Which one is weirder, Klevius (the main world critic of sex segregation/apartheid*) or sex apartheid?

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Islam is today Human Rights violating Saudi Arabia (OIC) and its Salafist terror organizations around the world. And you can't do anything about it unless you subscribe to secular and universal Human Rights!

These women are fascists if they oppose Universal Human Rights and propose apartheid and sex slavery (Sharia)! Or are they just that stupid - or misled by their menfolk?!

Klevius says islam smears Human Rights!

Islam and Saudi Arabia made Boko Haram's* atrocities possible

The faith world in general (plus some remaining "third world" inferiority complex) is the main reason medieval backward islam is still allowed to exist. We don't allow National Socialist German Workers' Party** (called Nazism by socialists so to cover the socialist roots) either, do we! Btw, the socialist roots are clearly visible in their 25 points program (shown furthest down on this posting).

Is this man the world's most evil? His organization certainly is because it criminalizes the most basic of Human Rights, hence opening up for racist and sexist attacks around the whole world!

This is Iyad Madani, the Saudi Sharia fanatic Fuhrer of all the world's muslims' world organization, the Saudi based OIC. Its main objective is and has always been to violate Human Rights and to replace them worldwide with Sharia. This means that the most basic of Human Rights are criminalized in islam because they are against racist/sexist islamofascist Sharia. Got it!

Saudi initiated, Saudi based, and Saudi steered OIC (islam) was created as a bulwark against Universal Human Rights because islam is not possible if it has to remove its racism and sexism in accordance with Human Rights.

The most disastrous tipping point was when OIC managed to turn UN from a bastion for the defense of Universal Human Rights into its very opposite, namely in practice an islamic mosque (OIC now constitutes the biggest voting bloc within UN) based on Sharia (via the so called Cairo declaration on "human rights in islam").  

In Saudi Arabia a woman can earn a phd in Sharia islam while still remaining equally oppressed as the women at the alleged Mohammed's medieval time!

60% of university students in Saudi Arabia are women but almost all of them are then functioning  as Sharia teachers of girls to become obedient muslim Saudi sex slaves women (also compare the fate of the evil Saudi "king's" daughters). 85% of employed Saudi women work in (girl's) education, and 95% in the "public sector" mainly as Sharia guardians of girls and other women. The first group of women graduated from a law (Sharia) program in 2008 but they are not able to practice law, but 'possibly' work in courts to Sharia "assist" other women.

A few years ago an "expert on girls' education" (Sharia), Nora bint Abdullah al-Fayez, became the first female minister in Saudi Arabia. She was made deputy education minister in charge of a new Sharia department for female students.

The dirty bigoted and hypocritical thinking of Saudi Arabia's top cleric

Sheikh Abdulaziz Al al-Sheikh, Saudi Arabia’s grand mufti opens his bigoted and hypocritical mouth about Boko Haram: “These groups are not on the right path because Islam is against kidnapping, killing and aggression,” he said. “Marrying kidnapped (muslim) girls is not permitted.”

Klevius: No, it isn't. But enslaving infidels is ok. And no matter if you are an infidel or a muslim girl, you will be lawfully raped under Sharia. Either in accordance to the Koran's statement of 'what your right hand possesses', or in accordance to the lack of domestic rape in Sharia.

In 2012, Sheikh Abdulaziz Al al-Sheikh issued a fatwa allowing ten year old girls to marry insisting that girls are ready for marriage by age 10 or 12: "Our mothers and grandmothers got married when they were barely 12. Good upbringing makes a girl ready to perform all marital duties at that age."

Sheikh Abdulaziz Al al-Sheikh also announced plans in 2007 to demolish the Green Dome and flatten the tombs housed under it, including the alleged but not existing one of Muhammad.

In 2012, Sheikh Abdulaziz Al al-Sheikh declared that, "All churches in the Arabian Peninsula must be destroyed". Abdulaziz bin Abdullah cited an Islamic hadith quoting the Prophet Mohammed on his deathbed. However, most of the world overlooked the statement. Mehmet Görmez, the most senior imam in Turkey, saide that the announcement totally contradicted the peaceful teachings of islam. Görmez said that the mufti’s declaration ran "contrary to islamic teachings of tolerance".

Klevius: What peaceful teachings of islam?!

The sheikh has now ruled that further church building should be banned and existing Christian houses of worship should be destroyed.Archbishop Robert Zollitsch, chairman of the German Bishops Conference, said the mufti "shows no respect for the religious freedom and free co-existence of religions", especially all the foreign laborers who made its economy work.

Saudi Arabia bans all non-Muslim houses of prayer, forcing Christians there to risk arrest by praying in private homes. There are churches for Christian minorities in the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman and Yemen.
However, the Saudi "king" Abdullah (Obama's first call as "president") plans to open a controversial centre for interfaith islam diamonologue in Austria.

"How could the grand mufti issue a fatwa of such importance behind the back of his king?" stupid bishops asked. "We see a contradiction between the dialogue being practiced, the efforts of the king and those of his top mufti."

Klevius explanation: So, you don't seem to realize what is said in OIC's Human Rights violating Sharia declaration: Reaffirming the civilizing and historical role of the Islamic Ummah which Allah made as the best community ---  in accordance with the Islamic Shari'ah. - 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.

Background to the continuing survival of barbaric islam and its Human Rights violating Sharia

Muslim countries aided by some other Human Rights violating countries criticized the Universal Declaration of Human Rights for its perceived "failure" to take into account the cultural and religious context of "non-Western" (read non-Human Rights) countries.

BBC's muslim sharia presenter Mishal Husain didn't even mention the real problem in Nigeria namely islamic sharia and that the hate crimes against non-muslims are committed under the sharia umbrella in the muslim majority north of Nigeria. Boko Haram is supported by muslim leaders and therefore more or less out of reach for the government's actions. Nothing about this in Mishal Husain's reporting. Could a journalist and a media company sink any lower.

Klevius: When islam started its enslavement campaign in Africa and elsewhere the main pattern was to bribe local leaders to become muslim slave traders. This is what is behind stupid historians references to 'local people welcomed the muslim invasions'.

