"British" stands today for naked racism - in the service and submission to the islamofascist Saudi dictator family, its allies - and sharia.
The Brexit vote was undemocratic because EU-nationals who were UK residents were not allowed to vote about being robbed of those very rights their decision to reside in UK were based on.
The Brexit vote was rigged because non-EU/non-UK national residents in UK were allowed to vote about EU.
According to several polls, the UK Government seems to be way more racist than UK citizens.
An ICM poll after the referendum found some 84 per cent of British people support letting EU migrants stay, including 77 per cent of Leave voters. And a more recent Opinium poll found that only five per cent of Britons think EU nationals currently living in the UK should be asked to leave.
Klevius wrote:
Tuesday, March 14, 2017
Is dog-whistle speech about "Brits" and sharia vs EU nationals and Human Rights conducive to the interest of the people in UK?
The Empire the Foundation and the Mule
Theresa May and David Davies use the EU "race card" in divisive dog-whistle hate speech about "Britishness" to induce hatred and impart ever-increasing feelings of vulnerability, marginalization, and fear for their safety among not only EU citizens in UK but also among many women in general - not the least those who "suffer" from "shariaphobia".
Theresa May's and David Davies' talks about "Brits" and "British values" means to many (most?) UK "Brits" the very opposite.
EU residents in UK had no democratic say in the Brexit vote. However, both UK nationals in EU as well as Commonwealth nationals in UK had the right to vote.
Klevius wrote:
Monday, March 13, 2017
Who are the most racist "Brits"? Klevius: What about David Davies and Theresa May and their dog-whistle politics against EU citizens and for arms sales to islamofascist regimes - and sharia money laundering in London?
Here's a hint from Klevius to some alternative and more up to date topics:
Brexit politicians tapping into heavy and questionable bias without being explicit about it - how dumb are the UK "Brits" supposed to be?
Klevius introduces a new word, 'Bracism'
'Bracism' stands for racially coded language used by UK politicians for the purpose of boosting a racist agenda against non-Commonwealth EU citizens while also pretending to be on the side of those UK citizens who voted Brexit for the very opposite reason, namely to lower immigration of uncontrolled islamists and Human Rights violating sharia muslims from outside the EU. Do note that just before the referendum the main issue at stake was the fear of an uncontrolled flood of potentially islamist immigrants/"refugees" from/via Turkey.
British racism against EU citizens other than Commonwealth people constitutes manipulation of racism in service of a specific agenda not necessarily shared by residents and citizens of UK.
By using the deceptive and deeply racist "British people" terminology in "Brexit" context, David Davies, Theresa May etc. in fact adhere to the lowest level of dog-whistle politics - well aware of the fact that EU citizens (other than from Commonwealth countries) who are residents in UK already have less rights - including that they weren't even allowed to have a democratic vote in the referendum (as had Commonwealth residents in UK).
"Bracist" coded speech triggers racial anxiety while allowing deniability by crafting language that lets the speaker deny that he's even thinking about what s/he is in fact .
Outright racist language has been replaced "Bracism" type of speech but is working as hard as ever to drum up support for certain policies.
Theresa May's nasty party" proposes welcome signs on airport for wealthy people from Commonwealt while neo-colonizing Africa through investments in S-A, Nigeria etc. countries rich in for UK desirable raw materials.
Klevius wrote:
Tuesday, July 19, 2016
Theresa May said she would authorize a nuclear strike killing 100,000s of innocent people. However, Klevius thinks that's insane - and for once shares Corbyn's view
Would it really be in the best interest of the "Brits" (and the Scots) to send little Britain's nukes somewhere in Russia, the world's biggest country, that has never shown any signs of using nukes for attacks?
Perhaps the UK Parliament should rethink its vote on Trident - just as some suggest the Brits should rethink their vote on Brexit.
1 Only one country, USA, has ever used nuclear weapons - and twice and mainly against innocent civilians in Japan.
2 "Terror balance" originated in the aftermath of WW2 and the US fear of a new totalitarian threat from the Communist Soviet Union (USSR), and a corresponding Communist will to world hegemony from the Kremlin, which saw the US (besides already Communist China) as its main remaining rival - and the one with the most powerful military potential. However, due to the geographical location of the US, USSR started developing missile technologies (for transporting nukes) to an extent that also resulted in the first man made satellite and the first man in space. As a result we ended up in a "terror balance" situation that in practice made it impossible for either centrally steered nation to ever "push the button" - not even at the so called Cuba crisis.
3 In the world of today the nuke scenario is completely different. Not only are conventional weapons both more effective and less wasteful with civilian casualties, they are also widespread and easily movable. The same could be said of modern nukes - hence puncturing the deterrent argument.
4 The right to "push the button" is usually in one (or a few) human hands. The whereabout of that human is always uncertain - and would the killing of that human justify the lives of 100,000s of innicent?
5 The biggest nuke threat comes from islam, e.g. muslim Pakistan or muslim terrorists. Why? Simply because of the origin of islam, i.e. the Koran, Mohammad and the Hadiths that inspire islamic terror.
Muhammad: I have been made victorious by terror
The dictionary definition of terrorism is “the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear." Sadly, we are living in an age that we do not need to consult a dictionary to learn the meaning of terrorism. Even our children know about it and are affected by it.
