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.

Monday, March 11, 2013

Our God told us that those without a God and all women are less worthy


Lal on muslim terror in India 1,000 years ago: In every campaign of Mahmud large-scale massacres preceded enslavement. The sight of horrendous killing completely unnerved the captives. Not only were the captives physically tortured, they were also morally shattered.

The tyranny of monotheism(s)


From a recent survey: People in bottom income groups are 17% more religious than those in top income groups. It is interesting that Religiosity declines as worldly prosperity of individuals rises. While the results for nations as a whole are mixed, individual respondents within a country show a revealing pattern. If citizens of each of the 57 countries are grouped into five groups, from the relatively poor to relatively rich in their own countries, the richer you get, the less religious you define yourself.


While the people of the world are turning their back to monotheist religions (see stats) the evil racist/sexist fascist organizations representing them (OIC, the Papacy etc) are growing in power and influence.

And although Mohammedanism (also called, Mahometanism, Saraceism, islam etc) is historically the by far worst evil ideological perpetrator, the root from which it emerged, Jesuism (Jews believing in Jesus) is the second worst. And yes, one may argue (as has Klevius argued since long ago) that the main bulk of Christian evil emerged as a response to islam's evilness.



Monotheism sprung out of slavery as "the chosen people" whose God told them to subjugate and enslave others. And it's only a question of definition how you draw the lines between the "Abrahamic faiths". Enslavement and rapetivism have been their constant followers.




Women in monotheist religion are kept unequal under the  sex apartheid motto 'equality but not sameness'


Not even female priests, bishops, imams etc. in monotheist religions alter the sex apartheid that constititutes the very origin and backbone of monotheism. This is because of women seen as sexual objects and physical and cultural reproducers of more monotheisms.


Female patriarchy in monotheism


Some examples from Catholic women in Brazil: Clearly, the inhibiting environment of patriarchy and machismo is primar­ily to blame for the depressed condition of Brazilian women. But, from what the interviewees have shared, it is also clear that other factors play a significant part in women's oppression. The fatalistic attitude of many was startling. While complaining about their subjugation, women shrugged off their responsibility to do something about it. Many said, "it's our culture and we can't change it," or "the price is too high." Could the underlying reason for this reluctance to change be a fear of losing touch with the "self' that women know and with whom they have become comfortable? Their attitudes make it difficult for those who have the courage to confront their oppressors, be they clergy, macho men, or other women, to effect even a minimal change. (O’Connor & Drury 1998:111).

A major reason women choose to maintain the status quo in the church, and want other women to do so, is their fear of ridicule, change, and loss of security. The clamor in the United States for a married clergy and women priests threatens "good women's" comfortable place in the church. These women appear to be more interested in retaining their image than in challeng­ing the injustices that face them daily
Most Brazilian women are paralyzed by their machistic society and face total ostracism if they so much as address the topic of sexism in society or in the church. Frightened women from both countries, who have found their identity within the patriarchal church, become angry at women who promote equality because they fear losing their status, inferior as it is. In different yet similar ways, they indicate they benefit from the oppressive structure and often persecute other women who try to change the system.
Among some women in both countries there seems to be an inherent need to put other women down. Women frequently do not help one another. They criticize each other, thereby working against solidarity. They tend to replicate the patriarchal model by using what little power they have to force other women into submission. By criticizing women who speak for equality and by reporting such "heretics" to the clergy or hierarchy, they marginalize those who have the courage to stand against the tide of clerical oppression.
Women act as tormentors both from the top down and from the bottom up. This was evidenced by an Episcopal woman priest in the United States who admitted she oppressed women because that was the only model she had ever seen in the church. Another example is, the sister in the diocesan office who, behind the scenes, forced the bishop's secretary to resign by overtly oppressing her. Similarly, the women in a Brazilian parish boycotted their Methodist min­ister simply because of her gender. In another Catholic parish the women jeered and taunted a woman catechist because she gave a good homily and dis­tributed Communion, roles they felt belonged to men only
The effects of patriarchal conditioning on the formation of women are evi­dent in both countries and affect the relationship between sisters and lay­women even today Their status as sisters, emanating from a male, militaristic formation, elevated those in the religious orders a step above the laity, and many do not want to "descend" to the level of other women. These sisters con­tinue to contribute to inequality in the church by hanging on to privileges and perks denied to other women. Historically, some teaching sisters have influ­enced women to believe they are secondary and subordinate, not only to the clergy and other men, but to sisters as well (O’Connor & Drury 1998:127-128).


