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")!
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.
Sunday, March 14, 2010
See the fascinating truth: Why didn't fully modern humans evolve in Africa? And why weren't you told?!
The pic is a reconstruction made on a Homo floresiensis skull. H. floresiensis was an apelike creature who used same type of stone tools as Homo erectus although the former had less than half the brain size.
Islam heavily intervened in the discovery of Homo floresiensis via its Indonesian representative the so called "anthropologist"* Teuku Jacob who stole the remains and even damaged them!
* Teuku Jacob was the head of Indonesian "anthropology" & hence closely tied to "muslim interpretations", i.e. essentially a crypto-evolutionist, i.e. one who believes in evolution only when it doesn't involve humans. Whereas Klevius proposes a streightforward evolutionary explanation to the emergence of modern humans, islamists want to have it a "divine intevention" when the human "spirit" entered the brain. Compared to Klevius explanation, this naive (or deliberate) confusion misses the very point, namely that we are 100% mixed with the rest of nature, & that there's not the slightest hint of any "divine spirit" other than that an ape brain that was better structured than the Homo brain ("Homo" floresiensis is probably a wrong & misleading name), entered the Homo skulls via hybridization & as a consequence got much more space. If this is "divine" then whatever could be called "divine" hence making the wording pure non sense (see more on Philosophy in depth by Klevius)!
We don't consider apes humans, do we. We don't even call the apelike Homo floresiensis human. So why call those Homos who happened to walk on two legs & superficially resembling us humans?!
What is extremely confusing for many, & understandably so, is the fact that the dumb Homos were much bigger & humanlike than the pygmy sized hybrids which spread out of Africa (& East Asia?). See Klevius Out of Africa as pygmies and back as global mongoloids! A completely new understanding of the human evolution will open up in front of your eyes - supposing you open them!
Cro Magnon (Europe) skull 28,000 bp representing a typical Aurignacian. The Cro Magnon skull was in fact some 15-20% bigger than the average of today. This is because the adaptive pressure for the evolution of intelligence has long since stopped because there cannot be any real evolution among us anymore (only a variety of gene expressions) because we're simply too many & too mixed for evolutionary niches to survive long enough (not even the remotest tribes usually fulfil this criterion). In fact, as I wrote in Demand for Resources - on the right to be poor (1992), we may well already have slipped into a slight retardation. This would certainly explain the many stupid "anthropologists" etc out there, wouldn't it!
The hallmark of modern humans, Aurignacian culture, never developed in Africa but only in Eurasia.
Aurignacian is the hallmark of the emergence of truly modern humans, i.e. people who are clearly distanced from the level of culture seen among e.g. Homo floresiensis, Homo erectus, Homo neanderthalensis & even so called "modern sapiens" etc more apelike creatures.
Unfortunately (but logically due to the climate situation back then) Aurignacian is centered in Europe & northern Asia hence making it politically incorrect.
Aurignacian culture is solely associated with skulls much more sophisticated (i.e. less archaic) than ALL other such cultures & started after 40,000 years ago so whatever is presented for you before that is not made by humans but by Homos or other apelike creatures. No, Klevius isn't racist against apes or Homos but just wants to distinguish between them & human creatures in accorance with YOUR view on what to be considered human!
There's rights now an exhibition at the David H. Koch Hall of Human Origins at the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History, which is such a charlatan example of misleading & confused "science" you can ever imaging.
(INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY BY KLEVIUS)