Negative Human Rights for a Positive Human Future

Definition of Negative Human Rights - i.e. the very foundation of the freedom part of the anti-fascist Universal Human Rights declaration of 1948.

Support Klevius' Atheist anti-fascism against islamofascism

This is what BBC's muslim sharia presenter Mishal Husain "forgot" to report. Mishal grew up in the very same theocratic medieval dictatorship which now harbors and rules all muslims world organization OIC and its Human Rights violating sharia. While also spreading islamic hatred over the world through a variety of channels.

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".

Klevius to Mueller (who opposed investigation of Saudi 9/11): Check Saudi connections/influence!

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?

Is Mrs Theresa May digging a miserable "British" sharia "empire" under the Brexit cliff?

Mrs May plays sharia with the islamofascist Saudi dictator family - skipping Human Rights. Right?

Saudi islamofascism attacks Buddhists - again and again - backed by Mrs May.

When will the world finally turn on the hateful Saudi dictator family - rather than on its victims?

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

The Viking phenomenon started with bilingual Finns raiding/trading sex slaves to Abbasid (ca 750)

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")!

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.

Sunday, October 07, 2012

Kate Rudd, Sayeeda Warsi, Catherine Ashton, all work for Ansar Al-Shariah and OIC

There are 193 states represented in UN. Why are 57 of the worst Human Rights violators (OIC) allowed to dictate it and the world?!

 When Piers Morgan asked Iran's president if he was prepared to accept Israel's right to exist Ahmedinejad referred to the "end of occupation first" and by this he of course also referred to his previous answer where he saw the establishment of Israel in the first place as an "occupation". However, Piers Morgan never pointed out this. Wonder why?

Three UK women working hard from top positions for Sharia and against girls'/women's Human Rights



1 Kate Rudd, the British Consul General in Jeddah, started her diplomatic career as head of the UK Trade and Investment delegation to Iraq and her questionable position has only deepened as the delegation’s representative to OIC.

2 European Union's high representative for foreign affairs, Catherine Ashton (see text below).

3 Sayeeda Warsi ('Minister for Faith islam' – is at the Foreign Office and includes being the lead minister responsible for Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Central Asia, the UN, the International Criminal Court and the OIC, which is the largest multi-lateral organisation in the world after the UN)

 

Cliff Kincaid on The Wall Street Journal repeats what Klevius has warned for a decade:
OIC has not given up its efforts to silence criticism of Islam. The group has merely changed tactics, focusing instead on dramatically expanding the U.N. ban against advocating religious hatred. The legal basis here is the U.N.'s International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which prohibits "any advocacy of . . . religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination [or] hostility." Several Western states also bar such incitement. The OIC's attempt to broaden existing hate-speech laws is therefore difficult to resist on principle for those liberal democracies, which have bought into the idea that tolerance can be fostered through limiting free speech. This agenda was vividly on display in a statement by the foreign ministers of the OIC at the U.N. General Assembly last week. The statement, in response to the "Innocence of Muslims" film and cartoons depicting Muhammad published by a French magazine, refers to the U.S.-brokered Human Rights Council resolution. It then urges U.N. member states, "in line with their obligations under international human rights law, to take all appropriate measures including necessary legislation against these acts that lead to incitement to hatred, discrimination and violence against persons based on their religion."

Astonishingly, the European Union's high representative for foreign affairs, Catherine Ashton, has also issued a joint statement with the secretaries general of the OIC and the Arab League that "condemn[s] any advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to hostility and violence. While fully recognizing freedom of expression, we believe in the importance of respecting all prophets." The statement will be understood by many as EU approval of the OIC position that disrespecting any prophet is tantamount to advocacy of religious hatred and should be prohibited by states that have ratified the ICCPR




Baroness Cox: "It is right, of course, that we respect freedom of religion, but surely not when basic laws and morality are being flouted..." 


Klevius comment: Baroness Cox here reveals her "islamophobia" and could be jailed for it now in any of OIC's member states, and soon even in UK if Sayeeda Warsi & Co are allowed to continue their evil Human Rightsphobia. Sharia is "basic laws and morality" that deeply clashes with Human Rights. So deeply, in fact, that OIC (islam's foremost representative) has openly violated Human Rights by replacing with the terms "as would not be contrary to the principles of the Shari'ah"; "according to the norms of Islamic Shari'ah"; "in accordance with the provisions of Shari'ah"; "All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari'ah"; "to assume public office in accordance with the provisions of Shari'ah" "The Islamic Shari'ah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration".


Some examples from OIC's Cairo declaration: 


ARTICLE 22: (a) Everyone shall have the right to express his opinion freely in such manner as would not be contrary to the principles of the Shari'ah. (b) Everyone shall have the right to advocate what is right, and propagate what is good, and warn against what is wrong and evil according to the norms of Islamic Shari'ah (c) Information is a vital necessity to society. It may not be exploited or misused in such a way as may violate sanctities and the dignity of Prophets, undermine moral and ethical values or disintegrate, corrupt or harm society or weaken its faith. (d) It is not permitted to arouse nationalistic or doctrinal hatred or to do anything that may be an incitement to any form or racial discrimination. ARTICLE 23: (b) Everyone shall have the right to participate, directly or indirectly in the administration of his country's public affairs. He shall also have the right to assume public office in accordance with the provisions of Shari'ah. ARTICLE 24: All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari'ah. 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.




 

No comments: