in all aspects of life;

Having examined the stages through which the preparation of this draft Document has so far, passed and the relevant report of the Secretary General;

Having examined the Report of the Meeting of the Committee of Legal Experts held in Tehran from 26 to 28 December, 1989;

Agrees to issue the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam that will serve as a general guidance for Member States in the Field of human rights.

Reaffirming the civilizing and historical role of the Islamic Ummah which Allah made as the best community and which gave humanity a universal and well-balanced civilization, in which harmony is established between hereunder and the hereafter, knowledge is combined with faith, and to fulfill the expectations from this community to guide all humanity which is confused because of different and conflicting beliefs and ideologies and to provide solutions for all chronic problems of this materialistic civilization.

In contribution to the efforts of mankind to assert human rights, to protect man from exploitation and persecution, and to affirm his freedom and right to a dignified life in accordance with the Islamic Shari'ah.

Convinced that mankind which has reached an advanced stage in materialistic science is still, and shall remain, in dire need of faith to support its civilization as well as a self motivating force to guard its rights;

Believing that fundamental rights and freedoms according to Islam are an integral part of the Islamic religion and that no one shall have the right as a matter of principle to abolish them either in whole or in part or to violate or ignore them in as much as they are binding divine commands, which are contained in the Revealed Books of Allah and which were sent through the last of His Prophets to complete the preceding divine messages and that safeguarding those fundamental rights and freedoms is an act of worship whereas the neglect or violation thereof is an abominable sin, and that the safeguarding of those fundamental rights and freedom is an individual responsibility of every person and a collective responsibility of the entire Ummah;

Do hereby and on the basis of the above-mentioned principles declare as follows:

ARTICLE 24:

All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari'ah.


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

Klevius: This declaration is the real muslim problem because it constitutes islam of today. This is also the reason why BBC and its muslim sharia presenter try hard to keep ordinart Brits and others unaware of this disgusting hate declaration.

Iyad Madani, Saudi Fuhrer of the Saudi initiated and Saudi based OIC, all the world's muslims Umma and Sharia organization, which via UN demands the world to criminalize criticism of islam (the worst crime ever) and to make it a crime following Human Rights (as it is already in e.g. Saudi Arabia - compare the case of Raif Badawi and others).

British muslims oppose British values

Communities Secretary Eric Pickles has been challenged by Muslims for writing to mosques in England urging them to do more to root out extremists and prevent young people being radicalised.

In a letter sent to more than 1,000 Islamic leaders, Mr Pickles stressed that he was “proud” of the way Muslims in Britain had responded to the Paris terror attacks but added that there was “more work to do”.

The Muslim Council of Britain said it wanted Mr Pickles to clarify his request - and asked if, like “members of the far right”, he was suggesting that Islam is inherently apart from British society.

Deputy secretary-general Harun Khan said: “We will be writing to Mr Eric Pickles to ask that he clarifies his request to Muslims to ‘explain and demonstrate how faith in Islam can be part of British identity’.

“Is Mr Pickles seriously suggesting, as do members of the far right, that Muslims and Islam are inherently apart from British society?”

In the letter, also signed by Communities Minister Lord Ahmad (the muslim who threatened to let loose ten thousand jihadists if the Brits didn't obey to muslim demands - same muslim was later sentenced for killing a person with his car), Mr Pickles wrote: “You, as faith leaders, are in a unique position in our society. You have a precious opportunity, and an important responsibility, in explaining and demonstrating how faith in Islam can be part of British identity.

“We believe together we have an opportunity to demonstrate the true nature of British islam today. There is a need to lay out more clearly than ever before what being a British muslim means today: proud of your faith and proud of your country. We know that acts of extremism are not representative (sic) of islam, but we need to show what is.”

A "colored" voice on islamic schizophrenia

Aki Muthali (born and raised in Sri Lanka): We know Reza Aslan is a stickler for misrepresenting the truth. I have discussed him once before here. His obsession with omitting key details of Islamist violence has made him a proper unicorn since his takeover of Western media. He also found comfort in the hearts of [pseudo] liberals obsessed with their own western colonial and imperial guilt who also have no problem limiting human rights for people [in the east and west] just so it doesn’t “offend” religious fanatics.

On January 8, 2015, he was on CNN (yet again) with Don Lemon, discussing the Charlie Hebdo massacre.

ASLAN:"They make fun of Muslims for a very specific reason to sort of show, or maybe demonstrate, that look if you maybe want to be in this country, if you want to be in France, then you have to deal with the French values, you have to rid yourself of your own values, ideals, norms and you have to take on French values."

In the case of Charlie Hebdo—the massacre took place because the “French value” was to uphold free speech [over religious appeasement]. But that isn’t a “Muslim value”—am I hearing this right? I’ll let my head fall on the table for a minute here…

With all the different races and cultures that create France’s multicultural landscape, only those practicing Islam are being specially targeted by the French society? So the Kouachi brothers simply reacted by killing cartoonists and police officers?

being religious means people can never truly integrate into secular societies—that religion will be at a constant war with the provision of human rights above the law of religion itself

he is admitting that being religious means people can never truly integrate into secular societies—that religion will be at a constant war with the provision of human rights above the law of religion itself.

Jihadists had heavily indoctrinated the Kouachi brothers with Islamic tribalism [on recruitment at a young age] which resulted in mental lacerations that kept them further apart from civil society and convinced them to contribute to the tyranny of those wanting an Islamic totalitarianism. And that’s what Islamists do—they take advantage of young children and preach anti-western and anti-secular sentiments to the point where they feel victimized whenever their Islamic values aren’t placed above human rights—then Aslan proceeds to reiterate these clearly erroneous placement of blame on the west as well. Somehow, the west is “accountable” when they refuse to sacrifice fundamental human rights for the bigotry of religious fanaticism.

ASLAN:“And there have been a number of laws passed not only in France, with regard to prohibitions on Islamic dress, but throughout Europe about whether you can build mosques, about whether you can build minarets, etcetera. And this tension, this polarization I'm afraid has led to a lot of acts of violence. Not just the tragedy yesterday...”

Surely, Aslan’s eyeballs will bulge momentarily after hearing one of the gunmen literally admitting to being influenced by the scriptures to die as a martyr for Islam [back in a 2005 documentary on Muslim extremism] but he would probably brush that off as well and make another mental note to deflect and deter criticism of Islam and shorten it to an “identity crisis” and “clash of civilizations” to place a collective blame [on those being abused by Islam]. Where did he get his Ph.D. from—Fox News?

Infidels must have been asking for it with their enticing secular nonsense—so of course it makes sense to shout “Allahu Akbar” while slaughtering them. But it still has nothing to do with Islam!

One of the brothers told a female worker at Charlie Hebdo that she is being left alive because she is a woman, but she must convert to Islam and wear a hijab. See—women are not compelled to wear the hijab at all!

ASLAN:“And particularly in France, an aggressively secularizing country that has never really tolerated multiculturalism or the kind of cultural religious diversity that is the hallmark of the United States, you can see how that would create the kinds of tensions that would bubble up occasionally into acts of violence on both sides. We have seen a lot of anti-Muslim violence in Europe as well as Muslim violence against Europeans.”

He claims a multi-racial “Muslim” group is having hostility with a multi-racial “European” group and yet he only blames one group for the atrocities.This is what I call ‘mind-numbing idiocy’—and as if that weren’t enough, his hyperbole narrative implies severe racism against the “Muslims”.

Why is the controversial caricature being referred to as “racist”? It sounds rather unsophisticated to me. Who exactly is Charlie Hebdo being racist towards—blacks—whites—browns—olives? I think my hair just turned white.

Islam is represented by Asians, Africans, Americans, Australians and Europeans—so who exactly is being racially discriminated by the satire…? I’m genuinely curious.

I’m sure Aslan has heard of Anjem Choudary. If we are to scan through his social media pages—he incites hatred and violence against non-Muslims and calls for an Islamic colonialism in the west [in accordance with the Quran and Sharia Law].

The way free speech works is Choudary can spout as much hate speech against non-Muslims as he wants and still he hasn’t been violently victimized by ‘anti-Muslim bigots’ in the west,whereas anybody else who satirizes or criticizes Islam under the same banner of free speech—they get shot and killed or threatened by Islamists who are protecting the “honour” of Islam exactly as any citizens living in countries governed by the law of Sharia are terrorized for blasphemy.

Aslan’s narrative is so dangerous that it suggests Islamists violence and threats are part of multiculturalism and should be respected. He is defaming multiculturalism itself with his nonsensical rationale—which creates more room for the rednecks that chant “Go back home!” not just to immigrants but also to people of colour who were born and raised in the west.

