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.

Thursday, June 27, 2013

Is there a difference between Qatar and Taliban?!


This is the islamic perversion muslim born (apostate?!) Mr X Barry Barakeh Hussain Dunham Obama Soetoro (or whatever) approves of!






Fly or flee Qatar islamofascism?


Not only is the Qatari dictator family responsible for the murdering and victimization of millions of mainly muslims abroad, it has also some of the world's worst Human Rights records at home.


Some examples of islamic Human Rights violations in Qatar



Discriminatory Family Code

Family law was codified in 2006 with the introduction of Sharia Family Law, which applies to all muslims in Qatar, regardless of nationality.

A male guardian must sign a woman's marriage contract for it to be valid. Muslim women do not have the right to marry outside islam, although muslim men are free to marry whomever.

Polygamy is legal in Qatar. It is not known how many women in Qatar actually live in polygamous marriages.

The legal status of women and men as parents in Qatar is unclear. According to a forthcoming report by UN Women, within Qatari families it is widely accepted that the husband is the head of the household, and that he retains control over the household budget and expenditures. Domestic work and childcare remain the responsibility of the wife. Qatari women only have the right to pass citizenship onto their children in certain, limited circumstances. However, there is no information available on what these circumstances are.

Men in Qatar have the right to divorce their wives unilaterally (repudiate), while women’s rights to divorce are heavily restricted. Women can obtain a divorce if they can prove to a court that their husband has failed to uphold his marital duties (e.g. by providing insufficient financial support, or by deserting her). 
 Alternatively, they can request the court to grant a khula divorce, although this entails renouncing all future financial support, and a woman giving up her dowry. In cases of divorce, under the 2006 Sharia Family Law mothers retain responsibility of girls up to the age of 15 and boys up to the age of 13, although the father always remains the children’s legal guardian.

Women do not have equal inheritance rights in Qatar, as inheritance is also governed by Sharia, which allows women to inherit half what a similarly situated male relative would receive (e.g. daughters receive half the amount that sons receive).


Restricted Physical Integrity

Rape within marriage is not recognized as a criminal offense. Data on conviction rates are unavailable, and few rape victims report the crime, due to fear of Sharia and social stigma. There are no specific laws in place to protect women from domestic violence. Amnesty International reports that the law and state bodies do not protect women from sex-based violence in Qatar.

Qatari courts often give lenient sentences in cases when male violence against women has been motivated by ‘immodest behavior’ on the part of the victim, according to the Freedom House report. There are no statistics available as to the number of so-called ‘honour crimes’ in Qatar.

The domestic workers who form the bulk of Qatar’s female migrant population have limited awareness of or access to rights and justice. This means that they are effectively without protection in cases where they are experiencing physical, sexual or mental abuse, or the denial of their right to freedom of movement; according to Amnesty International, such cases are common. Amnesty also reports that in 2009, 52 foreign nationals were imprisoned, sentenced to flogging, and/or deported from Qatar for engaging in ‘illicit sexual relations’.

Qatari women do not have any legal control over their own fertility. Moreover, Qatari women are encouraged by the state to have large families, to aid the policy of ‘Qatarization’, to counter the demographic imbalance in the emirate between Qatari and non-Qatari nationals. They also face pressure from their families to give birth to large numbers of children. In fact, rapetivism is one of the most central pillars in islam.


Son Bias

Sex-disaggregated data regarding child labour was not available. However, according to survey data quoted in an unpublished report for UN Women, 28% of respondents felt that daughters should undertake domestic work in the home, compared to just 4% who felt that sons should. This may indicate son bias in regard to allocating domestic labor.



Restricted Access to Resources and Entitlements

Although increasing numbers of Qatari women are entering the business sector, many businesswomen operate through male intermediaries. This is because women directly engaging with male business contacts often face criticism from family members.


Restricted Civil Liberties

Qatari women need permission to apply for a drivers licence. Islamic sex segregation restricts interactions between unrelated men and women, and limit women’s access to non-sex segregated public spaces. It is not considered socially acceptable for women to live alone in Qatar, and those who choose to do so face criticism from their families and harassment. Migrant women working as domestic workers in Qatar face significant restrictions on their freedom of movement, including their right to leave the country, as their employers must give their consent before exit permits can be issued to allow them to leave.

Freedom of speech, assembly and association are non-existing in Qatar. According to a forthcoming report by UN Women, despite the presence of the well-known media company Al-Jazeera in Qatar, very few women work in the media in the emirate. Overall, the media environment is restricted, with little consideration of sensitive social issues – including sex issues – in local media. According to a 2010 report by Freedom House, the 2004 law governing private associations is so restrictive that independent women’s rights NGOs remain non-existent. As a result, most women’s organizations are state-run.

Women are virtually invisible in political life in Qatar; no woman has ever been appointed to the Advisory Council (the main legislative body, directly appointed by the Emir). 

Attitudes towards women in positions of leadership remain negative among many sections of the population, with 62% of women and men questioned for a 2007 survey reporting that they would not vote for a female candidate.

There is a significant sex gap between women and men in regard to earnings. In part, this is due to employers consistently disregarding the principle of equal pay, particularly in regard to allocation of benefits and bonuses.

Muslim Qatari husbands have a considerable say over their wives’ employment decisions, particularly due to sex segregation where a woman’s presence in the public sphere may lead to social contact with unrelated males.


Klevius' question: So what do you think about it, Janet Jackson?



No comments: