A global world is only possible under the guidance of (negative – i.e. individual freedom from racist/sexist impositions) Human Rights - as outlined in the original anti-fascist Universal Human Rights declaration of 1948. It excludes any religious or other supremacist tenets or impositions on the individual.
Due to the above and due to the West (politicians and media) having locked itself in with the islamofascist Saudi dictator family (the custodians of islam) we now have a deficit of (negative) Human Rights education – but massively more religious propaganda (e.g. Saudi spread “islamophobia” smear) against these rights. Against this background it's utmost hypocrisy to point against wealth spreading China while supporting islamic hate, terror and war crimes spreading hegemonic Saudi dictator family.
Saudi and BBC hate propaganda against Iran and Shia muslims behind attacks on Corbyn's "anti-Semitism"? BBC's inflammatory and offensive hate mongering use of the oxymoron "anti-Semitic" (reinforced by "islamophobia") protects Semitic (Arab/Sunni/Saudi) muslims from criticism while excluding non-Semitic Shia muslims (e.g. Iran). BBC also use "Asians" when they mean non-Semitic former British Asian muslims, i.e. again not incl. Iranian Shia muslims. Why? Because BBC's poster boy Mohammad Salman hates Shia. England also got a massive problem with "Asian" (sic - read 'mostly Sunni muslim') sex offenders. But no one dares to ask if islam's hate teaching of taking "infidel" sex slaves - and "muslim sensitivity" policies - may encourage it?
Don't let BBC's or islam's glossy surface (i.e. normal news/info and non-sharia muslims respectively) lure you to not see the evil core. Klevius is the opposite. WYSIWYG. No hidden evil core, just defense of your (whoever you are) basic Human Rights that islam wants to deny you.
Theresa May & Co defend sharia by saying "it's just a a contract". This is utter lie because any meaningful islam demands sharia and stepping out of the "contract" is the worst sin you can commit as a muslim (s.c. apostasy). Theresa May's and others deception is built on the mass of secular muslims, i.e. not true muslims. And these "secular muslims" get away with it as long as there's not enough true muslims to demand sharia all over the pitch - as yet. Moreover, Saudi led sharia finance demands sharia compliance - as does Saudi based and steered OIC, all muslims world organization.
Klevius supports "secular muslims" - Theresa May supports sharia muslims.
Is BBC's Pakistan rooted and Saudi raised muslim(?) presenter Mishal Husain an "islamophobe" against evil* islam, or an apostate supporting toothless** "islam"? She doesn't fast during Ramadan but rather drinks some alcohol, and doesn't veil herself and says she doesn't feel any threats to her way of life (Klevius: thanks to Human Rights - not sharia islam), well knowing how muslim and non-muslim women suffer in muslim sharia countries like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia without Human Rights. What would she say to a muslim terrorist asking her if she's a muslim? Isn't it about time to stop this bigoted and hypocritical indirect support of islamofascism that this Saudi/OIC initiated "islamophobia" smear camopaign against Human Rights*** is all about?
* Human Rights equality violating sharia islam
** in line with the anti-fascist, anti-racist and anti-sexist U.N.'s 1948 Universal Human Rights declaration.
*** Socialists have an ideological problem with individual Human Rights, and are therefore vulnerable for islamism (see Klevius 1994).
Is UK turning into a militaristic unconstitutional islamofascist rogue state?
Negative Human Rights for a Positive Human Future
Everything Peter Klevius writes (or has written) is guided by the anti-sexist. anti-racist, and anti-fascist Universal* Human Rights declaration of 1948. In other words, what is declared immoral and evil is so done as measured against the most basic of Human Rights (the so called "negative" rights - i.e. the rights of the individual not to be unnecessarily targeted with restrictions and impositions). Unlike the 1948 Universal Human Rights (UHR) declaration, islam denies Human Rights equality to women and non-muslims. And violation of such basic Human Rights can't be tolerated just by referring to "freedom of religion".