Masking every wrong on European colonization and [western] foreign and national policy continues to keep even our fellow women, children and men in the east shackled in mass terror day and night under the grip of their countrymen’s law concentrated with religious insanity.

Do the people of the east not deserve a better standard of human rights from their own government and citizens? How is the “west” preventing the east from granting human rights to its own people? Is Dick Cheney responsible for their jurisprudence—is he the one enforcing the draconian blasphemy laws? Just don’t blame“religion” if you want to be Aslan’s friend though—because this lion only roars in the west.

Conforming to secularism did not happen overnight in the west—it took centuries of bloodshed to even accept the idea—and it’s still not perfect, but it has a lot more human rights to offer than the east. While slavery is abolished in the west—it’s still alive and well in much of the Middle East where it’s openly practiced. Aside from ISIS’s brutality, ask why the people from India, Philippines, China, Sri Lanka,much of Africa, etc. who arrive to the Middle East on a worker visa, hoping for employment,are unable to return home to their loved ones.

While Islamists indoctrinate and force children to gear up in suicide vests and blow themselves up—we have Aslan [and others like him] claiming these unprecedented scale of terror around the world committed by Muslim extremists is a mere response to racial and cultural oppression by the west and doesn’t involve Islam in any way.

Recently, Amnesty International reported Boko Haram had killed approximately 2,000 people—mainly children, women and the elderly. What was the “west’s” involvement in this Islamist frenzy to create an “Islamic State” in West Africa;who erased the accountability of these eastern tyrants? Just ignore the meaning of “Boko Haram” if you’re feeling too cute for critical thinking.You can click here to view details and satellite image of Boko Haram’s attack on Baga, Nigeria.

I will discuss Raif Badawi repeatedly until reality sinks in. Why is he rotting in a Saudi prison? He was charged with “insulting Islam” after promoting free speech. He will receive 50 lashes every week—his spine will bleed and fester for 19 more weeks if he does survive the remaining 950 lashes. He also faces 10 years and approximately a quarter of a million dollars in fine. His initial sentencing was death for apostasy before it was “reduced”. Alas, hypocrisy enables people to condemn Saudi Arabia while making apologies for the Kouachi brothers.

Liberal/non-Muslims are already on a trial in a kangaroo court created in the delusional minds of Islamists who also processed the voir dire on the values of Sharia but apologists claim Islamists are the victims. So let me ask these apologists a few questions…

1) Why do you not march for minorities [Kurds, Yazidis, Balochs, non-Muslims, etc.] facing apartheid in Islamic nations?

2) Why do you silence discussion on the double standards, hypocrisy and contradiction Muslims often display in both east and west?

3) Why are you so eager to discredit and neglect the plight of those victimized by Islamists—victims who are as diverse in race and nationality as the Islamists themselves?

4) What can a verdict be[in a trial built on fallacies] when the doctrine of Islam is incompatible with liberalism?

Just take a proper look at Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Qatar,Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Palestine, Algeria, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Egypt, Libya, Somalia, Morocco, Sudan, Brunei, Malaysia, Oman, etc. and if these countries aren’t evident of human rights strife directly resulting from the consequences of embracing Islamic values—just please stop pretending to be indignant about injustice because you’re satirizing yourselves without the help of Charlie Hebdo.

Islamists stormed the magazine’s office due to their material which was enabled by freedom of speech but Aslan frills it up as a result of France “forcing” Muslim people to renounce their “norms”. His accusatory tone aimed at western people is the only thing generalizing all Muslims into one insidious category—so I denounce him for implicating the Muslim “norm” as being disconnected with liberal values.

The Kouachi brothers are not martyrs of multicultural and racial struggle—they are anti-liberal and anti-human-rights Islamists who assassinated 12 innocent people to honour their Islamic pride as commanded by the Sharia Law.

I’d like to welcome Aslan and his cheerleaders to the 21st century where multi-generational bigotry meets common sense and their redundant, preposterous apologia gets dismissed as quickly as religion dismisses human rights—and that is precisely why Islamists fear liberalism—because it is slowly ending the epoch of rule based on delusions and its momentum is creeping into the Islamic nations perilously governed by such madness.

Growing up must be so hard for some people—especially when they are told they can’t hijack the world for their own foolish sentiments.






Radical Islamists are using Sharia Law to silence fellow Muslims who critique the religion. (Photo: Emad Nassar/Flash90)

Last Wednesday’s terrorist attack against the Charlie Hebdo magazine in Paris shocked the world. A satirical magazine known for printing images of Muhammad, which is against Sharia law, the magazine has been threatened over the years by various terror and Islamist groups to stop or suffer the consequences.

The attack on the magazine, which left 12 people dead, is an attack by radical Islamists on the West’s ideals of freedom of speech. The terrorists who carried out the Charlie Hebdo attack were in line with a method of thinking that is becoming all the more popular among Muslims around the world.

Proscribed by numerous Islamic states and various Islamist groups, the terrorists believed that Sharia law should be implemented under any circumstances where the honor of the prophet Mohammed is seen to be ‘insulted’.

Over the last few years, numerous regimes and religious entities in Muslim countries have given out the death penalty for any person believed to have publicly critiqued Islam, Mohammed or even the government. Claiming that all such behavior is anti-Islam, these Islamist regimes have started a war on the basic human privilege known as freedom of expression.

image: http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Soheil-Arabi.jpg
Soheil Arabi (Photo: MEMRI/ Hra-news.org)Soheil Arabi (Photo: MEMRI/ Hra-news.org)

In Arab and Muslim countries, defaming Islam and the Prophet Muhammad is still defined as an offense against Sharia Law and entails heavy punishment. Recent examples of the enforcement of such laws have included the arrest of Saudi intellectual Dr. Turki Al-Hamad and Saudi blogger Hamza Kashgari; the arrest of another Saudi liberal, Raef Badawi, who was sentenced to public flogging; and both Mauritanian blogger Mohamed Cheikh Ould Mkhaitir and Iranian blogger Soheil Arabi, who were sentenced to death.

Mohamed Cheikh Ould Mkhaitir was sentenced to death for writing an article on January 14, 2014, in which he criticized some decisions that the Prophet and his Companions took during their military conquests. He applied and used these examples to implicitly criticize Mauritania for allowing a discriminatory caste system. The result was that on December 24, 2014, a court in Mauritania convicted him of apostasy and sentenced him to being shot to death, even though he publicly disavowed insulting Muhammad.

As for Iranian Soheil Arabi, he was arrested in January 2014 by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps for insulting the Prophet on his Facebook page. He has been incarcerated in Evin prison for about a year. An Iranian court sentenced him to death, but in December 2014 the sentence was suspended, possibly due to pressure by Iranian human rights activists abroad. However, according to various activists, his sentence may be carried out after all. According to those same sources, Arabi has been threatened not to disclose any information about his legal status.

image: http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/wp-content/uploads/useful_banner_manager_banners/81-TheThirdJihad-600WIDE.jpg

More recently, Saudi authorities began to carry out the punishment for Raef Badawi. As of January 9, the government began dishing out lashes incurred by Badawi, who is a co-founder of the Saudi Liberal Network online forum. His sentence, 1,000 lashes, is to be meted out in weekly installments of 50 lashes every Friday after prayers in front of a Jeddah mosque. In addition, Badawi is to serve 10 years in jail and a fine of 1,000,000 riyals (about $267,000). His crime? “Harming Islam” and committing Internet crimes. Human rights organizations have criticized the sentence. US State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki called Badawi’s sentence “brutal” and urged Saudi authorities to overturn it.

According to the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), the various punishments inflicted on these men for speaking their minds is straight out of the Koran. In a recently published report, MEMRI explains:

image: http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/rafi-badawi.jpg
Rafi Badawi with his children. Raef Badawi with his children.

“According to the Sharia, defaming the Prophet is an act of blasphemy, the punishment for which is death even if the blasphemer repents. This law is Koranic, for Koran 9:61 says: “Those who hurt Allah’s Messenger will have a painful punishment.” The same Surah also states: “…Say: ‘(Go ahead and) mock! But certainly Allah will bring to light all that you fear. If you ask them (about this), they declare: ‘We were only talking idly and joking.’ Say: ‘Was it at Allah and His verses and His Messenger that you were mocking? Make no excuse; you have disbelieved after you had believed. [Koran 9:64-66].’”

The question that remains is how long will it take for Western countries to realize that they are not dealing with simply a bunch of radicals, but with a culture that not only condones such actions as were seen in France last week, but promotes and encourages them – even commands it.

While it is rare to see such acts of terror in Western countries that are not mandated by Sharia Law, it is sadly commonplace among Muslim countries. What are clearly acts of terror in the West are in reality run of the mill legal battles in Islamic countries. The sickening part of it all is what happens when Islam succeeds at silencing all of its critics, both internal and external.

Even ‘moderate’ countries such as Egypt, whose President came out and decried the status of radical Islam on the international level, have their less liberal and more mainstream religious elements calling for a cessation of all depictions of the prophet, even by western media.

Should the attacks in France then come as a shock? Perhaps. Or maybe it is a wake up call to the West to get them to realize that these Muslim radicals are simply trying to enforce their version of the Sharia Law in Western countries.

BBC wastes 7 min on an islam critic's mistake abt UK no-go-areas - a topic BBC otherwise almost never spend time on!

BBC focusing on smearing an individual islam critic (Steve Emerson) while defending Human Rights violating islam

Steve Emerson is an islam "expert" playing in a lower division were mistakes may occur. However, fact slips like the one that the whole of the big UK city named Birmingham would be totally muslim and as a whole a muslim no-go-area shouldn't be used to cover up the troublesome fact that a steadily growing part of UK is turning into racist sharia areas. But this is of low importance for BBC which rather used a huge chunk of its news program for poorly veiled personal attacks on Steve Emerson instead of discussing the real problem - hate fueling racist/sexist islam. Birmingham is heavily infested by islamofascism, not only in schools (see e.g. the Trojan horse scandal in Birmingham UK).

Actually, the whole of UK is a no-go-area when it comes to criticism of islam or muslims. No other group is equally "sensitive" and protected.

Klevius message to BBC: If you try to call Klevius and other peaceful Human Rights defenders who criticize islam's Human Rights violations "extremist" - then you also prescribe to Saudi Arabia's islamofascist criminalization of Human Rights! Is that what you are there to do really? You can't juxtaposition the most basic of Human Rights with sharia violations of Human Rights as to create a presumably "non-extremist"/"moderate" islam in between. Driving on the correct side of the road isn't "extremism" nor is driving in the middle of the road "moderate". And if you want an "islam" that bypasses OIC's sharia declaration in UN - then there is no longer any islam that worries Klevius. A "personal islam" isn't islam - other than among dreamers and deliberately lying imams, media people and politicians!

Is BBC/Eddie Mair steered by this islamofascist, Iyad Madani and his muslim world Ummah, the Human Rights violating Saudi based OIC?

Here are two of the very few BBC reports on no-go-area racism throughout 13 years. Keep in mind that they are full of BBC bias and that the reality is far worse. Also note how BBC tries to paint a picture that this should somehow have something to do with white racism. For more than a decade white racism has been the one and sole target for anti-racism. As a consequence (and assuming that racism isn't biologically inherited in white skin) under normal circumstance there should therefore be less white racism than colored racism. Add on top of this islam which is to a high degree a fascism of color, and you'll see even more of the disgusting bias wrapped in BBC's reporting.


BBC 3, Oct 2014
Asian Vigilantes
by Barnie Choudhury

An investigation for Today has found disturbing evidence that Asian youths in parts of Oldham are trying to create no go areas for white people.

Last year the police investigated record levels of racist attacks in Oldham.Of the 572 cases, 60% turned out to be white victims.

Pakistanis make up the majority on the Glodwick estate just west of the town centre. Some youths speak the language of racial hatred. It's not clear whether this is bravado but their message is blunt... white people keep out.

Many openly admit to carrying out what they see as revenge attacks on white people as part of a tit-for-tat campaign.

One told us: "There are signs all around saying whites enter at your risk. It's a matter of revenge. It's about giving as good as you can take."

Another had a six-inch scar running across his head. He said he had been attacked by a white gang.

"I got slashed by some whites so that I'm totally racist. I don't like whites. It's like this now, we go to a white area and we get done over. It's like them coming here they get done over...it's for your own good."

This hardening in attitude is repeated across the town and has passed down to children as young as 10. Unlike their parents they will not tolerate being victims of racism.

Local white people are scared and many want to leave the estates but cannot.

"I was just walking with my dog around 10 at night and a group of Asian youths in their car, music blaring,threatening me like saying they'd kick me head in calling me white bastard, white scum. You're frightened," one person told me.

Many Asian youths say they take the law into their own hands because they have no confidence in the police.

The perception is that the police do not take racist attacks on Asian people as seriously as assualts on white residents.

Akbor Khan had his three front teeth smashed in a brutal attack by a white gang:

"I used to have a take away in Manchester. We used to get lots of people who used to order food but not pay for it. It used to take the police an hour to get there. We'd ring the police and they'd say we haven't got the manpower. But if it happened to white people they would be there in 10 minutes," he said.

Many Asian community leaders say the trouble is caused by a minority stoking up problems for the majority, who are law abiding residents.

They say they would happily support greater police action to clamp down on the trouble makers.

Greater Manchester Police deny the accusations levelled at them.

A special multi-agency task force has been set up in Oldham to tackle the growing number of racist attacks



Compare to an other BBC report from


BBC 19 April, 2001
Police deny 'no-go zones' for whites
racist graffiti
Racist graffiti in Oldham is stirring up tensions
Police have denied that Asian youths are turning parts of Oldham into "no-go zones" for whites.

Latest police figures show a record level of race attacks in the Greater Manchester town, with 60% of reported victims being white.

Suggestions that no-go areas exist in Oldham followed the violence which flared at the weekend between white and Asian youths in Bradford.

Chief Superintendent Eric Hewitt, of the Oldham division of Greater Manchester police, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that he did not believe there were any such areas in Oldham.

But he warned that unless the public gave their full support to police initiatives there was a "very real danger" that no-go zones could become reality.


It's a matter of getting revenge, a matter of giving as good as you can take

Asian youth

In a report on the Today programme, one young Asian on the Glodwick estate in the west of Oldham said there were signs all around the area saying "Whites enter at your own risk".

"It wasn't done to say 'We don't want you in our area', it was just to show that 'What you've done to us, we can do to you'," he said.

"It's a matter of getting revenge, a matter of giving as good as you can take.

"No one comes in here and causes trouble any more."


There has certainly been an increase of violence on white people

Councillor, Abdul Jabbar
But local councillor Abdul Jabbar said most people in the town lived in harmony, and only a small minority were responsible for the racist attacks.

He said: "There has certainly been an increase of violence on white people.

"This worries me and has to be resolved.

"But also there are attacks on Asian people, some very serious ones."

Racial crime unit

Akbor Khan, who lost three teeth in an attack by a gang of white youths in a subway, told the programme he would not report the crime because he had no confidence in the police.

But Mr Hewitt refuted the allegation that police were slow to respond to complaints from the Asian community.

"To try to combat that under-reporting, over a year ago I set up a special racial crime unit in the town to demonstrate that we were taking it seriously and that we would identify and arrest people responsible for these offences by employing specialist officers.

"That small unit alone arrested 75 people for racist crime last year.

"We are taking it seriously and we are producing the results.

Mr Hewitt urged community leaders to help the police identify anyone responsible for race attacks.





Compare this with some old stuff by Soeren Kern:

European ‘No-Go’ Zones for Non-Muslims Proliferating
“Occupation Without Tanks or Soldiers”

by Soeren Kern
August 22, 2011 at 5:00 am

Islamic extremists are stepping up the creation of “no-go” areas in European cities that are off-limits to non-Muslims.

Many of the “no-go” zones function as microstates governed by Islamic Sharia law. Host-country authorities effectively have lost control in these areas and in many instances are unable to provide even basic public aid such as police, fire fighting and ambulance services.

The “no-go” areas are the by-product of decades of multicultural policies that have encouraged Muslim immigrants to create parallel societies and remain segregated rather than become integrated into their European host nations.

In Britain, for example, a Muslim group called Muslims Against the Crusades has launched a campaign to turn twelve British cities – including what it calls “Londonistan” – into independent Islamic states. The so-called Islamic Emirates would function as autonomous enclaves ruled by Islamic Sharia law and operate entirely outside British jurisprudence.

The Islamic Emirates Project names the British cities of Birmingham, Bradford, Derby, Dewsbury, Leeds, Leicester, Liverpool, Luton, Manchester, Sheffield, as well as Waltham Forest in northeast London and Tower Hamlets in East London as territories to be targeted for blanket Sharia rule.

In the Tower Hamlets area of East London (also known as the Islamic Republic of Tower Hamlets), for example, extremist Muslim preachers, called the Tower Hamlets Taliban, regularly issue death threats to women who refuse to wear Islamic veils. Neighborhood streets have been plastered with posters declaring “You are entering a Sharia controlled zone: Islamic rules enforced.” And street advertising deemed offensive to Muslims is regularly vandalized or blacked out with spray paint.

