Are you or your representative(s) for or against basic Human Rights equality?

Peter Klevius global morality can only be challenged by violating the most basic of Human Rights.

Everything Peter Klevius writes (or has written) is guided by the anti-sexist. anti-racist, and anti-fascist Universal* Human Rights declaration of 1948. In other words, what is declared immoral and evil is so done as measured against the most basic of Human Rights (the so called "negative" rights - i.e. the rights of the individual not to be unnecessarily targeted with restrictions and impositions). Unlike the 1948 Universal Human Rights (UHR) declaration, islam denies Human Rights equality to women and non-muslims. And violation of such basic Human Rights can't be tolerated just by referring to "freedom of religion".

* This means accepting everyone - without exception due to e.g. sex, religion, lack of religion, "security" etc. - as equal in Human Rights. The individual is protected by negative Human Rights, but of course not against substantiated legal accusations - as long as these are not produced as a means that violates the basic Human Rights (compare "not necessary in a free, democratic country"). The legislator may not produce laws that seek to undermine some individuals rights. This also includes e.g. "freedom of religion", i.e. that this freedom doesn't give the right to unfree others, or cause others to be in an inferior rights position. If by islam you mean something that fully adheres to basic Human Rights equality, then you aren't targeted by Peter Klevius islam criticism. However, if you mean islam accepts violations of the most basic of Human Rights, then you may also call Peter Klevius an "islamophobe" - and he will be proud of it. And when it comes to "security" it can't mean "offending" opponents to basic Human Rights.

This is why any effort to twist or accuse the writings of Peter Klevius as "islamophobia" etc. can only be made from a standpoint against these basic Human Rights. As a consequence, no body of authority can therefore accuse, hinder etc. Peter Klevius without simultaneously revealing its own disrespect for these Human Rights. Conversely, Peter Klevius can not accuse anyone who agrees on these rights - i.e. this leaves e.g. "islamophobia" etc. accusations against Peter Klevius without merit.

Every effort against these basic Human Rights is treason against a country calling itself free and democratic.


Some basic facts to consider about Klevius* (except that he is both "extremely normal" and extremely intelligent - which fact, of course, would not put you off if you're really interested in these questions):

* Mentored by G. H. von Wright, Wittgenstein's successor at Cambridge.

1 Klevius' analysis of consciousness is the only one that fits what we know - after having eliminated our "pride" bias of being humans (which non-human would we impress, anyway?). Its starting point is described and exemplified in a commentary to Jurgen Habermas in Klevius book Demand for Resources (1992:30-33, ISBN 9173288411, based on an article by Klevius from 1981), and is further explained in a commentary to Francis Crick's book The Astonishing Hypothesis under the title The Even More Astonishing Hypothesis (EMAH), which can be found in Stalk's archive and which has been on line since 2003 for anyone to access/assess.

2 Klevius out of island/mainland fluctuating Southeast Asia Denisovans up to big skulled Siberians as the birth of much more intelligent modern humans who then spread all over the world, is the only analysis that fits both genetic reality as well as tool and art sophistication seen in e.g. the Denisova cave (no dude, Blombos etc. don’t come even close).

3 Klevius criticism of Human Rights violating sharia islamofascism (e.g. OIC) which is called "islamophobia" by islamofascists and their supporters who don't care about the most basic of Human Rights (e.g. re. women). Klevius' "islamophobia" has two roots: 1) UN's 1948 Universal Human Rights declaration, which, contrary to any form of muslim sharia, doesn't, for example, allow sex to be an excuse for robbing females of their full Human Rights equality, and 2) the history of the origin of islam ( e.g. Hugh Kennedy, Robert G. Hoyland, K. S. Lal etc.) which reveals a murderous, pillaging, robbing, enslaving and raping racist/sexist supremacist ideology that exactly follows precisely those basic islamic tenets which are now called "unislamic" but still survive today (as sharia approved sex slavery, sharia approved "liberation” jihad, academic jihad etc.) behind the sharia cover which is made even more impenetrable via the spread of islamic finance, mainly steered from the islamofascist Saudi dictator family.