* This means accepting everyone - without exception due to e.g. sex, religion, lack of religion, "security" etc. - as equal in Human Rights. The individual is protected by negative Human Rights, but of course not against substantiated legal accusations - as long as these are not produced as a means that violates the basic Human Rights (compare "not necessary in a free, democratic country"). The legislator may not produce laws that seek to undermine some individuals rights. This also includes e.g. "freedom of religion", i.e. that this freedom doesn't give the right to unfree others, or cause others to be in an inferior rights position. If by islam you mean something that fully adheres to basic Human Rights equality, then you aren't targeted by Peter Klevius islam criticism. However, if you mean islam accepts violations of the most basic of Human Rights, then you may also call Peter Klevius an "islamophobe" - and he will be proud of it. And when it comes to "security" it can't mean "offending" opponents to basic Human Rights.
This is why any effort to twist or accuse the writings of Peter Klevius as "islamophobia" etc. can only be made from a standpoint against these basic Human Rights. As a consequence, no body of authority can therefore accuse, hinder etc. Peter Klevius without simultaneously revealing its own disrespect for these Human Rights. Conversely, Peter Klevius can not accuse anyone who agrees on these rights - i.e. this leaves e.g. "islamophobia" etc. accusations against Peter Klevius without merit.
Every effort against these basic Human Rights is treason against a country calling itself free and democratic.
Most people today are A(mono)theists, i.e. not "believing" in an impossible "one god"*. Such a "collective god" would mean equally many personal "gods" as there are believers/interpretors. "Monotheisms" are for racist/sexist movements - not for individuals. Human Rights are for individuals living among individuals with same rights.
Religion always means a total or partial reduction of some people's (e.g. women''s) Human Rights equality.
Being against A(mono)theism must be categorized as contempt of basic Human Rights equality because "monotheists" have doctrines which can't comply with basic Human Rights equality.
Klevius moral formula is a bedrock you can't beat:
1 There's no absolute and fixed moral in a dynamic society.
2 Therefor we have to repeatedly agree on a minimum moral and equality for all.
3 In doing so we are logically forced to approve of negative Human Rights, i.e. not to impose restrictions other than necessary in a democracy based on as much freedom as possible for all individuals - no matter of sex, race etc. And, for the truly dumb ones, do note that this definition excludes the freedom to restrict freedom.
* Though some people keep calling their own racist/sexist "interpretation" as "god's/allah's will").
Klevius "islamophobia" CV
Some basic facts to consider about Klevius* (except that he is both "extremely normal" and extremely intelligent - which fact, of course, would not put you off if you're really interested in these questions):
* Mentored by G. H. von Wright, Wittgenstein's successor at Cambridge.
1 Klevius' analysis of consciousness is the only one that fits what we know - after having eliminated our "pride" bias of being humans (which non-human would we impress, anyway?). Its starting point is described and exemplified in a commentary to Jurgen Habermas in Klevius book Demand for Resources (1992:30-33, ISBN 9173288411, based on an article by Klevius from 1981), and is further explained in a commentary to Francis Crick's book The Astonishing Hypothesis under the title The Even More Astonishing Hypothesis (EMAH), which can be found in Stalk's archive and which has been on line since 2003 for anyone to access/assess.
2 Klevius out of island/mainland fluctuating Southeast Asia Denisovans up to big skulled Siberians as the birth of much more intelligent modern humans who then spread all over the world, is the only analysis that fits both genetic reality as well as tool and art sophistication seen in e.g. the Denisova cave (no dude, Blombos etc. don’t come even close).