In the Bury Park area of Luton, Muslims have been accused of “ethnic cleansing” by harassing non-Muslims to the point that many of them move out of Muslim neighborhoods. In the West Midlands, two Christian preachers have been accused of “hate crimes” for handing out gospel leaflets in a predominantly Muslim area of Birmingham. In Leytonstone in east London, the Muslim extremist Abu Izzadeen heckled the former Home Secretary John Reid by saying: “How dare you come to a Muslim area.”

In France, large swaths of Muslim neighborhoods are now considered “no-go” zones by French police. At last count, there are 751 Sensitive Urban Zones (Zones Urbaines Sensibles, ZUS), as they are euphemistically called. A complete list of the ZUS can be found on a French government website, complete with satellite maps and precise street demarcations. An estimated 5 million Muslims live in the ZUS, parts of France over which the French state has lost control.

Muslim immigrants are taking control of other parts of France too. In Paris and other French cities with high Muslim populations, such as Lyons, Marseilles and Toulouse, thousands of Muslims are closing off streets and sidewalks (and by extension, are closing down local businesses and trapping non-Muslim residents in their homes and offices) to accommodate overflowing crowds for Friday prayers. Some mosques have also begun broadcasting sermons and chants of “Allahu Akbar” via loudspeakers into the streets.

The weekly spectacles, which have been documented by dozens of videos posted on Youtube.com (here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here), and which have been denounced as an “occupation without tanks or soldiers,” have provoked anger and disbelief. But despite many public complaints, local authorities have declined to intervene because they are afraid of sparking riots.

In the Belgian capital of Brussels (which is 20% Muslim), several immigrant neighborhoods have become “no-go” zones for police officers, who frequently are pelted with rocks by Muslim youth. In the Kuregem district of Brussels, which often resembles an urban war zone, police are forced to patrol the area with two police cars: one car to carry out the patrols and another car to prevent the first car from being attacked. In the Molenbeek district of Brussels, police have been ordered not to drink coffee or eat a sandwich in public during the Islamic month of Ramadan.

In Germany, Chief Police Commissioner Bernhard Witthaut, in an August 1 interview with the newspaper Der Westen, revealed that Muslim immigrants are imposing “no-go” zones in cities across Germany at an alarming rate.

The interviewer asked Witthaut: “Are there urban areas – for example in the Ruhr – districts and housing blocks that are “no-go areas,” meaning that they can no longer be secured by the police?” Witthaut replied: “Every police commissioner and interior minister will deny it. But of course we know where we can go with the police car and where, even initially, only with the personnel carrier. The reason is that our colleagues can no longer feel safe there in twos, and have to fear becoming the victim of a crime themselves. We know that these areas exist. Even worse: in these areas crimes no longer result in charges. They are left ‘to themselves.’ Only in the worst cases do we in the police learn anything about it. The power of the state is completely out of the picture.”

In Italy, Muslims have been commandeering the Piazza Venezia in Rome for public prayers. In Bologna, Muslims repeatedly have threatened to bomb the San Petronio cathedral because it contains a 600-year-old fresco inspired by Dante’s Inferno which depicts Mohammed being tormented in hell.

In the Netherlands, a Dutch court ordered the government to release to the public a politically incorrect list of 40 “no-go” zones in Holland. The top five Muslim problem neighborhoods are in Amsterdam, Rotterdam and Utrecht. The Kolenkit area in Amsterdam is the number one Muslim “problem district” in the country. The next three districts are in Rotterdam – Pendrecht, het Oude Noorden and Bloemhof. The Ondiep district in Utrecht is in the fifth position, followed by Rivierenwijk (Deventer), Spangen (Rotterdam), Oude Westen (Rotterdam), Heechterp/ Schieringen (Leeuwarden) and Noord-Oost (Maastricht).

In Sweden, which has some of the most liberal immigration laws in Europe, large swaths of the southern city of Malmö – which is more than 25% Muslim – are “no-go” zones for non-Muslims. Fire and emergency workers, for example, refuse to enter Malmö’s mostly Muslim Rosengaard district without police escorts. The male unemployment rate in Rosengaard is estimated to be above 80%. When fire fighters attempted to put out a fire at Malmö’s main mosque, they were attacked by stone throwers.

In the Swedish city of Gothenburg, Muslim youth have been hurling petrol bombs at police cars. In the city’s Angered district, where more than 15 police cars have been destroyed, teenagers have also been pointing green lasers at the eyes of police officers, some of whom have been temporarily blinded.

In Gothenburg’s Backa district, youth have been throwing stones at patrolling officers. Gothenburg police have also been struggling to deal with the problem of Muslim teenagers burning cars and attacking emergency services in several areas of the city.

According to the Malmö-based Imam Adly Abu Hajar: “Sweden is the best Islamic state.”

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/2487/french-suburbs-islamic-societies

French Suburbs Becoming ‘Separate Islamic Societies’

by Soeren Kern
October 10, 2011 at 4:45 am

France’s decrepit city suburbs are becoming ‘separate Islamic societies’ cut off from the state, according to a major new study that examines the spread of Islam in France.

Muslim immigrants are increasingly rejecting French values and identity and instead are immersing themselves in Islam, according to the report, which also warns that Islamic Sharia law is rapidly displacing French civil law in many parts of suburban Paris.

The 2,200-page report, “Banlieue de la République” (Suburbs of the Republic), is the result of a one-year research effort into the four “i’s” that comprise the heart of the debate over French national identity: Islam, immigration, identity and insecurity.

The report was commissioned by the influential French think tank L’Institut Montaigne, and directed by Gilles Kepel, a well-known political scientist and specialist in the Muslim world, together with five other French researchers.

The authors of the report show that France, which has between five and six million Muslims (France has the largest Muslim population in European Union), is on the brink of a major social explosion because of the failure of Muslims to integrate into French society.

The report also shows how the problem is being exacerbated by radical Muslim leaders who are promoting the social marginalization of Muslim immigrants in order to create a parallel Muslim society in France that is ruled by Sharia law.

The research was primarily carried out in Clichy-sous-Bois and Montfermeil, two suburbs in north-eastern Paris that were ground zero for Muslim riots in 2005. Clichy and Montfermeil form part of the district of Seine-Saint-Denis, which has one of the highest concentrations of Muslims in France.

Seine-Saint-Denis, which the report describes as a “wasteland of de-industrialization,” is home to more than 600,000 Muslims (primarily from North and West Africa) out of a total population of 1.4 million.

“In some areas, a third of the population of the town does not hold French nationality, and many residents are drawn to an Islamic identity,” the report says.

The study says that Muslim religious institutions and practices are increasingly displacing those of the state and the French Republic, which has a strong secular tradition.

For example, French schools, which are rigorously non-religious, have traditionally been seen as having the role of training and socializing young citizens in the secular values of the French Republic. However, many Muslim pupils refuse to integrate and often boycott school dinners if the food is not halal [religiously permitted in Islam], the report says.

The survey also points to differing social attitudes when it comes to marriage, for example. The report says that although most people in France do not object to mixed marriages, “in the suburbs we were surprised to find a very large proportion of Muslim respondents who said they were opposed to marriages with non-Muslims.”

The researchers also looked into the reasons behind the 2005 riots, which they said had called into question modern France’s founding myth, namely “the implicit shared belief that the nation was always able to integrate people.”

Islamic values are replacing those of a French Republic which has failed to deliver on its promise of “equality,” the report says, and the residents of the suburbs increasingly do not see themselves as French.

But the report adds that the French state is not primarily to blame for this and that many Muslim immigrants simply do not want to integrate into French society.

Although resentment in the poor suburbs has social roots (primarily a lack of jobs), the report says the rioters expressed frustration in a vocabulary that is “borrowed from Islam’s semantic register.”

The report points out that the suburbs of Clichy and Montfermeil have been at the center of one of France’s biggest urban renewal projects. Many physical barriers to integration have been removed, and efforts have been made to plug the area into public transport networks and improve public safety.

Nevertheless, low educational achievement is endemic among the Muslim population. This, in turn, is turning France into a “divided nation.” Most Muslim youth are “not employable.” More than 20% of the residents of Clichy and Montfermeil leave school without a diploma (about 150,000 people per year), according to the report. The unemployment rate for Muslim youth in the suburbs of Paris is around 43%.

These drop-outs enter a cycle of social exclusion negatively shapes their lives and those of their children. Many Muslim youth turn to “deviant behaviors across the range of incivilities in a parallel economy in which drug trafficking is the most prominent.”

“One is struck by the high birth rates among newly arrived families from the African Sahel. The mothers work long hours and their young children are under-supervised by the education system, thus threatening their social integration,” the report says.

Islam is filling the void. The authors of the study are taken aback at the explosion of the halal market in France in recent years and also point out that the term halal has been greatly expanded in its definition. The survey question “do you respect the halal?” highlights the “complexity of different meanings of the word, which in its most restrictive sense means only the dimension of the forbidden food, but may also include a code of conduct, standards and an expression of dominant values, separating the ‘halal’ from ‘haram,’ the lawful or unlawful in many aspects of society.”

The report also describes a proliferation of mosques and prayer rooms in the suburbs. The religious orientations of the mosques are heavily influenced by the national origin of the founder or president of a given mosque.

Islam in Clichy-Montfermeil is structured around two major poles: one pole involves the Tabligh (“spreading of Islam”) movement which is focused on “re-socializing” Muslims on the lower rungs of the socio-economic ladder.

The Tabligh movement arrived in Clichy-Montfermeil in the 1980s in the midst of mass unemployment and drugs. Tabligh preachers built their social legitimacy by providing a moral regeneration of young people in distress around a rigorous practice of the precepts of Islam.

The other pole revolves around the figure of the Tunisian imam Dhaou Meskine, who was involved in the launch of Union of Islamic Organizations in France (UIOF). The UOIF, which represents the majority of the 2,100 registered mosques in France, is closely tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, which aims to extend Islamic law throughout France.

Meskine also participated in the formation of the Union of Muslim Associations (UAM93), a Muslim lobby group that aims to mobilize Muslims to elect candidates in local elections around Islamic issues. UAM93 has been pushing for the construction of a mega-mosque in Seine-Saint-Denis, although that project has run into difficulties due to a power struggle between Algerian, Moroccan and Turkish immigrants.

The report describes a “new sociology of Muslim believers” that is composed mainly of undereducated low-income immigrants who depend on financial support from Morocco or Turkey, countries that are pursuing their own objectives in France.

The authors of the study also point to a contradiction among Muslims who live in the suburbs: they do not want the French state to interfere in matters relating to Islam, but they also expect the state to improve their lot in life.

The report closes with a warning: “France’s future depends on its ability to re-integrate the suburbs into the national project.”

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/2941/muslim-gangs-denmark

Muslim Gangs Terrorize Denmark

by Soeren Kern
March 14, 2012 at 5:00 am

“With Islam comes fear, and with fear comes power.”

More than 140 Muslim gang members were arrested in Denmark after they tried to raid a courthouse where two fellow Muslims are being tried for attempted murder.

The Muslims — all members of criminal street gangs that have taken over large parts of Danish towns and cities — were wearing masks and bullet-proof vests and throwing rocks and bottles as they tried to force their way into the district courthouse in Glostrup, a heavily Islamized suburb of Copenhagen, on March 6.

Police used batons and pepper spray to fend off the gang members, who were armed with an arsenal of 20 different types of weapons, including crowbars, darts, hammers, knives, screwdrivers and wooden clubs.

The trial in Glostrup involves two Pakistani immigrants accused of shooting and attempting to murder two fellow Muslims who belong to a rival gang. Police say the accused used a nine millimeter handgun to carry out the crime in Ballerup, a Muslim suburb northwest of Copenhagen. The trial began on February 28 and is scheduled to run through March 28.

The shooting was related to an escalating turf war between rival Muslim gangs from the Værebroparken housing estate in Bagsværd, a suburb of Copenhagen, and Nivå and Kokkedal in northern Zealand. Immigrant gangs are believed to be responsible for at least 50 shootings in and around Copenhagen during the past several months.

The recent violence is reminiscent of an earlier conflict between immigrant gangs and Danish gangs like the Hells Angels or the AK81 that left many people dead or wounded in Copenhagen and other Danish cities.

The immigrant gangs are involved in countless criminal activities, including drug trafficking, illegal weapons smuggling, extortion, human trafficking, robbery, prostitution, automobile theft, racketeering and murder.

Many of the gang members are ethnic Arabs, Bosnians, Turks and Somalians. They also include Iraqis, Moroccans, Palestinians and Pakistanis.

Over the past several years, the immigrant gangs have proliferated geographically across all of Denmark. The gangs have spread south from Copenhagen to the rest of Zealand, from inner Nørrebro, to the suburbs Ishøj, Greve, Greve, and on to Køge. The gangs are also active in Albertslund, Herlev, Hillerød, Høje Gladsaxe, Hundige, Roskilde and Skovlunde, among many Danish localities.

One of the largest criminal gangs in Denmark is a Muslim gang called Black Cobra. The organization was founded by Palestinian immigrants in Roskilde near Copenhagen in 2000 and now operates in all Danish cities.

Black Cobra has also established itself in Sweden, where it operates with impunity in the Islamized Tensta and Rinkeby suburbs of Stockholm and in the Muslim ghetto of Rosengård in Malmö.

The Black Cobra gang — whose members wear black and white shirts with an emblem of a cobra in attack position — also controls a youth gang called the Black Scorpions.

Danish authorities estimate that each year more than 700 immigrants between the ages of 18 and 25 are choosing crime as a permanent career by joining gangs such as Black Cobra, the Black Scorpions, the Bandidos, the Bloodz, the International Club, or any other of the more than 100 gangs that are now operating in Denmark.

On February 28, the Danish national police (Rigspolitiet) together with the Justice Ministry presented parliament with a plan to push back against the gangs. Police say they hope they can arrest 300 high-ranking gang members — 200 from Zealand and 100 from Jutland — by the end of 2012. The government has also committed 50 million Danish kroner ($9 million) in 2012 to a special project aimed at intercepting and preventing gang recruitment in marginalized areas.

But analysts are skeptical the Danish government can do very much to crack down on the gangs. Although Danish police say they arrested more than 350 gang members in 2011, many of those detentions involved lower-ranking “errand boys” who were released after being questioned.

Some critics say a big problem is a lack of will and that Danish efforts to crack down on the immigrant gangs have been half-hearted at best. In Denmark — as in other European countries where the state-enforced dogma of multiculturalism trumps traditional notions of equal justice for all — immigrants involved in crime are portrayed as victims of circumstance and relatively few are ever sent to prison.

In those cases where immigrants are detained, many are released after just a few hours. Critics say this encourages them to avenge their arrests. A case in point: Of the more than 140 Muslims who were arrested for trying to storm the courthouse in Glostrup on March 6, all but five were immediately released. That same night many of those who were released went on a rampage in Værebroparken, setting fire to trash bins and launching missiles at hapless police.

But a larger part of the problem involves fear.

Immigrant gangs often operate or seek refuge in so-called no-go zones that are effectively off limits to Danish authorities. These “no-go zones” involve suburbs of Copenhagen and other Danish cities that function as autonomous enclaves ruled by Muslim immigrants, areas where Danish police fear to tread.

Muslim gangs in Denmark have been highly adept at leveraging the fear that Danish authorities have of Islam and of Muslim immigrants. They replicated the model that Muslim gangs in Britain have successfully used to wrest control over the criminal underworld in that country.

In an interview with a British newspaper, an Asian Muslim gang member named Amir put it this way: “The reality is that Asian gangs don’t give much of toss about religion, but with Islam comes fear, and with fear comes power. Religion is important to us only as a way of defining who we can trust and who we can work with. Young Muslim gangs aren’t worried about what Allah makes of their criminal ways — they don’t believe in it to that extent.”

Amir added: “Through religion we speak the same language, live in the same areas, go to the same schools and can even use mosques as a safe place away from the police or other gangs. If you f*** with a Muslim gang you’d better be able to run fast or hide well, because they will come back at you in numbers.”

Klevius again by far more informative than BBC when it comes to essential information about islamofascism

Dear reader, if you search for the two most important words today and add BBC you get the following astonishing but also depressing result:

Jan 11, 2015

Are uslims


m































In other words, Klevius has again beaten the world's top media. How come that BBC and it's muslim sharia presenter Mishal Husain, with all the money from compulsory license fee paying Brits and all available connections, technology etc.  can't find this essential information and distribute it?!

Compare what Klevius wrote:

Monday, May 21, 2012

Klevius beats BBC when it comes to true reporting about OIC!

Totalitarian fanaticism replacing Human Rights while BBC misinforms muslims and others on how they're robbed of their Human Rights!
Klevius beats BBC in reporting on the most essential and critical issue of our time: OIC and its Fuhrer Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu's islamofascist violation of the most basic of Human Rights!

BBC, the largest broadcaster in the world, has as its main responsibility to provide impartial public service broadcasting.

Klevius question: How come then that Klevius beats BBC when it comes to informing about OIC? As you can see on the 'OIC BBC' search below Klevius' 'BBC News', i.e. not BBC, is the first to offer real info about OIC. on the web (see the eighth result on the pic below: BBC News by Klevius)! And to really prove it you will find a picture of the first BBC post (BBC News - Profile: Organization of the Islamic Conference) further down to show that it completely avoids to inform the most essential feature of OIC, namely that it has abandoned Human Rights and replaced them with Sharia.

According to BBC OIC's aims are to 'safeguard islamic holy places' (Klevius comment: Those places are already carefully destroyed by the Sauds) and toe eradicate racial discrimination (meaning Human Rights "discrimination" of islamic Sharia) and colonialism (sic - islam has been the worst colonizer ever throughout 1400 years!). But nowhere in BBC's text can you find the most important namely OIC's violation of Human Rights by replacing them with Sharia!

While BBC has some 23,000 staff Klevius is not only alone* and without resources, he is also deliberately hindered in his extremely informative work by active and continuous "islamophobia filtering". Yes, Klevius knows that he could do much better by avoiding words like 'islamofascism' etc. but he loves it.

* no offence to other "islamophobes" out there but Klevius happens to be the one with the best potency for evaluating the origin of islam from a perspective of sex segregation/rapetivism.

Muslims are sharia married with islam(ofascism) via Saudi based OIC and its evil tentacles in UN - if they like it or not!

Samantha Lewthwaite, Mishal Husain and Michael Adebolajo are all muslim jihadists. However, only Mishal Husain isn't UK homegrown (she was influenced/raised by Pakistan and Saudi Arabia).

When muslims are "radical" or "extremist" we are told not to generalize "all muslims". However, when muslims do someting good then it's again ok to generalize.

David Cameron has said Britain faces a very similar threat to France from fanatical extremism. Speaking ahead of the Paris unity march, he said we can only defeat this threat by "confronting the poisonous narrative of Islamist extremism wherever we find it".

Klevius advice: Why not start with your Minister of faith islam, the OIC (with its Human Rights violating sharia) loving Sayeeda Warsi! Isn't it extremism to support organizations which not only violate the most basic of Human Rights but also want to criminalize Human Rights?!

US isn't at war with radical islam

 Chuck Todd of “Meet the Press”:

    Todd: The French Prime Minister this morning declared that France is at war with radical Islam. Would you say the United States is at war with radical Islam?

    Holder: Well, I would say we are at war with terrorists who commit these heinous acts and who…use Islam. They use a corrupted version of Islam to justify their actions. We are bound and determined to hold them accountable, to find them wherever they are. And then to try to…come up with ways in which we prevent young people who become attracted to this radical ideology, becoming members of these groups and perpetrating these heinous acts.

Next up, George Stephanopoulos on “This Week”:

    Stephanopoulos: …France is at war with radical Islam. Is the U.S. at war with radical Islam?

    Eric Holder: Well, I certainly think that we are at war with those who would commit terrorist attacks and who would corrupt the Islamic faith in the way that they do, to try to justify their terrorist actions. So that’s who we are at war with. And we are determined to take the fight to them to prevent them from engaging these kinds of activities…

This is the Saudi Wahhabi islamofascist Iyad Madani who leads all the world's muslims sharia organization, the Saudi based OIC which via UN sanctions sharia atrocities against Human Rights around the globe.

Secular sharia

Ahmed Shebani is Founder of The Democratic Party in Libya: The state needs to be subordinated to the mosque and not vice versa. This will ensure that judges will not remain mere tools of the royal families and of the police state. Only then can we do away with this age old autocracy of ours in favor of the rule of law. There can never be justice otherwise.

In a Muslim secularist state, the people, as represented by their democratically elected parliament, will be the source legislation, Al-Sharia. However, any legislation which contravenes The Quran will be made null and void by the judiciary.

All the Islamist organizations which call for the implementation of Al-Sharia such as ISIS, Al-Qaeda and Ansar Al-Sharia adhere to the extremist Saudi ideology of Wahhabism. The Saudi regime spends billions of dollars on a yearly basis to spread this evil ideology. It would be meaningless for the West to fight these terrorist organizations while unreservedly supporting the royal house of Saud. Theocracy must come to an end in Saudi Arabia and Iran in order to defeat Islamist terrorism at source.

 For unlike Christianity, which makes no separation between God and Man in the person of the Christ, Islam makes such separation central to its message of monotheism. For politics to be informed by religion does not make it religion.

Klevius: There you go - always ending up with sharia! Is Ahmed Shebani a new Ghadaffi or something? However, don't forget that a democracy "informed by Koran/sharia" is no real democracy because it will inevitably clash with the most basic of Human Rights - no matter how you try to twist your man made understanding of islam. And if it doesn't then there is no longer any islam to worry about. Islam as an ideology is then equally dead as Monthy Python's Norwegian Blue parrot.

French Muslim Children Cheer/Mock Gun-Firing Gestures/Thumbs up Outside Kosher Supermarket During Jihad Siege

 Play video

Pamela Geller: During the reportage of jihad siege and slaughter in a Kosher supermarket, Muslim children can be seen cheering, giving the thumbs up and making machine gun-firing gestures behind an on scene reporter. The only thing missing is the passing out of candies. Perhaps Mahmoud Abbas will take care of that.

When the cameraman realizes what is going on behind the reporter, he pulls the camera away. When in fact, that should have become the story. That was the lede at that point.
Jews were being slaughtered in cold blood because they were Jewish and these Muslim kids are cheering.

They get this from home.
They get this from mosque.
They get this from community.
Islamic Jew-hatred — it’s in the Qur’an.

It is reflective of the enemedia’s continued protection and whitewashing of the most savage and extreme ideology on the face of the earth.


Klevius comment: Klevius isn't a Jew but feels equally offended and insulted by muslims' hatred against Atheists. However, although Klevius defends every human beings Human Rights, is against aggression in any form, and only criticizes violations against the most basic of Human Rights - he still counts as a dangerous "islamophobe" - just like Ayaan Hirsi Ali and other "extremists". Dangerous to what? Islam, the worst ideological crime history knows about?

What BBC and its Pakistan/Saudi Arabia raised muslim sharia presenter Mishal Husain "forgot" to tell you about muslim terror on Charlie Hebdo

Charlie Hebdo caricatures weren't meant to offend - they were meant as criticism with a selling* laugh

* Klevius can be quite funny if he so likes - however, he hasn't chosen that more selling path because it might blur some of his analysis. The whole idea of Klevius writings has been that they not only stand the light decades later, but that they also improve by time (no, you're quite right, Klevius doesn't know the word 'moderate').

The worst you can do is to protect islam and its terrorists with blasphemy laws (sharia - that in the West is hidden behind terms like "hate speech"* etc)

* Criticism can never be "hate speech" and hate speech can never be "criticism"! With this simple formula islamic sharia (in whatever basic Human Rights violating form) inevitably classifies as hate speech and Saudi based and led OIC as a terrorist organization supporting hate.

The main problem is OIC's (all muslims sharia Ummah via UN) Human Rights violating sharia declaration which now guides and sanctions not only legislation in muslim majority countries but also the spread of sharia inspired Human Rights violating more or less informal "justice" systems within (and sometimes even nationwide) muslim communities in secular states. And simultaneously OIC makes every effort to push sharia compliant legislation into secular law. One such effort is to criminalize criticism against islam (the worst ever ideological crime against humanity and Human Rights) under the strange cover of "it offends muslims".

If politicians again submit to the jihadists by restricting criticism of islam (the by far worst ideological crime known to history) then it not only equates the desecration of the graves of the Charlie Hebdo victims but also encourages more islam inspired attacks.

Why doesn't BBC's Pakistan/Saudi Arabia raised muslim sharia presenter Mishail Husain never inform about the Saudi/OIC/UN/sharia connection to all the world's muslims?

The "no-go" zones, officially called Zones Urbaines Sensibles (ZUS), or Sensitive Urban Zones formations began in late 1996, and more than 8% of France's population, i.e. some 2/3 of French muslims now live in them. Area locations include the heavily muslim parts of Paris, Marseilles, Strasbourg, Lille and Amiens. Seine-Saint-Denis, a northern suburb of Paris is home to an estimated 500,000 Muslims and 36 of the 40 districts in the area are "no-go" zones.