4 Klevius analysis of sex segregation/apartheid (now deceptively called “gender segregation”) and heterosexual attraction - see e.g. Demand for Resources (1981/1992), Daughters of the Social State (1993), Angels of Antichrist (1996), Pathological Symbiosis (2003), or Klevius PhD research on heterosexual attraction/sex segregation and opposition to female footballers (published in book form soon).

Britisharia Human Rightsphobia

Britisharia Human Rightsphobia

Saudi induced muslim attack on UK Parliament. How many elsewhere? And what about Saudi/OIC's sharia

Saudi induced muslim attack on UK Parliament. How many elsewhere? And what about Saudi/OIC's sharia

Racist UK Government and BBC

Racist UK Government and BBC

UK's sharia ties to Saudi islamofascism threaten EU (and UK) security

UK's sharia ties to Saudi islamofascism threaten EU (and UK) security

Peter Klevius "islamophobia"/Human Rightsphobia test for you and your politicians

Warning for a muslim robot!

There's no true islam without Human Rights violating sharia

There's no true islam without Human Rights violating sharia

UK PM candidate Rees-Mogg: Germans needed Human Rights - we don't. Klevius: I really think you do.

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

Klevius 1979: Human Rights rather than religion

Klevius 1979: Human Rights rather than religion

BBC (imp)lies that 84% of the world is "monotheist" although most people are A(mono)theists

BBC (imp)lies that 84% of the world is "monotheist" although most people are A(mono)theists

Peter Klevius' 1986 experimental zero budget refugee video

Klevius can no longer distinguish between the techniques of BBC and Nazi propaganda - can you!

By squeezing in Atheist ideologies/philosophies as well as polytheisms under the super set BBC calls "religion", and by narrowing 'Atheism' to what it's not (Atheism is what it says on the tin - no god) they produced the extremely faked proposition that 84% of the world's population is "religious". Moreover, BBC also proudly claimed that the 84% figure is rising even more. Well, that's only by relying on those poor women in Pakistan, Bangladesh, English muslim ghettos (where most so called "British" women don't even speak English) etc., who still produce many more children than the average in the world. But Klevius doesn't think this abuse of girls/women is anything to cheer.

The main threat to your Human Rights

The main threat to your Human Rights

BBC, the world's biggest fake/selective news site - with an evil agenda

BBC, the world's biggest fake/selective news site - with an evil agenda

BBC's compulsory fee funded propaganda for Saudi sharia islam

Thursday, June 12, 2014

How many lives has the muslim Saudi terrorist "king" destroyed - at home and abroad?

Saudi muslim "king" Abdullah is the world's most evil muslim terrorist - yet BBC and its muslim Sharia presenter Mishal Husain seem to have completely missed this obvious fact - as has muslim born (apostate?!) Mr X "president"! Why?


RT video: Deprived of their basic needs, the four Saudi royal princesses kept in 13-year isolation by their father, King Abdullah, have surpassed 60 days without food.

The monarch’s daughters fell out of their father’s favor for speaking out against the ill treatment of women in the Gulf kingdom. It is also believed that the king was angry at the girls' mother for not giving him a son.

Two of the princesses, Sahar and Jawaher, say they are being kept against their will in two mansions inside a royal compound in the city of Jeddah, along with their other two sisters – Maha and Hala. They say they have been deprived of food for over 60 days and have very little access to water.

“It’s a horrible situation, it’s a forced famine basically. They are confining us, depriving us of food and water, freedom and rights. We are struggling, we are surviving, we are resisting, we are trying our best to stay alive,” the two sisters told RT via Skype.

“How can we continue living like this? We have to take the risk of [speaking out]."

Having spent so much time deprived of freedom, they struggle to understand why they have been locked up.

“The king and his sons need to answer these questions: What are we charged with? What exactly is our crime?”

“What is the crime of 99 percent of women in this country, who are basically suffering under male guardianship? A male guardian can do whatever he wants; he can cut off everything and she is left with nothing,” they said on behalf of the female citizens of the ultraconservative kingdom.

“We are making these statements right now [in order to] gain our rights, our freedoms.”

Their health is slowly deteriorating. Past appeals by their mother, Alanoud Al-Fayez, for outside assistance - including from Western leaders like US President Barack Obama - have not come to fruition. The administration is turning a blind eye, according to some critics. But the situation cannot be helped by appealing to the Saudi government either, as it maintains that the princesses are in fact perfectly free to move around the city of Jeddah, provided they are accompanied by bodyguards.

The four sisters are between the ages of 38 and 42, with at least one said to be suffering from psychological problems.

Earlier, in rare interviews with foreign media, the sisters said they don’t have any passports or IDs and the king has also forbidden any man to seek his daughters’ hands in marriage. The entire time they have been kept in isolation, both electricity and water have been shut off at random, often for days – even weeks.

The 89-year-old monarch and father of 38 children, given to him by multiple wives, is listed among Forbes magazine's most wealthy and influential men, with a fortune estimated at around US$17 billion.

The princesses' mother, Al-Fayez, divorced King Abdullah in 1980, consequently leaving for London in 2001. The sisters' ordeal then began around 2002. Less than one year after their mother escaped, Abdullah began tormenting his daughters. The sisters told their mother that he drugged their food and water to keep them docile when they openly spoke against women being illegally detained and placed in mental wards.

The director of the Institute for Gulf Affairs, Ali Al-Ahmed, believes the grave human rights situation in the kingdom is compounded by a political strategy from the outside, whose purpose is to keep any negative press at bay, and is a force to either change things for the better or keep them as they are.

“This is the nature of the Saudi monarchy, who are oppressing the people in their country. But now it’s very clear that they’re oppressing their own female members. The king who is portrayed in the international media – in the Western media - as a reformer, is oppressing his own daughters; healthy adult women, who have been held for 13 years…they’re being starved deliberately,” Al-Ahmed told RT.

“People outside the country definitely can speak and hold those people who are responsible for this crime accountable; namely the Saudi king and his sons…who are deliberately doing this.”


The Saudi islamic terror tentacles


Although Qatar and other islamofascist countries try to shed as much blood as possible, Saudi Arabia's dicator family is by far the world's most dangerous terrorist organization. ISIS and Boko Haram are just two names in the islamic Saudi killing and raping machinery.


How many versions are there of islam? And how many versions were there of Nationalsocialism (Nazism)?! And how come that "benign islam" always represents islam while evil Nazism always represents Nationalsocialism? Klevius doesn't approve of any state socialism* but cannot see the logic in this.

* State socialism ia when the state and state officials rather than the citizens benefit from taxes.

According to people who use the oxymoron "islamophobia", Saudi Arabia is both the islamic paradise and not islamic at all.

If we have to believe PC people (fascists) there is actually not any muslim country with "real islam". Their islam is "perverted" by the "infidel colonialists". In short, if you think you can criticize islam then think again because it's not islam's fault but yours! So Klevius has taken these advices seriously and therefore headed to the origin of islam, long before any "Western imperialism". However, what Klevius found there when islam started its own grim 1400 year colonialism campaign turned out to be exactly the very same picture as we see today.

Mr X "president" Barry Barakeh Husein Mohammad Dunham Obama Soetoro (or whatever) and other leaders in France, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and the UK, should all be held accountable for the destabilization of Iraq, Libya and Syria. Indeed, Egypt, Lebanon, Mali, Tunisia, Nigeria, Malaysia, Thailand, Brunei, etc etc. Islamofascist Gulf and Western powers alongside Turkey have unleashed forces that, guided by islamic original evil, shoot, bomb, behead, slaughter and rape in a stream of terrorist attacks, destroy cultural monuments and commit other barbaric acts.

According to a jihadi source, Baghdadi received 'encouraging signals from a regional agency in a friendly Sunni Muslim country to enter Syria, and promises of financial support toward this goal.' When asked whether it was Saudi Arabia or Qatar, he replied, 'It is one of these two.'

Zaid Alisa: Iraq should name and shame the countries supporting Al-Qaeda and lodge complaints at the United Nations against those countries if it wants to fight Al-Qaeda

Klevius comment: How could you possibly complain to UN when islam and Saudi Arabia have taken over UN?!






No comments:

Post a Comment