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.
Friday, May 01, 2009
"Peaceful islam" again fighting itself? Muslim civil war in Pakistan: Original islam vs Obamaislam? Or what's the point?! Continued rapetivism?!
Islamic Sharia courts ("moderate Talibanism"?) established in conflicted area.
Stupid muslim born (but without a birth certificate proving he is a "natural born" U.S. citizen) & unconstitutional (i.e. "respecting anti human rights & anti democratic islam") Mr X "president" Barry Barack Hussein Obama Dunham Soetoro (or whatever his true name/nationality/"faith" is) seems to share the view on Sharia not only with the Saudi islamofascists he is bowing in front of on the pic to the left, but also with the islamic Pakistan army, government, the islamic Taliban terrorists & Al-Qaeda.
According to Paki authorities the Taliban have no reason to fight because the Paki government has agreed to install Taliban Shariah courts based on Koranic/islamic law, throughout seven districts in the Malakand region, incl. Swat and Buner.
General Abbas: “If peace can be brought in the region without further destruction, then it will be a victory for all."
Klevius comment: Brilliant! But unfortunately he forgot the last word, 'islamists' from the sentence! Or is it just the usual islamist rhetoric, i.e. that "all" means only those who submit to islam?! Friends of freedom won't applause it. Islam is Sharia "peace" under submission of the same islamic sword that initially used to be waived by the islamist preacher in the original mosques (also consider Origin of mosque)!
In Karachi (population 14 million) islamic street terrorists have recently caused at least 34 people being killed and at least 42 wounded. Also in in Baluchistan the government has "failed to calm public anger over the killing of three nationalist leaders". Klevius comment: And the real culprit is Saudi islamofascist "king" Abdullah (& Co), who represents the main sponsors of evil world jihad, & to whom Mr X "president" bowed so deeply!
Cowardice & stupid muslim born & unconstitutional Mr X "president" has already (within his first 100 days) managed to commit senseless war crimes
Stupid muslim born (but without a birth certificate proving he is a "natural born" U.S. citizen) & unconstitutional (i.e. "respecting anti human rights & anti demcratic islam") Mr X "president" Barry Barack Hussein Obama Dunham Soetoro (or whatever his true name/nationality/"faith", if any, is) has deliberately murdered scores of civilians by allowing an extremely extended (& expanded) irresponsible use of drone bombings.
The inevitable (but desperately rejected) conclusion
There's only one true islam, the original ugly one! The pathetic notion that "most muslims are moderate" is as empty as the islamists Cairo declaration on "human rights (the one created for the sole purpose of making it possible for islam to continue treating girls/women as sub-humans"!
A useful feminist idiot or just an intellectual whore?
Irshad Manji (has written The Trouble with Islam Today)(in the notorious series of misleading islam excuses): "As a reform-minded Muslim, I admit that these guys make the notion of diversity in my faith look laughable. Salafis displace pluralism with puritanism. True to the dictates of dogma, they use intimidation and violence to spread their gospel. This summer, a small but steroidal gang of Islamists assaulted human-rights activists in Jakarta. Police stood by as the extremists crashed a religious freedom rally, organized after Indonesia's government imposed restrictions on a minority Muslim sect. Salafis call the move a defense of Islam's integrity. Pluralists call it a violation of Indonesia's Constitution. Moderate Muslim leaders call it none of their business.
In only 10 years, Islamism has gone from being a joke to a force.Like Muslims elsewhere, Indonesians are watching the import of Saudi-style Islam. Sometimes known as Salafism, it preaches a borderless caliphate anchored in the moral absolutes of the Prophet Muhammad's initial successors. A global village for the virtuous and valorous, Salafism purports to offer a way—no, the way—to combine reverence with modernity. Binding black and white, rich and poor, woman and man, mighty and weak, the theory of Salafism is transcendently pluralistic.
Then there's reality. In practice, Salafis displace pluralism with puritanism."
Klevius comment: I rest my case! Ijithad is an unnecessarily prolonged way out of islam. And the reason why some people stubbornly continue excusing islam while its victims in Darfur & around the globe suffer, is that they haven't (or just don't want to) fully accept the grim historical origin of islam.
Islam isn't born out of evil, it's evil itself institutionalized, which fact easily explains islams fast initial progress through the empty deserts into civilization where it planted its poisonous Sharia sword & started sucking for its own survival! What naive or deliberate (or simply ignorant) historians read as "tolerance" against non-muslims is, in fact, the same kind of "tolerance" every parasite shows its host! And also remember that the original & eternal islamic currency is called slaves! This is the whole point of Koranic infidel racism
Btw, isn't it quite a strange "logic" that the same people who now defend a Utopian non-existing "islam" & explain evil islam's evil consequences as "unislamic" are the ones who see history as testifying that "islam tolerated other cultures" when, in fact, this "tolerance" was truly unislamic & a consequence of necessitating circumstances?!
Islam is every bit compulsion!
It seems that the defenders of the worst crime ever against humanity are running out of ammo when they stubbornly try to cling at one (heavily misinterpreted) sentence in islam's Kampf: "There's no compulsion in religion". However, there was no such word as 'religion' in Arabic! And, as noted by Daniel Pipes, "this deceptively simple phrase historically has had a myriad of meanings". As stupid or deliberate islam supporters seem to have no problem pointing at a single verse among an abundance of its opposite, one may also consider Sura 8: 12: "Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): "I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instil terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them," or Sura 2: 191 which states: "And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out". Compulsion is certainly implied in Sura 9: 29: "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya (a tax paid by Christians and Jews) with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."
In its context "there's no compulsion in religion" is followed by “The correct has been distinguished from the wrong”, i.e. referring to conversion, & implying that because islam is perfect (i.e. totalitarian) there's no need to abandon it. Moreover, this has to be put in the context of islamic infidel racism connected to jihad, slave-taking & rapetivism (see Origin of islam).