Islamic terrorism, however, did not start in 9/11 of 2001, nor did it start with the Iranian Islamic Revolution in 1979. Islamic terrorism has its origin in the sayings and examples set by Muhammad.
In the last ten years of his life, after Muhammad migrated to Medina , he launched no less than 78 raids called qazwa (raid, ambush, sudden attack). Some of these qazwas involved the assassination of one opponent by one or a group of volunteers, and others were carried out by hundreds or thousands of warriors. Nonetheless a common characteristic of all Muhammad’s incursions was that they were done without notice. The enemy was caught off guard without being given the chance to prepare himself or be armed. As such all Muhammad’s victims were civilians.
The historian Abul Husain Muslim Nisapuri writes:
Ibn 'Aun reported: I wrote to Nafi' inquiring from him whether it was necessary to extend (to the disbelievers) an invitation to accept (Islam) before meeting them in fight. He wrote (in reply) to me that it was necessary in the early days of Islam. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) made a raid upon Banu Mustaliq while they were unaware and their cattle were having a drink at the water. He killed those who fought and imprisoned others. On that very day, he captured Juwairiya bint al-Harith. Nafi' said that this tradition was related to him by Abdullah b. Umar who (himself) was among the raiding troops.” Muslim 19: 4292
Muhammad used the same element of surprise in virtually all his raids. Bukhari writes:
Allah's Apostle (p.b.u.h) offered the Fajr prayer when it was still dark, then he rode and said, 'Allah Akbar! Khaibar is ruined. When we approach near to a nation, the most unfortunate is the morning of those who have been warned." The people came out into the streets saying, "Muhammad and his army." Allah's Apostle vanquished them by force and their warriors were killed; the children and women were taken as captives. Safiya was taken by Dihya Al-Kalbi and later she belonged to Allah's Apostle go who married her and her Mahr was her manumission. Bukhari 2.14.068
Here we read that Muhammad said: “the most unfortunate is the morning of those who have been warned.” This should not be interpreted as announcing his plans for war. Actually not even his men knew which town they are going to attack until they reached at the gates of that town. He sent spies to the cities that he wanted to attack and ambushed them when they were least prepared. This “warning” should be interpreted with the understanding of the Muslim mind. As far as Muslims are concerned we are all warned. They have called us to convert or prepare to die. This is the warning. There will be no other warning. Now that they have issued the warning, we are all fair game. All the non-Muslims are legitimate targets of Islamic terrorism. Muslim warriors today, do what their prophet did and follow his examples. The pattern and the modus operandi, is already set. All Muslims’ wars and conquests have been through raid. This has been always the case and the secret of their success. In one hadith Muhammad boasted, “I have been made victorious through terror”. Bukhari 4:52.220
About four years after Hijra, an ambulant vendor came to Medina reporting that the tribes of Anmar and Tha’laba, (sun clans of Ghatfan) have gathered in Dhatal Riqa’. Upon hearing this news Muhammad left his loyal companion Utham in charge of the city and with a group of four hundred men (or seven hundred) warriors immediately headed to the place of the gathering of these Arab tribes. He found no one there but a few women, between them there was a beautiful girl. They captured the women. The men of the tribe took refuge in the mountains. (Ibn Sa’d Tabaqat V. 2 P. 59)
When the prayer time came, the Muslims were afraid that the Ghatafan men might descend from their mountain hideout and make a sudden attack on them while they were praying. Apprehending this fear, Muhammad introduced the ‘prayer of fear,’ where a party of faithful stands guard while the other party prays. Then they take turns. A revelation came from Allah on this provision regarding shortening of a prayer. (4:100-102)
And when you journey in the earth, there is no blame on you if you shorten the prayer, if you fear that those who disbelieve will cause you distress, surely the unbelievers are your open enemy. (4:101)
Two months after the raid of Dhatal Riqa’ Muhammad received the news that a large group of Ghatfan has gathered in the oasis of Dumatal Jandal, between Hijaz and al-Sham to barter goods. This place was five nights journey from Medina . Muhammad immediately gathered one thousand of his followers. They rode during the night and hid during the day. Muhammad also took the informer who was from the tribe of Bani udhrah as the guide. He reached this group at night time and the footprints of their herds of goats and camels could were still on the ground. The Muslims raided the herds of the animals, some of the shepherds were killed and some escaped. Muslims collected a large spoil. When the news reached the people of Domat, they scattered and the Prophet found no one in their place. He stayed a few days and sent various groups to the neighborhood to investigate but they returned having found no one, except one man whom they took as captive. Muhammad asked him about the tribe, the man said when the people heard about the raid they escaped. The Prophet then called upon him to accept Islam, which he did and then the Muslims returned to Medina . (Ibn Sa’d Tabaqat V. 2 P. 60)
Muslim historian claim that Muhammad the Qatfan were planning to attack Muslims. This is typical Islamic mindset, that always blames their victims. As the their own tale makes it clear, these people were a bunch of nomads and herdsmen and not warriors. Today Muslims use the same excuses and blame their victims to justify thier crimes against humanity. As an Arab proverb says: Darabani, wa baka; Sabaqani, wa'shtaka “ He struck me, and started crying; then he went ahead of me and charged me with beating him!” This has been Muhammad’s and his followers modus operandi.
No comments:
Post a Comment