Is the islamofascist Saudi dictator "prince" Mohammad bin Salman the world's most dangerous man?

Is the islamofascist Saudi dictator "prince" Mohammad bin Salman the world's most dangerous man?
Is the islamofascist Saudi dictator "prince" Mohammad bin Salman the world's most dangerous man?

The islamofascist Saudi dictator family spreading its islamist hate and losses while FEEding Lnd

The islamofascist Saudi dictator family spreading its islamist hate and losses while FEEding Lnd
The islamofascist Saudi dictator family spreading its islamist hate and losses over you

How an organization of islamic crimes (OIC) violates Human Rights

Human Rights is diversity - sharia is the opposite

The evil of Sharia islam is what makes it incompatible with Negative Human Rights (i.e. why islamic OIC violates Human Rights by replacing them with Sharia, hence excluding women and non-muslims from equality). The evil of islam and its origin may be easier to grasp with historical examples, e.g. the Origin of the Vikings.

It's racism and sexism even if proposed by a "god"! Klevius altruistic virtual volunteering for the world community in defense of Universal Human Rights . Yes, I know, it's unfair. Klevius vs islam, i.e. Universal Human Rights vs Sharia (OIC) racism/sexism! Of course Klevius will win. The question is just how long we should allow the dying beast to make people suffer. (Negative) Human Rights is not a ”Western” invention! It’s where you end up when you abandon racism and sexism, idiot! After you have abandoned islam! Your confused islamophilia and ignorance about Human Rights make YOU an accomplice to islam's crimes! Whereas Human Rights work as egalitarian and universal traffic rules (no matter who you are or what you drive you have the same rights as everyone else) islam/Sharia differs between muslim men and the rest (women and "infidels")!

Ask yourself, why can't racist islam (OIC) accept Human Rights? The answer reveals the difference between totalitarianism and freedom. And even if everyone converted to islam we'd still have Sharia sexism.
Have you noticed that when the history of slavery is (PC) debated islam is always excluded/excused? Atlantic slave trade and Roman slaves are eagerly mentioned while the world's by far worst, longest and most extensive one is blinked, as is the fact that islam not only sanctions slavery but is itself built on slavery and sex slavery (rapetivism)! The core idea of islam is the most thoroughly elaborated parasitism ever, i.e. what in 1400 yrs has made it the by far worst crime ever. But thanks to islamic teachings muslims are kept extremely ignorant about the evil origin of islam (institutionalized parasitism based on slave finance, rapetivism and pillage). Ohlig: The first two "islamic" centuries lie in the shadows of history. Klevius: There was no islam or islamic Mohammad (that's why the Saudis have levelled Mohammad's "grave" etc), only the evil murdering, pillaging and raping Aramaic-Arabic Jewish("Christian") led illiterate Arab thugs chasing for booty and sex. The "success" of this formula became later institutionalized and codified as a one way (Koran/Sharia) moral excuse (Allah) for further racist/sexist genocides. The bedrock and currency of this system was racist slavery. However, with Enlightenment the new idea of individual (negative) Human Rights emerged (incl. abolishing of slavery) and were, much later (1948), written down in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights according to which everyone is equal no matter of sex, beliefs etc. Just like in traffic! But unlike traffic rules no one really seems to care about guarding our most precious asset as human beings. Instead racist sexist islamofascism (OIC and the Cairo Sharia declaration) is protected by Human Rights while they strive to undermine and eventually destroy these Human Rights! And most people don't seem to get it. Always remember, there is no islam without Human Rights violating racist/sexist Sharia. So a "vote" for Sharia-islam is AGAINST democracy and the freedom part of Human Rights!

Sayeeda Warsi (UK's non-elected OIC/Sharia politician) in essence doesn't differ from those muslim Saudi women who approve of sex slavery etc, other than that she is either ignorant or a traitor (against democracy and Human Rights) of the worst kind.

We're all born unequal - that's why we need Human Rights, not islam!

Audi then built by Jewish slaves - today dangerous quality problems

Myth vs Truth

Japan's Hayabusa landed and returned to Earth many years before Europe's Rosetta failed to do so.

Monday, November 29, 2004

Islam, feminism and sex segregation, the last of lunatic taboos?

What is sex segregation? Link

A taboo is something you are supposed not to talk about. But if you insist you might be intellectually well rewarded precisely because of this.

The deeper the taboo the more invisible are the signs for the untrained eye¨, and the more resistance you may expect. But if you know what to look for, it’s there, almost unavoidable in its self-explanatory appearance when you look above your cultural filter.

Sex segregation has three main theoretical channels in today’s world: Psychoanalysis, which preaches sexual openness and fundamentalist religions e.g. Islam, which preaches the opposite, and feminism, which consists as a variety of variances of these. All three are basically reactionary movements against secular modernity and inevitably vanishing sex roles in practical life, but whereas psychoanalysis and feminism both emerged simultaneously in the late 19th Century entrance into modernity, Islam is of a special interest because it combines the “classical” sex segregation (i e the practical outcome of social institutions at hand) with the modern sex segregation (i e the artificial construction of an institution aimed for the conservation of vanishing sex roles in a fast changing dynamic modern world). In this view Muslim/Islamic feminism is just an extension of Middle Age fundamentalism, although totally out of sync with the practical reality. But that's no problem for it because its main purpose is not in the best interest of women but rather political.

Islam isn’t the product of the timid and peace loving Muslims but of its inherited violent and expansionistic birth. No matter how peaceful the majority of the believers are, the violent message from the Middle Ages will remain its real power and action potential. So what is (the non-personal institution of) Islam defending or fighting for? Political power, of course, wrapped in sex segregation (fundamentalist/feminist). And because political Islam doesn't follow nation borders it's anti-democratic, and because it's global and dogmatic, it's also totalitarian. In contrast to the idea of "negative" human rights Islam imposes "positive" rights (Sharia etc) in accordance with how those in power positions happen to interpret Koran.

Why do you call yourself a feminist, Judith Butler?

Peter Klevius
www.klevius.info

Sunday, November 28, 2004

The lunatic Zarqawi cries for women's help after the U.S. Marines took over in Fallujah

In a call of desperation on Wednesday, Zarqawi sent out a whiny-voiced tape recording on the Internet in which he slammed Muslim leaders for not joining his fight against the Americans. In his words, "Men have lost their virility; maybe it's time for women to pick up the fight." (Excerpt from Ignoring the lessons of Iraq by
Caroline B. Glick). Link

Also see the theoretical connection between lunatic Islam and feminism.

Islam's "tolerant form" seems to be a disguise!

Kalla, a wealthy Muslim politician, is believed by some Christians to be sympathetic to radical Islamic militants behind sectarian violence that has flared across Indonesia in recent years.

A bloody conflict has shaken the Moluccas, 2,400 kilometers (1,500 miles) east of Jakarta from 1999 to 2002, leaving 5,000 dead and some 700,000 homeless.

In the center of Sulawesi Island, more than 1,000 civilians have been killed since sectarian clashes in 2000.

“Yusuf Kalla is linked to dark stories about burning churches in South Sulawesi,” a senior official in the staunchly Catholic Flores city of Ruteng said on condition of anonymity.

“People are very worried that he became vice president. They are worried that he might change the basic law.”

Egis said, “Megawati protected everybody” whereas Yudhoyono’s administration reflected heavy Islamic overtones."
LINK

Almost 90 percent of Indonesia’s 212 million people are Muslim, practicing a tolerant form of the religion. But in certain areas where Christians account for a substantial proportion of the population, sectarian violence is chronic.


What kind of "tolerance" are we speaking of if it only tolerates "submission"?!

Did Bush and Condy get the Islamic threat right after all?

www.klevius.info

Saturday, November 27, 2004

Muslim "scientist" hides Flores WoMan & Co

What's going on on Flores? A Muslim scholar dismisses all the careful work done on the remains of Homo Floresiensis, and then hides them! Muslim creationism? And the claim that they are not "real" fossils because the remains contain soft parts, as well as the ridicilous claim that they are only a mere 1000+ year old, seem to indicate an effort to create a religious/political/legal base for denying further investigation of the skeletons. Or...?!

For a challenging new hypothesis (without religious connotations) on human migration and races see:

Out of Africa as Pygmies and back as global "Mongoloids"


Saturday, November 20, 2004

Muddy Debate on Races and Human Diversity

Sub-Saharan IQ averaging 70, genetic inferiority, eugenics etc etc in a review on
Race (The Reality of Human Differences by Vincent Sarich and Frank Miete
Westview Press, Boulder Co 2004). We never learn, do we?

While races and sexes are intermingling more than ever before, the debate seems to go the opposite road back to the "pure races and sexes" in the 1930's! An alternative view on segregation rests on a global human rights identity that opens up for everyone no matter race, sex or belief. More on: www.klevius.info

Earliest evidence yet of hominin presence in Northeast Asia

"Indisputable stone tools apparently made by early humans" in northern China about 1.66 million years ago, according to research reported in the journal Nature this week. The finding suggests humans--characterized by their making and use of stone tools--inhabited upper Asia almost 340,000 years before previous estimates placed them there, surviving in a pretty hostile environment.

According to the hypothesis Out of Africa as Pygmies and back as global "Mongoloids" it's precisely the hostile Northern environment (plus relatively rapid climate changes) that helped create advanced erectus as well as modern humans in Asia!

Thursday, November 18, 2004

Humans in America 50.000 years ago?

Digging under the Clovis level (13.000 years ago) seems to have resulted in indications for humans in America 50 kya! If it is related to the M130 genetic trait, then either they were very speedy or our previous estimates are wrong. Or maybe they weren't even related to us? At least this underscores the importance of the "boiling Asian gene soup" hinted at on Out of Africa as Pygmies and back as global "Mongoloids"

We might be wrong on gene interpretation as well as on earliest time for modern (M168) human dispersal but what would be even more confusing is if we have a lot of distant cousins running around at approximately the same time (and where to place the Flores WoMan?)!

Out of Africa and back as global "Mongoloids"

By combining genetic data from the emerging picture of Pleistocene human migration with some of the more puzzling skulls, the overall picture seems to support a strong multi-regional impact from a diverse "Homo pool". And although H. floresiensis appears out of the picture, its small size etc plus its tool industry (if related) is interesting due to the small size of Negritos and other pre-historic voyagers in the South East Asia! The pics on the bottom of the page, however, give a lot of reason for contemplation...