French rulings and law enforcement are replaced by islamic sharia in the no-go zones. They aren't even allowed in (compare muslim sharia ghettos in Sweden). For example Seine-Saint-Denis experiences frequent acts of violence, riots, fires and shootings everyday by large gangs of the muslim youth.

Washington Times: "France has Europe's largest population of muslims, some of whom talk openly of ruling the country one day and casting aside Western legal systems for harsh, Islam-based Shariah law.France's city officials are slowly losing control of heavily muslim neighborhoods to islamists."

Paul Belien of Brussels Journal: "The ZUS exist not only because Muslims wish to live in their own areas according to their own culture and their own Sharia laws, but also because organized crime wants to operate without the judicial and fiscal interference of the French state. In France, Shariah law and mafia rule have become almost identical."

Soeren Kern at the Gatestone Institute: "What they are trying to do is shut down any sort of criticism of Islam, any sort of speech, cartoons, discussion, anything. Essentially, the French government and the other European governments have lost control over the situation. It's a snowball that is growing bigger and bigger, in particular over the past 10 years. Islam is a permanent part of France now. It is not going away. I think the future looks very bleak. The problem is a lot of these younger-generation Muslims are not integrating into French society. Although they are French citizens, they don't really have a future in French society. They feel very alienated from France. This is why radical Islam is so attractive because it gives them a sense of meaning in their life."

France is the European country with the largest amount of muslims (12-15%). And they have no control over Islamic activity in the Muslim-fueled "no-go" zones.


 The dark forces against criticism of evil

Samantha Lewthwaite, Mishal Husain (from Pakistan) and Michael Adebolajo, representing different paths of islamic sharia jihad.

 Here's an other muslim sharia voice from Pakistan:

And here's one more sharia jihadist, the UK minister of faith islam, Sayeeda Warsi.

Klevius question: Why does it matter if Ahmed Merabet was a muslim? And why can't media see the "prophet" Muhammad/al-Bakr (IS) connection?!

Media fuels islamofascism by defending islam

Samantha Lewthwaite, Mishal Husain (BBC's sharia presenter) and Michael Adebolajo all belong to the same Human Rights violating "religion"*.

* see Klevius definition of religion (2001)

What if Ahmed Merabet (the murdered police) had been a non-muslim with a non-muslim name? 

How come that media tries to make a point of him having one of France's most common names? What has it to do with anything about his tragic death? And did he beg the muslim terrorist not to shoot him because he was also a muslim? We don't know. What we do know is that he was there to protect those who challenged islam. And that's why he was murdered by a muslim terrorist who would consider such a muslim a traitor against islam. What would a non-muslim police have done? We don't know but one possibility is playing dead instead of appealing. Moreover, this strange media approach completely neglects the position of non-muslims in all of this. The non-muslim "infidel" (in general) seems not to be thought of at all as a victim of islam although islam is all about erasing (i.e. genocide) non-muslims. This is why muslims say everyone is born muslim but those who don't submit to islam are the evil "infidel" ones!

The latest tweet on Charlie Hebdo's account was a cartoon of the Islamic State militant group leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi

Klevius analysis: The professional assassinations stay in sharp contrast to the confused behavior by the attackers when arriving at the scene, and lacked completely traces of being planned in advance. This would fit a scenario where Charlie's caricature of Islamic State leader al-Bakr just one hour before, was what triggered the attack. Especially having in mind that Islamic State is on the retreat due to Obomba's air attacks, and the insulting naming of the group by John Kerry and others. It seems that keeping up "respect" is a trade mark of islamofascism.

However, the attackers also reportedly defended their "prophet"* Muhammad - just like most of the world's muslims used to do (and many of them violently) after the Danish caricatures of this so called "prophet". And this really puts the world media in an embarrassing but also revealing light because this connects the "lone wolves" with muslim hotheads and islam more generally. We all remember how media excused muslims' disgusting behavior around the world after the Danish caricatures, don't we!

* according to e.g. Arab historian Hugh Kennedy, there are no traces whatsoever of any Muhammad figure in official Arab records for some half a century after his alleged death. 

Some random notes about he mosque/imam background of the muslim terrorists in France

In a 2008 interrogation session, Benyettou said: "I taught that suicide attacks are legitimate under Islam."

The group linked to Benyettou and Charif was known as the "Filiere des Buttes Chaumont" cell, after a park where the men would jog as part of training that included listening to Benyettou's sermons and how to handle AK-47 Kalashinokovs, the weapons used in yesterday's attack.

An armed-services adviser to President Hollande, Professor Jean-Pierre Filiu, said he has identified possible links between the Paris suspects and Islamic State.

He told AFP that a French-Tunisian jihadist Boubaker el-Hakim and member of Islamic State was part of the same "Butte-Chaumont" network in Paris as Cherif Kourachi.

Hakim assassinated two Tunisian politicians in 2013 and he "represents the link between the Kouachi brothers and [Islamic State]", the professor said.

"I am sure that the video claiming responsibility is already prepared."


It appears Kouachi was a disciple of a janitor-turned-Salafist imam Farid Benyettou. Kouachi worshiped at the Addawa mosque in the 19th ...

Cherif Kouachi once was a part of a plot to send Muslim fighters to Iraq in 2008.

Kouachi once said he was motivated by alleged prisoner mistreatment at Abu Ghraib.

    The so-called 19th arrondissement network is named for the Paris district where it was based, a multi-national neighborhood where families with roots in one-time French colonies in North Africa crowd into housing projects that rise above street markets offering Moroccan melons and pungent French cheese.

    Benyettou practiced a strict Salafist interpretation of Islam, and enjoyed credibility among radicals because his brother-in-law was a convicted member of an Algerian insurgency movement.

If you call for islam you inevitably also call for evil islam (i.e. the original islam)

OIC, the islamofascist  monster that hijacked UN which was supposed to be our bulwark against such totalitarian fascism

Why are muslims and Saudi islamofascists equally protected from criticism against their senseless Human Rights violations?

In fact, Human Rights are considered terrorism by the Saudi islamofascist dictator family - and by OIC.

Why are we afraid of veiled people? Klevius: Because they so often* turn out to be racist** muslims who hate us! But a more important question is what and who incite such islamofascist hatred?

* Compare the widespread muslim support for al-Qaeda, Islamic State, and numerous lesser muslim organizations and individuals.

** You're a racist (not to mention you're sexist too) if you're a muslim adhering to any type of sharia because sharia is against the most basic of the Universal Human Rights (compare how  OIC - all muslims world Ummah - had to violate Human Rights for the purpose of keeping Human Rights violating islamic sharia)  and disparaging non-muslims which they call "infidels" etc. And in doing this, muslims open themselves up for criticism. But not even this can be tolerated by racist/sexist muslims who want to criminalize criticism against their own violations against Universal Human Rights!

Abu Dhabi's burqa hiding muslim woman murdered a non-muslim mother in the restroom while the victim's two young children waited outside. Abu Dhabi encourages islam and sharia - so why do people even go there?

Eager convert proselytizer  Myriam Francois-Cerrah applauds islam while islam's guardian Saudi Arabia jails and lashes Raif Badawi fordaring to talk about Human Rights.

Without any objection heard there's a lot of racist and sexist smear going on against "white males" as a group - however not much against islamofascist Arab oil billionaires clad in sun/sand protecting Bedouin head scarves (indoors)! Why?!

Right, they belong to that overly protected vulnerable and easily offended "minority" called muslims who are under attack from a very few peaceful (but apparently so dangerous and disgusting) Human Rights defenders (i.e. not sharia compliant) called "islamophobes".

Raif Badawi is such an "islamophobe" whose friends and family now have chosen to distance themselves from or even turning against him. In other words, they have, like so many others, helped the Saudi islamofascists instead of a Human Rights defender.


Badawi did nothing wrong according to Western standards other than start a forum that was aimed at "a new generation of Saudi young men and women, who want to express themselves in a way that they can counter the overwhelming majority of clerics and religious people."

Now he has to kneel on the ground and receive 50 lashes every week until he has received 1,000 lashes. Happy now Myriam Francois-Cerrah? Right, Klevius almost forgot that the very fact that Saudi Arabia is the guardian of islam makes it having nothing to do with islam in your perverted thinking?


Klevius wrote

August 18, 2013

When Saudi blogger gets 600 lashes and 7 yrs in a Saudi prison, BBC only reports he was freed (from death sentence)

 

A screen dump on a Google news search today on 'BBC Raif Gadawi' gives this shameful result:

A general search gives this:

And this kind of utterly disgusting, not to say purely criminal, behavior from BBC just continues while it simultaneously uses all its resources to silence, misrepresent, or falsify facts about islam, Sharia and OIC while using every opportunity to air the views of islamofascists and their supporters.