Klevius verdict: There seems to be only two options for women. Either isolation in the nun-tradition (this includes becoming female priests, bishops etc) or abandoning monotheism altogether.



Monotheist fanatics just blink (or despise) the historical and contemporary fact that most people on earth never were or became monotheists


Pompous, high and mighty, self important racist/sexist "monotheisms" against the majority of the world's population who don't approve of political etc systems based on evil "God told us" religions.

Dear reader, isn't it quite telling that monotheist Mideast (and islamized India - the Hindu system transformed in accordance to much Arab/islamic influence after the bloody muslim attacks on India*) has constantly been the worst place for women and the world center for never ending civil wars?!

* During the Arab invasion of Sindh (712 C.E.), Muhammad bin Qasim first attacked Debal, a word derived from Deval meaning temple. It was situated on the sea-coast not far from modern Karachi. It was garrisoned by 4000 Kshatriya soldiers and served by 3000 Brahmans. All males of the age of seventeen and upwards were put to the sword and their women and children were enslaved.1 700 beautiful females, who were under the protection of Budh (that is, had taken shelter in the temple), were all captured with their valuable ornaments, and clothes adorned with jewels.Muhammad despatched one-fifth of the legal spoil to Hajjaj which included seventy-five damsels, the rest four-fifths were distributed among the soldiers.3 Thereafter whichever places he attacked like Rawar, Sehwan, Dhalila, Brahmanabad and Multan, Hindu soldiers and men with arms were slain, the common people fled, or, if flight was not possible, accepted Islam, or paid the poll tax, or died with their religion. Many women of the higher class immolated themselves in Jauhar, most others became prize of the victors. These women and children were enslaved and converted, and batches of them were des-patched to the Caliph in regular installments. For example, after Rawar was taken Muhammad Qasim halted there for three days during which he massacred 6000 (men). Their followers and dependents, as well as their women and children were taken prisoner. Later on the slaves were counted, and their number came to 60,000 (of both sexes?). Out of these, 30 were young ladies of the royal blood Muhammad Qasim sent all these to Hajjaj who forwarded them to Walid the Khalifa. He sold some of these female slaves of royal birth, and some he presented to others. Selling of slaves was a common practice. From the seventh century onwards and with a peak during Muhammad al-Qasim's campaigns in 712-13, writes Andre Wink, a considerable number of Jats was captured as prisoners of war and deported to Iraq and elsewhere as slaves. Jats here is obviously used as a general word for all Hindus. In Brahmanabad, it is said that about six thousand fighting men were slain, but according to others sixteen thousand were killed, and their families enslaved.6 The garrison in the fort-city of Multan was put to the sword, and families of the chiefs and warriors of Multan, numbering about six thousand, were enslaved.

In Sindh female slaves captured after every campaign of the marching army, were converted and married to Arab soldiers who settled down in colonies established in places like Mansura, Kuzdar, Mahfuza and Multan. The standing instructions of Hajjaj to Muhammad bin Qasim were to give no quarter to infidels, but to cut their throats, and take the women and children as captives. In the final stages of the conquest of Sindh, when the plunder and the prisoners of war were brought before Qasim one-fifth of all the prisoners were chosen and set aside; they were counted as amounting to twenty thousand in number (they belonged to high families) and veils were put on their faces, and the rest were given to the soldiers. Obviously a few (K. Lal).