BBC: But also muslims have been targeted in Nigeria.

Klevius: No "real" muslims have been targeted at all because Boko Haram follow exactly OIC's (Saudi) Sharia. It was no coincidence that muslim girls "managed to escape" whereas non-muslims did not. Only difference that the Saudis do it via the (dictator) state. Remember the barbaric and extremely intolerant laws against non-muslims in Saudi Arabia. And their bigot and hypocrite top imam who has asked for the destruction of all churchers and other non-islamic buildings and organizations, now pretends to condemn Boko Haram. Disgusting.

BBC: Islam is against forceful conversion.

Klevius: Not at all, islam is all about forceful conversion - except for them it wants to enslave. And in front of the "islamic world", the family, the society, the islamic state or whatever other means, a girl has no say of her own. There simply doesn't exist a Sharia version on this planet that would allow a muslim woman to marry a non-muslim man! Just to mention one of an endless pile of Human Rights violations emanating from evil islam.

A Nigerian voice on Boko Haram

Femi Fani-Kayode: Three years ago I called on the Federal Government to level any city or community that hosted, provided refuge or supported Boko Haram and many not only insulted me but also said that I was far too extreeme. At that time, whilst the doves continued to call for dialogue and understanding with and for Boko Haram I saw them exactly for what they were- evil islamist forces that had foreign-backing and a frightful agenda for our country which was not hidden. I also said that they would never stop until that agenda was effected or until they were utterly crushed and every single one of them was wiped out together with all traces of their evil philosophy. As usual most Nigerians did not understand at the time and they subjected me to all manner of insults. Yet I continued and I warned that if all these things were not done the situation would get far worse. Sadly, three years down the line, I have been proved right.

How did I know? Because I am a student of history and because what Boko Haram is attempting to do is nothing new. It has happened in many other countries over the ages and in those countries the people themselves were forced to make a hard choice- to either fight the evil or to succumb to it and allow it to overwhelm them.

Those that encouraged the Boko monster and fed the islamist beast at the outset and that silently supported and encouraged them in an attempt to destabilise the government and the nation have now become a victim of that hideous monster themselves.

Let us make no mistake about it: the agenda of Boko Haram and those that are behind it, both locally and their international backers, is not limited to northern Nigeria and neither has it ever been. Simply put they wish to conquer the whole country and establish their own caliphate. They wish to impose their strange values and barbaric beliefs on the rest of us by force. There are some leaders in Nigeria, backed by Al Qaeda, the Taliban, Al Shabab and emboldened by Arab money and salifist philosophies, that honestly believe that if Nigeria is not ruled by a northern muslim then there must be no peace or there must be no Nigeria at all

As far as they are concerned it would be better to establish a pre-historic islamic fundamentalist state, like the old Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, where full sharia law is practised and where Boko Haram leads and holds sway, than to have a modern-day secularist Nigerian state where a southern or northern christian or a moderate muslim rules. The underlying philosophy is that some were ”born to rule” and if ”they” cannot rule then they will use ”their” religion and ”their” considerable financial and political arsenal to ”make Nigeria ungovernable”. This is evil and we must resist it. I can never support such an agenda, such a philosophy or such people because as far as I am concerned they are of the devil.

Those that think like that and that espouse such views are worse than the white supremacist Boers of South Africa during the days of aparthied and they are worse than than the fascists of Nazi Germany under Hitler. I believe, and I have always believed, that if Nigeria is to remain one then ALL her ethnic nationalities must be treated as equals, no matter how big or how small, and that the secularity of the state must be preserved. I have always believed that we must keep religion out of politics and that faith, being essentially a personal matter, must never be used as a political tool or as a weapon of destabilisation. Evidently not all share my view. Some believe that religion and ethnicity can and must be used as a means to achieve and preserve political power. Worst still others believe that islamic fundamentalism has a place in our country.

They must either fight this evil called Boko Haram or submit and capitulate to it. They must either insist on a modern-day secular state where all are equal before the law and are protected by the constitution or they accept the violent imposition of the most cruel and barbaric form of an islamic fundamentalist state.

An amazingly stupid defender of the most disastrous of ideologies

Qasim Rashid (a nut head muslim on Fox): The ultimate test asks how well these teachings have played out in Islamic and world history. In one word—amazingly.

Klevius: Indeed. Islam managed during 1,400 years to be the ideology that has committed most slavery, genocides and rapetivism of all! By far! And a quick look at the islamic "world" map proves islam's disastrous effect on everything it has touched upon. Without Western abolishment, technology and oil nothing would be left. Just look at how the Ottoman slave empire sunk into the deepest misery after slavery was forbidden. The Ottoman slave empire's blood was that of its slaves.

Qasim Rashid (a nut head muslim on Fox): Prophet Muhammad’s wife Khadija was not only the first person to accept his claim to prophethood, she ran a thriving trade business as a CEO during his lifetime. She was a leader, an entrepreneur, a mother, and a wife—all in one.

Klevius: How come then that Khadiha was a prosperous CEO and run a thriving trade business BEFORE Mohammed and islam?!

A muslim "human rights lawyer" - the most laughable of oxymorons?

CNN's Arsalan Iftikhar (adjunct professor  imam at of religious studies at DePaul University in Chicago): As a Muslim human rights (sic) lawyer, it is obscene and absolutely un-Islamic for these lunatic human traffickers to invoke the name of God while kidnapping young girls and threatening to sell them into sexual slavery.

Klevius: As a muslim you can NOT be a Human Rights lawyer, only a sharia lawyer. This unchangable fact isn't altered by OIC (all muslims Saudi based and led world organization) calling sharia "islamic human rights"! So either Arsalan Iftikhar blatantly lies you straight up in your face or he is no muslim at all!

Arsalan Iftikhar: The leaders of Boko Haram have clearly never read the Holy Quran, which states quite clearly that “oppression is worse than murder” (2:191) and that nobody “shall force girls to commit prostitution” (24:33).

Klevius: The leader happens to be educated in islamic monotheism at a renowned university. I think he knows exactly what he is doing according to the Koran and Sharia. He actually gives us a modern copy of Mohammed to study!

Arsalan Iftikhar: They must have also missed the numerous times that the Prophet Muhammad categorically stated during his life that women or children were never to be harmed under any situation.

Klevius: No, because they should be used as sex slaves! Btw, by converting to islam Sharia makes it criminal for a woman to marry a non-muslim! This is just one of the "secrets" behind islam's "popularity".

Daniel Greenfield: Mohammed partly financed the expansion of Islam by enslaving and selling girls and women. Boko Haram in Nigeria is following in the way of their prophet by kidnapping and selling hundreds of non-Muslim schoolgirls.

    Qur’an (33:50) – “O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those (slaves) whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee”

This is Islam.

    Fears for the fate of more than 200 Nigerian girls turned even more nightmarish Monday when the leader of the Islamist group that kidnapped them announced plans to sell them.

    “I abducted your girls. I will sell them in the market, by Allah,” a man claiming to be Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau said in a video first obtained by Agence France-Presse.

    “There is a market for selling humans. Allah says I should sell. He commands me to sell. I will sell women. I sell women,” he continued, according to a CNN translation from the local Hausa language.

    “I will marry off a woman at the age of 12. I will marry off a girl at the age of nine,” he said elsewhere in the video.

    Leader Abubakar Shekau warned in a video obtained in March that all students should leave university and girls drop out of school to get married.

    “In Islam, it is allowed to take infidel women as slaves,” Shekau said. “In due course, we will start taking women away.”

    “Access to education is a basic right & an unconscionable reason to target innocent girls,” former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton wrote Sunday on Twitter. “We must stand up to terrorism. #BringBackOurGirls.”

    President Obama is being briefed on the attack, and pressure is mounting worldwide for the Nigerian government to act. Speaking during a visit to Africa, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said the United States “will do everything possible to support the Nigerian government to return these young women to their homes and to hold the perpetrators to justice.”

That’s funny considering how long the State Department resisted naming Boko Haram a terrorist organization and that the Obama contribution to Nigeria’s fight against Islamic terror was to pressure the government to appease it.

Boko Haram has murdered thousands, blown up churches and engaged in horrific atrocities. It’s the deadliest Islamic terrorist group in the region and almost certainly has ties to Al Qaeda.

Despite that, Hillary Clinton dragged her feet when she was Secretary of State and now has contributed nothing except a tweet.


Pamela Geller: On the very day that the devout Muslim group Boko Haram released a video of the kidnapped Nigerian schoolgirls, clad in burkas and being forced to recite the Qur’an, author Dean Obeidallah declared in the Daily Beast that “The Nigerian terrorist group that kidnapped hundreds of schoolgirls has nothing to do with Islam, and it’s grotesquely irresponsible of the media to suggest it does.”

Mr. Obeidallah, it’s not the media that suggests it; it is Boko Haram that declares it.

It is not grotesque to tell the truth. What is grotesque is that the widely-read Daily Beast would run such damaging propaganda by a failed yet self-described "comic."

The Daily Beast is doing an end run for Islamic jihad when these girls’ lives hang in the balance. That is a different kind of savagery. The Beast is more worried about Islam’s PR than it is in educating the public on the most grave threat to freedom, not just in Nigeria but across the world.

Clearly, the hashtag #BringBackOurGirls is just more empty rhetoric from hypocrites, not an honest clarion call for action.

The hashtag shouldn’t be #BringBackOurGirls. The hashtag should be #TellTheTruth.

The question we should be asking is, "Why do Muslims attack those of us that are merely reporting the truth? Why aren't these 'moderates' looking inwards and addressing the Islamic texts and teachings that command jihad instead of providing cover?" It is, in fact, complicity.

Dean Obeidallah and other dissemblers may say that Boko Haram is not Islamic, but Boko Haram (and al-Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Hezb'allah, et al.) says that Obeidallah and less devout Muslims aren't Islamic. In the Muslim world, outside of the ivory towers of media and academia, millions of Muslims agree with Boko Haram. Under Islam, secular Muslims are apostates, punishable by death.


Nonie Darwish: Students who invite experts on Middle Eastern culture and critics of Sharia, like myself, must endure horrific pressure to cancel our invitations. No matter what horror happens under Islam, we end up being dismissed by the Left as “Islamophobes.” The situation in America today is upside down, where we see the American Left tolerating Islamic intolerance and protecting Islam’s dirty little secrets from coming to light. We are not doing Muslims and Islam a favor with this cover-up and appeasement. Blatant atrocities against women by Muslims around the world must be exposed and rejected. It is time for the West to condemn Islamic Sharia law by name.



 * Boko Haram means 'everything non-islamic is bad', in other words not only "Western education". Boko Haram's official Hausa name means 'The Congregation of the People of the Tradition of the prophet Mohammad for Proselytism and Jihad'.


* *  The 25 Points of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NAZI) program (with some hasty islam comparison in brackets by Klevius):

        1. We demand the union of all Germans (muslims) in a Great Germany (world Umma) on the basis of the principle of self-determination of all peoples (muslims).

        2. We demand that the German people have rights equal to those of other nations; and that the Peace Treaties of Versailles and St. Germain shall be abrogated.

        3. We demand land and territory (colonies) for the maintenance of our people and the settlement of our surplus population.

        4. Only those who are our fellow countrymen (muslims) can become citizens. Only those who have German blood (are muslims), regardless of creed (background), can be our countrymen. Hence no Jew can be a countryman.

        5. Those who are not citizens must live in Germany as foreigners and must be subject to the law of aliens.

        6. The right to choose the government and determine the laws (Sharia) of the State (Umma) shall belong only to citizens (muslims). We therefore demand that no public office, of whatever nature, whether in the central government, the province, or the municipality, shall be held by anyone who is not a citizen (who is not a muslim).

        We wage war against the corrupt parliamentary administration whereby men are appointed to posts by favor of the party without regard to character and fitness (without regard to commitment for islam).

        7. We demand that the State shall above all undertake to ensure that every citizen (muslim) shall have the possibility of living decently and earning a livelihood. If it should not be possible to feed the whole population, then aliens (non-muslims) must be expelled from the Reich (muslim neighborhood).

        8. Any further immigration of non-Germans (non-muslims) must be prevented. We demand that all non-Germans who have entered Germany since August 2, 1914, shall be compelled to leave the Reich immediately.

        9. All citizens (all true muslim men) must possess equal rights and duties.

        10. The first duty of every citizen (muslim) must be to work mentally or physically (to follow Sharia). No individual (muslim) shall do any work that offends against the interest of the (muslim) community to the benefit of all (true muslim men).

        Therefore we demand:

        11. That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.

        12. Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in blood and treasure, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as treason to the people. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits.

        13. We demand the nationalization of all trusts.

        14. We demand profit-sharing in large industries.

        15. We demand a generous increase in old-age pensions.

        16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a sound middle-class, the immediate communalization of large stores which will be rented cheaply to small tradespeople, and the strongest consideration must be given to ensure that small traders shall deliver the supplies needed by the State, the provinces and municipalities.

        17. We demand an agrarian reform in accordance with our national requirements, and the enactment of a law to expropriate the owners without compensation of any land needed for the common purpose. The abolition of ground rents, and the prohibition of all speculation in land.

        18. We demand that ruthless war be waged against those who work to the injury of the common welfare. Traitors, usurers, profiteers, etc., are to be punished with death, regardless of creed or race.

        19. We demand that Roman law, which serves a materialist ordering of the world, be replaced by German common law (Sharia).

        20. In order to make it possible for every capable and industrious German to obtain higher education, and thus the opportunity to reach into positions of leadership, the State must assume the responsibility of organizing thoroughly the entire cultural system of the people. The curricula of all educational establishments shall be adapted to practical life. The conception of the State Idea (science of citizenship) must be taught in the schools from the very beginning. We demand that specially talented children of poor parents, whatever their station or occupation, be educated at the expense of the State.

        21. The State has the duty to help raise the standard of national health by providing maternity welfare centers, by prohibiting juvenile labor, by increasing physical fitness through the introduction of compulsory games and gymnastics, and by the greatest possible encouragement of associations concerned with the physical education of the young.

        22. We demand the abolition of the regular army and the creation of a national (folk) army.

        23. We demand that there be a legal campaign against those who propagate deliberate political lies and disseminate them through the press. In order to make possible the creation of a German press, we demand:

        (a) All editors and their assistants on newspapers published in the German language shall be German citizens.

        (b) Non-German newspapers shall only be published with the express permission of the State. They must not be published in the German language.

        (c) All financial interests in or in any way affecting German newspapers shall be forbidden to non-Germans by law, and we demand that the punishment for transgressing this law be the immediate suppression of the newspaper and the expulsion of the non-Germans from the Reich.

        Newspapers transgressing against the common welfare shall be suppressed. We demand legal action against those tendencies in art and literature that have a disruptive influence upon the life of our folk, and that any organizations that offend against the foregoing demands shall be dissolved.

        24. We demand freedom for all religious faiths in the state, insofar as they do not endanger its existence or offend the moral and ethical sense of the Germanic race.

        The party as such represents the point of view of a positive Christianity without binding itself to any one particular confession. It fights against the Jewish materialist spirit within and without, and is convinced that a lasting recovery of our folk can only come about from within on the pinciple:

        COMMON GOOD BEFORE INDIVIDUAL GOOD

        25. In order to carry out this program we demand: the creation of a strong central authority in the State, the unconditional authority by the political central parliament of the whole State and all its organizations.

        The formation of professional committees and of committees representing the several estates of the realm, to ensure that the laws promulgated by the central authority shall be carried out by the federal states.

        The leaders of the party undertake to promote the execution of the foregoing points at all costs, if necessary at the sacrifice of their own lives.












.

Human Rights vs islam - Ayaan Hirsi Ali vs her demonizers

Institutionalised equality of every individual  through Human Rights

Less than one third of civilized people are religious - meaning more than two thirds are Atheists. And being an Atheist means that the only logical basis for one's moral is Human Rights - especially the so called Negative Rights which are the most essential against impositions etc.. Or put in other words, religious people in general and muslims in particular, always have problems with Human Rights.

UK PM Cameron: "People who […] advocate some sort of secular neutrality fail to grasp the consequences of that neutrality, or the role that faith can play in helping people to have a moral code"

Klevius: People who advocate some sort of religious morality fail to grasp the consequences of that "religious morality", or the role that religion can play in hindering individuals from accessing Human Rights.

Mr Cameron explicitly implies that non-religious belief systems (Atheism, icl. Buddhism which lack the belief in a "God" but sometimes is confused with god-religions) do not supply the same level of motivational compassion. He is right, Atheism is the only way to open up for FULL COMPASSION, i.e. Human Rights!

The type of secular state sought by Klevius would never seek to dispute the role that people's faith can play in dictating their moral code; unlike Mr Cameron, it would make no comment at all on the validity or nature of that faith. So when Peter Klevius states that islam is the most evil ideology that has ever existed on this planet, this statement has nothing to do with faith, but has everything to do with historical facts about islamic atrocities and contemporary facts about islam's open violation of Human Rights. And by islam (this is for the reallty stupid readers only) Peter Klevius of course doesn't mean individuals but its organized effort to replace Human Rights with Human Rights violating Sharia worldwide via its Saudi initiated and Saudi based all muslim covering OIC, led by a Saudi islamofascist named Iyad Madani.


Article 2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (written in the aftermath of the Second WW as a defence against totalitarianism and fascism): Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as sex or religion.

Compare this to islam (through OIC's worldwide Sharia declaration) which criminalizes Universal Human Rights and hinders muslim women from accessing Human Rights! Moreover, which criminalizes even the very saying of this fact!

The mediaeval demonizing of Ayaan Hirsi Ali - the foremost* woman of our time

 * No offense at all! Klevius knows there are many a woman heroine who could be called foremost, however, Ayaan Hirsi Ali in the sense that she:

1) Represents Africa, the continent that had to carry possibly the worst part of the islamic slavery/genocide/rapetivism burden applied on it by the help of Arabic Koranic slave/infidel teaching.

2) Escaped islam's horror and ended up in politically correct Netherlands where she again was threatened to die by islam's hand, and when she asked for protection she was denied it and had to flee islam again, now to the US.

3) As a US citizen, and with the Constitutional confusion corrected, could easily win the presidency simply by picking up most of the Atheist votes.

4) As she, contrary to her critics, has been blessed with intelligence, and as she has already clearly and openly stated her support for Human Rights, she would tick all the needed boxes for leading the world's most powerful nation out of its dangerously destructive, racist and sexist anti Human Rights path.

5) As her destiny seems to be to suffer, why not place her in the White House, hence utilizing her suffering for the common good!



This is how Google News see her today

First place taken by an eager defender of that very islamofascism Ayaan Hirsi Ali escaped! He also applauds Brandels University's decision to rescind its already decided honorary degree to Ayaan Hirsi Ali because of pressure from anti Human Rights islamofascists and their supporters. It accuses Ayaan Hirsi Ali of "intolerance" while backing the Saudi islam "guardians" (and OIC leading) laws that make Human Rights an "act of terrorism".

.

Lawsuit asks for better rights for chimps than OIC allows the world's muslim women

What do BBC's Sharia presenter Mishal Husain and UK's OIC representative Sayeeda Warsi think about this?

A non-profit Nonhuman Rights Project has launched a lawsuit in a New York state court to declare a 26-year-old chimp named Tommy "a cognitively complex autonomous legal person with the fundamental legal right not to be imprisoned".


However, OIC's Sharia declaration in UN covers ALL MUSLIM WOMEN on the planet and it clearly states that women should not be allowed same freedom, equality etc as muslim men. As a muslim woman to get rid of this medieval* evil your only possibility is apostasy - the worst of crimes according to islam and its Sharia!

* As Klevius has explained to you in hundreds of postings, articles etc., the "medieval darkness", the Vikings, the building of cathedrals and the Catholic inquisition were all triggered by islamic slavery expansionism/colonialism/parasitism. And it all started by the Romans making Judaic Christianity its state religion.

Apart from Klevius' rock solid islam*/OIC criticism, here are some other critical voices on OIC's Sharia declaration for the whole world's muslim population. No offense!

* Moreover, islam is, by far and by any historical and/or ideological standard (except islamofascism itself), the worst ideological crime ever committed against humanity.


The CDHRI has been criticized for being implemented by a set of states with widely disparate religious policies and practices who had "a shared interest in disarming international criticism of their domestic human rights record."

Article 24 of the declaration states: "All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Sharia." Article 19 also says: "There shall be no crime or punishment except as provided for in the Sharia."

The CDHRI has been criticised for failing to guarantee freedom of religion, in particular the right of each and every individual to change their religion, as a "fundamental and nonderogable right".

In a joint written statement submitted by the International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU), a non-governmental organization in special consultative status, the Association for World Education (AWE) and the Association of World Citizens (AWC), a number of concerns were raised that the CDHRI limits human rights, religious freedom, and freedom of expression. The statement concludes, "The Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam is clearly an attempt to limit the rights enshrined in the UDHR and the International Covenants. It can in no sense be seen as complementary to the Universal Declaration."

The Centre for Inquiry in September 2008 in an article to the United Nations writes that the CDHRI "undermines equality of persons and freedom of expression and religion by imposing restrictions on nearly every human right based on Islamic Sharia law."

Rhona Smith writes that because the CDHRI's reference to Shariah implies an inherent degree of superiority of men.

Adama Dieng, a member of the International Commission of Jurists, criticised the CDHRI. He argued that the declaration gravely threatens the inter-cultural consensus on which the international human rights instruments are based; that it introduces intolerable discrimination against non-Muslims and women. He further argued that the CDHRI reveals a deliberately restrictive character in regard to certain fundamental rights and freedoms, to the point that certain essential provisions are below the legal standards in effect in a number of Muslim countries; it uses the cover of the "Islamic Shari'a (Law)" to justify the legitimacy of practices, such as corporal punishment, which attack the integrity and dignity of the human being.

Have you noticed how racist and misogynist anti-Human Rights islam pushes women to represent itself?

Klevius suggestion to BBC's muslim islam propagandist Mishal Husain: Tell the license fee paying Brits about OIC's Cairo declaration and that it considers basic Human Rights (e.g. equal rights for women) a crime against basic Sharia! And Mishal, try to tell the truth about it. Yes, I know, it will hurt many muslims and "muslims". But, as Karin Boye (Swedish author of Callocain, a classic dystopia - well on pair with Huxley and Orwell - criticizing totalitarian ideologies) used to put it: 'Of course it hurts when buds burst'!

Klevius translation of Karin Boye's* poem:

* Karin Boye was born in Gothenburg, Sweden

yes, it hurts when buds burst
why should otherwise the spring hesitate
why should all our passionate longing
be tied to frozen bitter paleness
the envelope, though, was the bud all the winter
what is this new thing that taxes and bursts
yes, it hurts when buds burst,
hurts what grows and what confines

So why is Klevius targeting Mishal Husain? Simply because she represents a threat against the free world far more deceptive than the misled woman above and her bearded islamofanatic pals! Mishal Husain knows very well that Klevius tells the truth about islam, its parasitic origin, its slavery finance, its rapetivism etc - and if she doesn't I'm surprised and will forgive her just like I forgive all other ignorant muslims.

Listen to Mishal Husain's blood thirsty voice by playing this video


Mishal Husain was chosen by BBC allegedly to help adjusting BBC's skewed sex-ratio (not gender ratio - gender means culture*). However, the main reason was without a doubt because she was muslim (and the right sort of muslim of course).

* read Klevius sex and gender tutorial

Klevius comment: So in short, BBC managed to employ a woman who is against basic Human Rights for women while trying to make the public believe it was for equality between the sexes! I 43w5 my case.

Klevius question to Mishal Husain: Is it true that you have forgotten so much about your law studies that you don't realize that islam and Human Rights are each others very opposites and that that's the reason why OIC (all muslims world organization, i.e. islam today) abandoned Human Rights?!

Moreover, when your muslim Pakistani friends in Sheffield now are busy racially profiling Roma people, what do you think Mishal, should we call them with all the same names as we use to call other racial profilers?




Islam's horrifying Indian slave raids/trades:

Then came Islam - slaughter, slavery, rape, violence, pillage; destruction of religious sites, art and architecture; poverty, exploitation, humiliation, famine, forced conversion, decline in intellectual pursuits, social destruction and a worsening of social ills.  To Islam, anything that is not Islamic is from a time of ignorance –Jahiliyya- and must be destroyed (or appropriated and called Islam’s!).  The onslaught created the Roma (gypsies), destroyed ‘Hindu’ Afghanistan and formed Pakistan (Kashmir) and Bangladesh .

The cost of the Muslim invasions is massive in lives, wealth and culture.   Estimates suggest that  60-80 MILLION died at the hands of Muslim invaders and rulers between 1000 and 1525 alone (ie over 500 years-the population FELL).  (Lal cited in Khan p 216)  Impossible you think?   In the war of Independence of Bangladesh, 1971, the Muslim Pakistani army killed 1.5-3 million people (mainly Muslims ...) in just 9 MONTHS. (Khan p 216).  The world looked the other way—but don’t we always when it’s Muslims committing the violence!

Should BBC's presenter of Human Rights violating Sharia'h islamofascism, Mishal Husain be awarded as Britain's most hypocritical bigot*?

When muslims now racially profile and stereotype Roma people in Europe - the people that fled islamic terror and slavery more than thousand years ago - a tragic historical irony about Pakistan appears.


* A bigot is a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc.
Mishal Husain says she's a muslim (how many hundred millions of muslims wouldn't say she's not?) 


Who is the worst hypocrite among muslim women in Britain? I know, it's a tough one. Competition is extremely hard. Just consider, for example, Sayeeda Warsi, minister of islamofascism and Britain's messenger at the Saudi based OIC - all the world's muslim's Sharia (Sharia'h) organization, which has clearly stated, via UN etc (look it up, ignorant) that it considers basic Human Rights a "crime" against islamic Sharia (Sharia'h)!

Some random reports re. islam (from Pamela Geller's Atlasshrugs - you know, the Jew that wasn't allowed to enter England because UK muslims don't like truthsayers

In the "Stockholm Syndrome," now seen, ironically, in Sweden, victims start bonding with their abusers in the wish that if they share the same values as their abusers, their abusers might stop abusing them. "We must be open and tolerant toward Islam and Muslims because when we become a minority, they will be so toward us." — Jens Orback, former Swedish government minister.

The European Union [EU] is singling out Israel for sanctions. Not only are the officials at the EU failing to boycott other regions that legally count as occupied territories, but they are actively aiding at least one clearly occupying power, Turkey, in the Turkish-occupied northern Cyprus: in 2006, the EU approved a $259 million aid package for the Turkish Cypriot community there. In addition to that double-standard, the EU's High Representative for Foreign Affairs, Catherine Ashton, has revealed noticeable prejudice on multiple occasions, the latest example being when she felt compelled to compare the Toulouse massacre to "what's happening in Gaza," any similarities to which would objectively be hard to come by.



Hamas Threatens Israel with Genocide

You cannot make peace with an adversary that refuses to recognize your existence. You cannot make peace with an adversary whose goal is your annihilation.

You cannot make peace with a devout adversary whose religion demands the annihilation of the Jews.

    [You] Zionists, you have no place on the land of Palestine ... we shall expel you from our land and we will fight against you on it [on the land], we will kill you or expel you from it when you are submissive ... the jihad and the martyrdom in the way of Allah are our road and our track which are meant to fulfill our triumphs and fulfill and protect our [Muslim] nation.

And the world roots for the annihilationists. They loved Hitler, too, until he lost the war.

    "Hamas Threatens Israel with Genocide" INN, November 22, 2013
    Members of Hamas have recently implied that once the balance of power changes, the terror group will commit genocide against Israelis.



In March 2012, 16-year-old Filali committed suicide in the northern town of Larache by taking rat poison after she was forced to marry her rapist.

Her death provoked several demonstrations and the Twitter hashtag #RIPAmina to demand the repeal of Article 475.
According to Article 475, a rapist can avoid a prison sentence by marrying his victim. The law is based on a similar measure in France.



Obama lifted the ban on child soldiers, reversing President George W. Bush's law, the  “Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008.” That law that made it a federal crime to recruit or use soldiers under the age of 15. The law also gave the United States authority to “prosecute, deport or deny entry to individuals who have knowingly recruited children as soldiers.”




British Students Threatened With "Racial Discrimination Note" For Skipping Islamic Field Trip

Refusal to allow your child to attend this trip will result in a Racial Discrimination note being attached to your child's education record, which will remain on this file throughout their school career.

How severe the dhimmis are in enforcing, promoting dawah (proselytizing for Islam, a religious mandate). How stern. If only they had such conviction, such civilizational self-esteem. Parents should organize and protest, or will they, too, suffer a permanent mark on their record?

Educate yourself on Negative Human Rights



 Mishal Husain, OIC, Roma, Sayeeda Warsi, Sharia, Sharia'h, Sheffield,




.


 .

According to Turkish PM and OIC's world Sharia, Human Rights constitute "a crime against humanity"

Elected islamofascist dictatorship

Turkey's PM is attacking his citizens. Time for the West to support islamist intervention - or Human Rights?

Amnesty International: The lack of freedom of speech in Turkey is one of the country's "most entrenched human rights problems.

Klevius: This "Human Rights problem" stems from islam and its Sharia which is against Human Rights and which Turkey is prescribing for, mainly via its PM Erdogan and OIC's Fuhrer Ihsanoglu.

The Human Rights declaration is the ultimate "islamophobia"

It's not Klevius but the original anti-fascist 1948 Human Rights Declaration that constitutes the worst "crime" against islam today!


Qur'an:8:39 — "So fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief) and all submit to the religion of Allah alone [in the world]."

Muslims WorldWide: There are no churches allowed in Turkey and the number one cause of death for women is assault. Like all Muslim societies Turkey constantly pretends to be striving for democracy to appease the EU while none of this is true. Democracy, equality, freedom and so on, taken for granted in the West are completely against Islamic doctrines and violates Sharia law. Like Egypt’s president Morsi, the Turkish PM Recep Erdogan has been caught numerous times contradicting his open lies to the EU. While Mustafa Kemal Atatürk recognized the dangers of Islam he banned minarets, the Koran and the spread of Islam in his country to try and avert it from a totalitarian rule, PM Erdogan is a deep admirer of the Ottoman empire and cannot wait to be a stepping stone for it to reappear in our modern age.

The Muslim world is eagerly waiting for Turkey to open borders with Europe, which many Brussel lunatics support, so the country can serve as a bridge between the Middle East and Europe, allowing enormous mass immigration of the kind that created the Palestinian people and the endless effort to gain control over Israel. Turkey’s EU membership and open borders with this Islamic state allows the Muslim world to infiltrate and speed up the new Caliphate order that Muslims dream of. Islam intends to ‘rule the world’ no matter how absurd it sounds. And they have no intentions to let go of that dream. It is being done through mass immigration, mass baby production, exploitation of human rights laws, abuse and pressure on political policies, lawfare, crime, and economic exploitation (massive welfare exploitation, common in Muslim communities all across Europe).

Do "princesses" of the hate mongering islamofascist Saudi dictator family already have got the right to fart?

Probably not because we haven't heard BBC reporting on it as they usually eagerly do on whatever tiny "progress" from this black hole of medieval moral darkness. 

Adam Coogle (Human Rights Watch): "There are no laws that protect women specifically. If, for example, a woman claims rape, and a man says it was consensual, she can face a counter charge of adultery,"

Klevius: The Saudi law is Sharia and essentially based on the same principles as all the world's muslims Saudi based organization OIC and its Cairo declaration on "islamic human rights" (Sharia)! And some of the most fundamental principles in islamic Sharia are totally at odds with Human Rights. That's why OIC created a completely separate legal system for muslims in the UN and the world! A system that is both racist and sexist compared to Human Rights.

European Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee in association with the Delegation for relations with the Arab Peninsula held an exchange of views in Brussels Monday with Mohammad Al-Issa, Saudi Minister of Justice, on the reforms of the judicial system in Saudi Arabia: "In its general principles, our judicial philosophy is not in contradiction with that which is in force in other countries, whether we are talking about civil, commercial or criminal proceedings. In Saudi Arabia, what is of the greatest importance to us is not to contradict the constitutional text, which is inspired from Islamic canonical law, the Sharia". And the judge has full discretion to interpret. He may draw his judgement from jurisprudence or he may draw it from his own interpretation.

Saudi "king" Abdullah: “We refuse to marginalize women in society in all roles that comply with Sharia”.



Klevius: Well, dah!

Saudi women are barred from driving and were required by law to seek the approval of a male “guardian” to work, travel abroad and to undergo surgery.

Aiyah Saihati: All these baby steps are not enough. There is a need for removing any constraints that make [women] unequal to men in terms of self-determination, be it the need for guardian permits for education, travel, hospitalization, as well as being treated with full citizenship, as men, in rights to housing or citizenship for her children.

Klevius: Impossible within any form of Sharia!

Adam Coogle (Human Rights Watch): There is no penal code that protects women and girls from domestic violence, marital rape is not considered a crime in Saudi Arabia, and there is no legal protection that any women can cling to in the face of abuse.

Rawda Al Youssef: My guardian knows what’s best for me!


Klevius:  This is the most disgusting form of cultural "femininity", i.e. sex segregation!

Girls/women! You need Human Rights equality freedom - not Sharia "equity" limitations

Semitic sexist gender pronouns are the exceptions in the world of lingvistics, not the rule!

Astonishing ignorance about linguistic sexism and its deep roots in Mideast

Acknowledgement: It never ceases to astonish Klevius how ignorant and poorly informed so called educated people often are. However, what astonishes him even more is the poor interest in his sites and blogs (barely over 150,000 visitors - most of whom are supposedly way above the average though). If people need education why don't they turn to the best, especially when it's for free? But now it has become evident that people in their deeply biased ignorance just underestimate Klevius as one in the mass of "opinioners". Well, stop that. Nothing could be more detrimental to your educational potential than dismissing Klevius. You need Klevius but Klevius doesn't need you. Just take a look at the total lack of adds on all of his sites and blogs for over a decade! Moreover, consider that Klevius has no economical or personal* ties whatsoever to what he is writing about! I.e. he's lacking a personal agenda other than striving towards a better world for both him and you.

* True, Klevius lost his "manhood" as a teenager when a sexy teenage girl told him "it's so relaxing to be with you when you don't try to push me in bed all the time". From then on Klevius has treated women as equals. And it has paid off perfectly. However, he has also continuously encountered women who don't want to be treated as equals which fact astonishes him. Women's bodies look better than men's bodies for most men. However, the "male gaze" isn't equivalent with the female person although those two may meet, albeit preferably on the woman's terms. It's not rocket science but prejudices from the past - often kept alive from mothers to daughters.

From comments on The Economist's article on gender neutral pronouns:

CUJzRmUw5b Apr 19th 2012, 14:46 In Finnish there is no singular genders and it works just well. Only overly sexist societies need constant reminder of the sex of the subjects.

Reluctant Polluter in reply to CUJzRmUw5b Apr 19th 2012, 23:25 It has nothing to do with sexism, just with some features common for all Ugro-Finnic languages. In the words of respected commenter Nirvana-bound, don't become obsessive-cumpulsive... . .


Klevius comment: It has everything to do with 'sexism'! And much more than you can even dream about with such limited knowledge/understanding. Btw, it's absolutely not "just some features common for Ugro-Finnic languages". In fact, it is and has always been the main rule in the majority of the world's languages!  Keep on reading!

Finland in the borderline between non-sexist and sexist languages

Is it a coincidence or a logical consequence that Finland has been the most progressive when it comes to women's rights? Arguably, most of the individuals behind it back then were Finland-Swedes. However, these bilingual people were heavily influenced by non-sexist Finnish 'hän' (meaning both he and she) culture in this rare borderline between Indo-European and Uralic linguistic domains (also consider Origin of the Goths).

Linguistic background

A gender-neutral pronoun is not associated with a person's sex. This designates two distinct phenomena, the first being that genderless pronouns occur naturally in most human languages. Most languages do not have gender distinctions in personal pronouns.

The other phenomenon regards pronouns that have been assigned nontraditional meanings in ancient times out of concerns for keeping up inequality and in modern times out of a concern for the very opposite namely defending equality in accordance with Human Rights.

Semitic Mideastern monotheist sexism after the fall of the world's oldest civilization, the non-Semitic Sumerians

In some languages - notably most Indo-European and Semitic languages - third person personal pronouns intrinsically distinguish girls/women from boys/men. History proves there's absolutely no need for such linguistic apartheid, quite the contrary.

However, it seems that the very culprit is to be found back in history in the Semitic language family. Proto-Indo-European lacked such gender divide but got it sometimes after the Sumerians were replaced by Semitic groups sometimes at the time and place of the mythic Abraham. So it wasn't Abraham that created sexist religions but sexism that created Abraham.


The very simple but extremely important bottom line is that all physical differences, whatsoever, are already included in the most important of Human Rights, i.e. the so called Negative Human Rights. Just like in traffic. We can't have different rules for different sex or sexual orientation, skin color, religion, atheism etc. Or affirmative lanes/rules for certain races or ethnicities.

Astonishing ignorance about linguistic sexism in the Bay Area

The Difference Between 'Equity' (not same rights, i.e. like Sharia) and 'Equality' (same rights, i.e. like Human Rights)

Klevius example of today of misled girls/women


Listen to this crap!


Lara David from Bay area wrote:


There's this activity I do in my class. All the students sit in a circle, and I ask everyone to take off his or her left shoe and throw it into a pile in the center. Once the shoes are all piled up, I begin re-distributing them, one to each student, completely at random. Then I tell everyone to put on the new shoes. And inevitably, there begin the complaints.

 I wanted to treat you all EQUALLY." I point to a boy with somewhat large feet, and a nearby girl with smallish feet. "He'll have more shoe than you will," I note. And without a doubt, someone unknowingly gets right to the heart of the issue:

"It doesn't matter who has more shoe, Miss David. It matters that we all have the right shoes for us."

And THAT, my friends, is the difference between equity and equality. Equality means everyone gets exactly the same outcome - two shoes - without regard to individual differences - large or small feet, for example. Equity means everyone gets the same quality of outcome - shoes that fit their individual needs.

A lot of feminist arguments are either poorly worded, claiming to desire equality for women in situations where they would actually prefer equity, or misunderstood as demanding equality when they are, in fact, demanding equity. This has become remarkably apparent to me in the recent barrage of posts about women bloggers and how they earn - or fail to earn - respect for their work. Catherine wrote this in her MamaPop post:

What is radical about it is that we push on, demanding to be heard, and demanding recognition of our worth as mothers, women, writers, business-people, innovators, people, against the ignorance of those who would keep us down.

Some have interpreted this as a half-hearted and hypocritical demand for equality, when it is actually anything but. Demanding recognition as mothers and women sort of fundamentally requires an expectation that we will not be treated exactly the same as a man would. Why would we want to be treated exactly like men anyway? In case you didn't notice, WE'RE NOT MEN. What we're demanding is not equality - it's equity.

We demand respect for doing a damn hard job and doing it well. We demand respect for creating a community that inspires and uplifts in the face of some of life's greatest challenges. We demand respect for refusing to compromise our femininity in the face of professional obstacles. We don't demand the EXACT SAME RESPECT that men receive - that's like demanding everyone wear the same shoes, regardless of size. We demand the respect that is most fitting to our stations, but damn it, we still demand the respect. We are women, and we should be treated as women - to do otherwise would be to ignore plain facts. But being treated as women should not automatically mean being treated as less serious or less important, and that's the problem with having an article about our work in the field of blogging - which really is primarily a technological field - placed in the "Style" section of the New York Times.

We are not screaming our heads off to be placated with promises of equality. We are not men - do not treat us as men. We are women, and we demand equity.


Klevius clarification for Lana and other misled people: Apart from lacking even essential logic - that's dictatorship! Why weren't they allowed to pick their own shoes?! This is communism. You intervened as a social state (see Angels of Antichrist - kinship vs social state) instead of respecting their individual freedom in accordance with the Universal Human Rights declaration. This is why USSR collapsed. They got their wrong shoes because they had to obey central dictates. And because of communist "equity" they couldn't build up financial equity either.

What if a girl or a woman likes to do something not appropriately "feminine"?! Per definition  "feminine" can't be a man in your usage of the word here. In effect that means that humans with a female sex lack rights outside "femininity". Rights that the other sex possesses!

Why are you so afraid of individual freedom (equality) and why do you want to contribute to the suppression (equity) of your sisters?!

The Human Rights declaration (equality) gives you freedom to be both "feminine" as well as "unfeminine" if you like. Sharia (equity) doesn't!

'He/she' apartheid signals and determines limitations due to your sex - Finnish 'hän' doesn't!

I can't believe it. Such deep confusion and ignorance (or?!) about sex in the Bay Area, i.e. where my beloved San Francisco resides.

Feminist confusion

Feminism started more than hundred years ago as a movement opposing the right for women to vote. Women shouldn't be like men, they should therefore be "feminine". Where 'woman' is biology 'feminine' is culture.

Today many would call Klevius a feminist although he is precisely the opposite. True feminists have their true friends among islamofascists, chauvinists etc.