 

 

Saudi islamofascism, a Saudi "islamophobe" and BBC's silence

How islamofascism works

When should "islamophobes" be designated authors of conscience, persecuted for not only peacefully exercising their right to freedom of expression but more importantly, for defending Universal Human Rights.


On July 30, 2013 Saudi media reported that Raif Badawi had been sentenced to seven years in prison and 600 lashes for founding an Internet forum that "violates Islamic values and propagates liberal thought". The court also ordered the website closed.

On 17 June 2012, he was arrested on a charge of insulting Islam through electronic channels, and in December of that year was also cited for apostasy, a conviction which carries an automatic death sentence. Badawi's website also hosted material criticizing "senior religious figures" and Badawi had suggested that Imam Muhammad ibn Saud Islamic University had become "a den for terrorists."

The family of Badawi's wife subsequently filed a court action to forcibly divorce the couple on grounds of Badawi's alleged apostasy.

On May 7, 2014 Badawi was re-sentenced to 1000 lashes and ten years in prison. He also received a fine of 1 million riyal (equal to about $267,000).

Badawi's lawyer Waleed Abulkhair has been jailed after setting up Monitor of Human Rights in Saudi Arabia, a human rights organization. He is being charged for "setting up an unlicensed organization” and for “breaking allegiance with the ruler”. His requests to license the organization were denied.

Badawi has stated that he was a Muslim but "everyone has a choice to believe or not believe.

According to Human Rights Watch in its review of Saudi Arabia's membership in the United Nations Human Rights Council, "Over the last year Saudi authorities have harassed, investigated, prosecuted, and jailed prominent peaceful dissidents and human rights activists on vague charges based solely on their peaceful practice of basic rights, particularly the right to free expression, including Mohammed al-Qahtani, Abdullah al-Hamid, Mohammed al-Bajadi, Abd al-Kareem al-Khodr, Omar al-Saeed, and Raif Badawi."



Ask yourself: Why hasn't BBC and their Saudi raised muslim sharia presenter Mishail Husain, properly informed you about this and OIS's sharia declaration?

These jihadists, Samantha Lewthwaite, Mishal Husain and Michael Adebolajo, may represent three main channels for spreading islamofascism: The reproductive, the cultural, and the militant.

However, the by far most important islamofascist power is Saudi based OIC and its sharia declaration through UN, steered by the Saudi islamofascist Iyad Madani. Even with Islamic State taking over Saudi Arabia it would become easier to handle because as it is now the Saudi islamofascist billionaires can freely travel etc in the West, while with Islamic State such would not be tolerated anymore.

The counting is still out but the Saudi dictator family has probably still caused much more suffering and murdering with its islamic hate mongering than has Islamic State so far.

First time Klevius read OIC's sharia declaration he thought it was a joke or some poorly done pre-college homework. Judge for yourself!

Acknowledgement: Klevius has simplified and clarified the text. However, make no mistake. The text hasn't lost anything of its original meaning.

This is OIC's disgusting and pompous  Human Rights violating sharia declaration (the so called "islamic human rights") that an islamist, or islamist supporting voting bloc managed to pass through UN. However, don't panic. It's not legal because the UN is supposed to be a democratic institution and as such can not logically uphold decisions against democracy and Universal Human Rights. In other words, what has happened in UN is a disastrous deception that has nothing to do with UN's original aim. It should therefore be seen as nullified through its own manifesto of which some articles are presented below.


Allah made the Islamic Ummah as the best community which should guide all humanity that is confused because of different and conflicting beliefs and ideologies.

Klevius explanation: Childish but dangerous totalitarian fanatism. The utterly naive expression can be understood only as a product of a pathetic balancing between language borrowed from the real Human Rights declaration from 1948 and then mixed up with islamic nonsense cherry picked to fit the Saudi dictator family plus, to a lesser and varying degree, their supporters.

Mankind is still, and shall remain, in dire need of islam.

Klevius explanation: Wishful fanatic thinking that islam should rule the world.

Sharia is an integral part of the Islamic religion and no one shall have the right to abolish it either in whole or in part or to violate or ignore it in as much as it is binding divine commands, which are contained in the Koran and which were sent through Muhammad. Safeguarding sharia is an act of worship whereas the neglect or violation thereof is an abominable sin.

Klevius explanation: A definition of a muslim.

All men are equal - in terms of basic human dignity and basic obligations and responsibilities.

Klevius explanation: All muslim men of the right sect are equal - but not women and non-muslims. Every country can have its own sectarian version of sharia (e.g. wahhabi sharia in Saudi Arabia). 'Dignity', 'obligations' and 'responsibilities' are code words for sex slave apartheid and the inferior status of women in islam.

All human beings are Allah's subjects, and the most loved by Him are those who are most beneficial to His subjects, and no one has superiority over another except on the basis of piety and good deeds.

Klevius explanation: 'Those who are most beneficial' moeans those wh best serve the Saudi dictator family.

It is prohibited to take away life except for a sharia prescribed reason.

Klevius explanation: In Saudi jurisdiction the support of Universal Human Rights is equated with terrorism - and due sentences.

Bodily harm is prohibited to breach without a Sharia-prescribed reason.

Klevius explanation: Wife and slave beating etc.

Parents and those in such like capacity have the right to choose the type of education - provided they take into consideration the principles of sharia.

Klevius explanation: Main aim being to make the kids muslim and see to it that they stay that way (apostasy ban etc).

Both parents are entitled to different rights from their children, and relatives are entitled to rights from their kin - in accordance with sharia.

Klevius explanation: Meaning the muslim man has the right to the kids.

Every man shall have the right - within the framework of the sharia - to free movement and to select his place of residence whether within or outside his country and if persecuted, is entitled to seek asylum in another country. The country of refuge shall be obliged to provide protection to the asylum-seeker until his safety has been attained - unless asylum is motivated by committing an act regarded by the sharia as a crime.

Klevius explanation: Only muslims have this right. And an apostate muslim isn't persecuted according to sharia because s/he is simply the worst of criminals.

Everyone shall have the right to enjoy the fruits of his scientific, literary, artistic or technical labour of which he is the author; and he shall have the right to the protection of his moral and material interests stemming therefrom - provided it is not contrary to the principles of the sharia.

Klevius explanation: Means that this right only applies to muslims and non-muslims who submit to Human Rights violating sharia.

There shall be no crime or punishment - except as provided for in the sharia.

Klevius explanation: Everything that is against sharia is a crime and could render punishment.

Everyone shall have the right to express his opinion freely - in accordance with the principles of the sharia.

Klevius explanation: You think this must be a joke? No, it's pure old fashion fanatic totalitarianism.

Information may not be exploited or misused in such a way as may violate sanctities and the dignity of Muhammad, undermine sharia or disintegrate, corrupt, harm or weaken islam.

Klevius explanation: They got at least that right. An empty parasitic slave ideology that lacks any other foundation logic than the mysterious Allah (whose intentions/will even the muslims admit they have no clue about) is in extreme need of protection from scrutiny. Extremely laughable was it not for all the people who have suffered and died because of this hateful ideology.

It is not permitted to excite nationalistic or doctrinal hatred.

Klevius explanation: You're not allowed to criticize the Saudi dictator family or wahhabi islamofascism.

Everyone shall have the right to participate, directly or indirectly in the administration of his country's public affairs. He shall also have the right to assume public office - as long as he complies with sharia.

Klevius explanation: 'Everyone' means a muslim who complies with the muslim dictator family. Remember, we are dealing with islam and its guardian in the first place. This is also the aim of the islamofascist so called "diversity training" that is sprayed all over our Western institutions etc. Sadly, it is aggressive islamofascism, not timid Human Rights voices that is let through.

All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic sharia.

Klevius explanation: What else?! This simply means the complete elimination of any possibility for an individual to take cover under the Human Rights declaration form 1948.

The Islamic sharia is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration.

Klevius explanation: So why even bother to write this declaration when it gives full freedom for every member state to tailor their own sharia? The answer is of course UN. By having "islamic human rights" sanctioned via UN, OIC's member states in general but Saudi Arabia in particular, can avoid UN criticism against Human Rights violations.


Klevius concluding advice: When you're done laughing - start thinking! Honestly, isn't this the worst offense ever against what it means to be a human being! And as such, well in line with its origin - the worst ideological crime ever against humanity.

Muslims could have the freedom to look, behave and believe freely under the 1948 Human Rights declaration. But that's not enough for muslims - they want sharia, i.e, violation of Human Rights!