3 Klevius criticism of Human Rights violating sharia islamofascism (e.g. OIC) which is called "islamophobia" by islamofascists and their supporters who don't care about the most basic of Human Rights (e.g. re. women). Klevius' "islamophobia" has two roots: 1) UN's 1948 Universal Human Rights declaration, which, contrary to any form of muslim sharia, doesn't, for example, allow sex to be an excuse for robbing females of their full Human Rights equality, and 2) the history of the origin of islam ( e.g. Hugh Kennedy, Robert G. Hoyland, K. S. Lal etc.) which reveals a murderous, pillaging, robbing, enslaving and raping racist/sexist supremacist ideology that exactly follows precisely those basic islamic tenets which are now called "unislamic" but still survive today (as sharia approved sex slavery, sharia approved "liberation” jihad, academic jihad etc.) behind the sharia cover which is made even more impenetrable via the spread of islamic finance, mainly steered from the islamofascist Saudi dictator family.
4 Klevius analysis of sex segregation/apartheid (now deceptively called “gender segregation”) and heterosexual attraction - see e.g. Demand for Resources (1981/1992), Daughters of the Social State (1993), Angels of Antichrist (1996), Pathological Symbiosis (2003), or Klevius PhD research on heterosexual attraction/sex segregation and opposition to female footballers (published in book form soon).
Klevius can no longer distinguish between the techniques of BBC and Nazi propaganda - can you!
Racist Theresa May is robbing EU citizens of their Human Rights
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.
Thursday, February 24, 2011
While the anti-islamic (islamophobic, if you prefer) revolution spreads in the very womb of islam (i.e. the Arabic language area), Saudi Abdullah (the evil mastermind behind OIC's sharia declaration for 57 muslim states) eagerly applauds the finishing of a codified sharia law.
Klevius question: How many young protesters are really aware of the depth of OIC's sharia threat, including the command that criticism against islam is a crime? I mean, when media is silent about this horrifying fact. OIC has worked high over the heads of the average people via those very leaders (and their foreign ministers) who are now targeted by the revolution.
OIC's sharia declaration states in Article 24 that "All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari'ah." and Article 25 "The Islamic Shari'ah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration."
It seems that so called "moderate" muslims in the West may well be the most treatcherous and dangerous for the young Arabic islamophobic revolution. One of the worst of its kind, the Paki/Brit Sayeeda Warsi, uses to be an eager guest in OIC's sharia headqurter in Saudi Arabia, while in Britain appearing "modern" and "moderate" against British muslims who actually follow sharia, and whom she calls "idots"!
Sunday, February 20, 2011
To really understand true democracy (and how islam never can be part of it) read Klevius Definition of Negative Human Rights!
Also, to get a more Enlightened perspective on the origin of islam, read Origin of Vikings!
The only asset of true islam has always been parasitism - slavery and rapetivism, now complemented with oil money and Western welfare. True islam is impotent and improductive in every other sense except the reproduction of new muslims who out of fear of sharia apostasy ban, inferiority complex racism, or plain nostalgia, continue to "believe" in evil and destructive islam. Islamic "charity" (Muslim Brotherhood) is a political means for keeping poor and ignorant people - poor and ignorant (especialy muslim girls/women who have to obey /believe their menfolk). Usually with money gained from Western aid, slavery, drugs etc! And btw, the translation of civilized science to the Arabic language doesn't make islam a copyright holder in history, does it!
Don't you think you've got a hefty screw loose in your support of these thugs?!
They have abandoned Human Rights and replaced them with islamic sharia! This means, among other creepy things, that they propose a legal system that forever would lock out girls and women from equal Human Rights
(via OIC's Cairo declaration - see burning paper above)!
They have made criticism of the very evil, i.e. islam, a crime!
They applaud (or at least try to adapt to) democracy in islamofascist nations while simultaneously castrating it by connecting it to islamic sharia! Islam and democracy/Human Rights are completely incompatible, which fact lies behind the islamofascist OIC states' decision (led by the Saudi "king" and "guardian of islam") not to follow the Universal Human Rights Declaration but replacing. it with an islamic sharia that has as its most precious tenet the segregation of the sexes by the help of female "duties" and "responsibilities". Islam/sharia isn't only sexist but also racist in that it departs from a supremacist belief that everyone is (symbolically) born a muslim and that non-muslims hence are despicable apostates.