Raiding and trading for slaves


The main lineage in Jewish/islamic ideology has been parasitism finance with the main currency consisting of slaves. Wealthy Jews (some of them believers in Jesus) ruled most of the pre-islamic slave trade routes through which evil islam later came to spread by the help of Jewish collaborators. The Arabs would never have been able to conquer anything bigger than a caravan or power empty spaces where they could slaughter/rape defenseless civilians. Every serious historian knows that the Arabs were really lousy (but sly) and technically backward soldiers. This is also why islam never has achieved anything in science and technology. Islam's primary interest has always been parasitism. Whereas Jews occupied the financial/commercial interface between power blocks, hence also slipping into science and technology, islam due to its totalitarian parasitic mass movement/conversions/genocides never reached that far. Every scientist etc you may find in the history books named muslim is in fact a converted scientist etc! This is why islam without slaves or oil is a total looser and has left clear traits of this in history.

Islam has by far been the worst slave raider/trader in history. The role of slavery in monotheist "religions" (although in Christianity to a much lesser extent*) goes hand in hand with sex segregated rapetivism (i.e. ideological rape). In fact, it may be argued that the slaves was the main currency and basis for finance until Capitalism** freed most of them. Also consider that Columbus was a Jew who was imprisoned when he tried to bring slaves from America to Europe! And that most so called "European" slave traders were in fact deported Jews! Deported because of their involvement in slavery, i.e. the same reason why Shakespeare via his Renaissance informants created the disgusting (Jewish) merchant in Venice!

  * Christianity emerged as an anti-sex protest movement before the "Church fathers" disciplined it. And although Christianity managed to corrupt the Roman empire from within, it was only after islam's attacks on Europe that Christianity became a defense ideology and established itself as the major power center in Europe.

** Capitalism is based on and feeds from technology, not slaves (no dude, cheating with assets isn't Capitalism!). Consequently, it's no surprise that Capitalism followed by Abolitionism (anti-slavery) both emerged in England.


The Indian caste system was a product of islam

Helen E. Hagan, anthropologist: "It is known that the caste system existing in that area is not so much directly related to the caravan trade as it is to the importation on an ideology – Islam.


Klevius brief philosophy lesson re. religion



Klevius criticism against islam is restricted precisely to what islam itself disfavors or shows hostility towards., for example those basic Human Rights that islam has always abandoned in line with its own evil origin and now through islam's main earthly representation, i.e. Saudi based OIC and its fanatic Fuhrer, Ihsanoglu, the main fascist movement of today




The concept of (Negative) Human Rights is a moral conscience above egoism and hence the only true God. But this God is not offered by "monotheist" religion. On the contrary, she is actively excluded and the exclusion excused. 

Moreover, human weakness is not only used as an excuse for monotheist atrocities but also as a reason to stay within monotheism for the purpose of shoveling over these sins to God.

Negative Human Rights clearly out-rules such such speculations in evilness.

In schools islam leaves out studies of Paganism, Buddhism, Shinto,  or purely atheistic philosophies such as Atheism and secular Humanism. If there are classes concerning religious studies in the public school system, they should be comparative religious studies, inclusive of the world's major faiths and compared to Atheism and Human Rights based on equality without strange, sleazy and treacherous references to 'equality but not sameness' where this 'not sameness' is then made an excuse for limiting Human Rights. You'd never hear someone arguing that a disabled person should have less Human Rights than non-disabled.

On the contrary, the whole idea about Human Rights equality is that a condition of whatever sort shouldn't restrict Human Rights.

Don't allow the door of science to be open to nonscientific, theocratic teachings under the oxymoron “islamic scholars”.



1400 years of slavery and racism






genocides








 The Catholic patriarchy - and the female patriarchy supporting it


.


Monotheist genital mutilation





Islamofascism applauding and supporting muslim born (apostate?!) Mr "president" Barry Barakeh Hussain Obama Dunham Soetoro (or whatever)



 .

No comments: