Negative Human Rights for a Positive Human Future
Support Klevius' Atheist anti-fascism against islamofascism
Klevius to dumb (or just evil) alt-left "antifa" people who support the worst of Human Rights violating evil:
True anti-fascism in its purest form is laid down in the Universal Human Rights declaration of 1948. Islam (OIC) has in UN decided to abandon the most basic of these rights (the so called negative Human Rights).
Fascism is, according to Google's top hit, "a political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation*, and forcible suppression of opposition." 23 Aug 2017
So let's face islam with this definition.
A political philosophy, movement, or regime (islam) that exalts nation (Umma) and often race (muslims) above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government (Koran text/Mohammad's example) headed by a dictatorial leader (the caliph - e.g. the Saudi based OIC's Saudi leader), severe economic and social regimentation* (sharia), and forcible suppression of opposition (apostasy ban against muslims wanting to leave islam, and demonizing defenders of Human Rights by calling them "islamophobes").
And islamofascism gets away with it by calling itself a religion and thereby being protected by those very Human Rights it opposes.
* According to Cambridge dictionary, "extreme organization and control of people".
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 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")!
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.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
What’s the difference between “moderate Talibans” & “anti-islamist muslims”, & why “respect” those who despise you?!
Klevius intro: Never forget that the essence of islam is racism, i.e. racist disrespect against the “infidel”! This racist lure, together with islam’s deep rooted sexist sex segregation (rapetivism) is what makes islam going! And by always connecting muslims with islam, while simultaneously always referring to an imaginary “difference between moderate muslims & islamists” this evilness is effectively upheld. Moreover, this is combined with the islamofascists' (Saudi Abdullah & Co) efforts to exploit & incite racist hatred between the "non-white" developing world & the technologically advanced “white West” (what abt Japan`, it,s neither “West” nor “white”! And what abt all non-whites who for long have been “Westerners”)?!
Mr. unconstitutional muslim born “president” X, Barry Barack Hussein Dunham Soetoro Obama/Osama (or whatever - see postings below) says he "respects islam" & now wants to talk with "moderate Talibans"! However, these words aren't just like his ordinary empty platitudes but contain a deep paradox. Apart from the obvious fact that the line between an "islamist Taliban" & a "moderate muslim" seems to become more problematic, the connection to islam itself suffers a logical meltdown. For example:
M. Zuhdi Jasser, is an American who calls himself “a devout anti-islamist American muslim who rejects all of political islam & the Islamic Umma”.
Klevius comment: And the leader of ALL American muslims, incl. M. Zuhdi Jasser, is the islamofascist, Wahhabi inspired & Saudi funded extremely political Sharia supporting Ingrid Mattson, a close ally to Mr. “president” X (e.g. invited by him as a main speaker on the Democrats convent last year & as a preacher on his “inauguration” this year).
M. Zuhdi Jasser wanted to hear Mr. “president” X, Barry Barack Hussein Dunham Soetoro Obama/Osama (or whatever - see postings below) speak to muslim dissidents. “He (Mr “president” X) did not, save an oblique reference in his inaugural. By making no distinctions between support for autocrats and dissidents, he spoke to maintaining the status quo--the despots in control.”
Klevius comment: Pls, Mr M. Zuhdi Jasser, but every support for islam, incl. your own, is “maintaining the status quo - the despots in control” (islam is the very definition of a despot, i.e. “a ruler with absolute power & authority”!).
M. Zuhdi Jasser: The 'Muslim world' is not monolithic.
Klevius comment: But islam is! Why? Well, because you just made it by calling yourself a muslim! Unless, of course, you abandone islam.
M. Zuhdi Jasser: Islam as a singular political entity based in a faith practice directly feeds into the language of the theocrats -- the Islamists. Islamism is the politico-religious collectivist belief in the primacy of the Islamic state grounded in a dominating legal system based in shar'ia law (Islamic jurisprudence). It is a system which can feign democracy vis-à-vis elections but operates in a supremacist position of Islamic law over all other faith systems and empowers oligarchs (clerics) to write and interpret law. While some Islamists may believe in more peaceful means of ascendancy, whether they are violent or peaceful, the Islamic state is their common goal. At the crux of the 'contest of ideas' between the West and the "Muslim world" lie the competing roles of liberty and Islamism.
Klevius comment: I rest my case! The very same same islam that is now, via UN, trying to veil its ugly face by having 57 islamofascist nations (OIC) criminalizing criticism of itself, is the original islam that succeeded precisely because it utilized racism (enslavement &/or dhimmitude for "infidels") & sexist sex segregation (rapetivism) & mob etc. violence/intimidation!