This man, the extremely evil islamofascist Saudi dictator Abdullah (most of the people in the Saudi occupied land are ignorantly unaware of the full extent of his evilness), got really mad when his confused White House puppet, the eye rolling and head turning cheaapo opportunist, unconstitutional muslim born Mr X "president" eventually, after öong hesitation, ceased to support their both pal dictator Mubarak. The evil Saudi dictator is not only a close friend and supporter of Sudan's dictator Bashir (arrested in his absence for large scale murdering, torturing and raping people in Darfur), but also the very mastermind behind OIC's deliberate violation of the most important part of the Universal Human Rights declaration! Although this guy is more or less dead by now, the Saudi oil billionaire family that he represents is not!
Here a bunch of extremenly evil islam supporters! Yes, due to its evil origin islam attracts the scum of the Earth!
This radical muslim convert (Ingrid Mattson) is a close friend of (physically) muslim born Mr X "president".
This is "lord" Ahmed, Muslim Brotherhood's representative in UK, who killed a person while recklessly driving and sending sms. Same guy threatened British democracy with 10.000 islamic jihadists.
This is Sayeeda Warsi, who uses to visit OIC's sharia headquarter in Saudi Arabia while calling other sharia muslims "idiots".
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Muslim ignorance about islam/sharia/OIC veiled in a "faith" of imam etc propaganda that is uncritically swallowed
The pathetic view of a police or other public servant listening to lies about islam reminds me of the heydays of incest hysteria when similar groups were taught how children's fridge door scuiggling etc were sign of parental sexual abuse.
Klevius question: Can a "believer" excuse whatever of her/his ignorance as "belief"?
The only reasonable explanation to the origin of islam in the light of its sudden historical emergence is the very tenets that now are deemed "radical" or simply evil! Of these tenets the two most basic ones are still at play, namely infidel racism and rapetivist sexism. And treacherously wrapped in a propaganda that tries to make pure evil look good and even desirable. And of course they are desirable and easily marketed - for the racists and sexists! And most racists/sexists today happen to be those whose societies have been severly injured throughout 1400 years of islamic parasitism. Moreover, most of these people have darker skins than more successful non-muslim societies, hence offering a handy tool for racist fingerpointing. It also comes handy that darkskinned muslim males seems more interested in fairskinned non-muslim women and that muslim women aren't allowed to marry non-muslim men. Btw, throughout history white girls/women have been the most paid for sex slaves in muslim societies.
What the world hasn't really realized as yet - thanks to all the propaganda noise out there
OIC (57 islamic states which have agreed to implement islamic Sharia and to violate Human Rights) is the very body of islam and is also the most dangerous ideological/political threat to the freedom of both muslims and non-muslims.
And according to Pakistani/British OIC messenger Sayeeda Warsi, all islam is the same without any moderation or (presumably) radicalization altering this fact.
However, the very fact that OIC (yes dude, it includes Egypt as well) cannot accept UN's Human Rights declaration (which has paved the way for freedom of muslims all over the world) should worry everyone who dislikes totalitarian ideologies!
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Klevius: What about letting someone vote who works for the elimination of the most important part of Human Rights? Like Warsi, your vice chairman, who cooperates with OIC, the islamist organization which has replaced Human Rights with islamic sharia (see burning pic above), and which has furiously worked (via UN!?) for the criminalization of criticism against islam, the worst ever ideological crime against humanity!
Is this woman a muslim traitor or double agent - or just plain naive, ignorant and confused?!
It was right not to allow islamist parties in Egypt. However, it was wrong to let islam into the constitution and Egypt as a member of the islamofascist OIC! Can the anti-islamofascist freshminded Egyptians change it or will the islamists again abuse democracy by gaining power by the help of poor illitterate and ignorant islamic rapetivist victims?