Is UK turning into a militaristic unconstitutional islamofascist rogue state?

Is UK turning into a militaristic unconstitutional islamofascist rogue state?

First UK people voted to join and share borders with EU. Then England voted to leave while Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to stay. And now UK politicians want to leave while keeping the Irish EU border open. UK lacks a modern constitution according to which a constitutional issue has to pass at least two majority votes.

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).

Rabbi Sacks: "BBC runs Britain." Klevius: Pro-sharia BBC meddles worldwide.

Rabbi Sacks: "BBC runs Britain." Klevius: Pro-sharia BBC meddles worldwide.

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

Friday, April 10, 2015

The medieval backwardness of BBC's muslim sharia* presenter Mishal Husain


* By declaring herself a muslim she inevitably has to support sharia in some form. And every form of sharia is against the most basic of Human Rights and the principle of universal equality.

Jews, not Romans, ordered the execution of Jesus*. 600 years later Muhammad ordered the first genocide of Jews in Medina.

* When Mr X "president"Barry Barakeh Hussain Muhammad Obama Soetoro Dunham (or whatever) in his presidential campaign was asked whether he believes in Jesus he said yes. However, like all muslims he doesn't believe in Christ.


First the Jews murdered Jesus and then the muslims murdered the Jews - no wonder religion seems to be the problem. Or do you really think that without Judaic religions there would still be the same amount of victims on top of other victims?! In other words, do you, for example, really think the Germans had murdered equally many without Nationalsocialism (aka Nazism)?


BBC presenter Mishal Husain has called on British Muslim scholars to use social media to combat extremism






Mishal Husain: “I don’t think my way of life is under any kind of threat."


BBC-s sharia presenter Mishal Husain with her islamofascist muslim pals who share almost identical values with the Islamic State.

British muslim jihadists: Samantha Lewthwaite, Mishal Husain and Michael Adebolajo



OIC Secretary-General Iyad Amin Madani stressed that the "Saudi governing system is based on Islam, which fosters values of justice, compassion, equality, and tolerance."

Klevius: These words from this human scumbag must be some of the most hypocritical ever uttered. According to historical facts islam has been the by far worst crime against humanity throughout 1400 years. And today islam's "guardian" Saudi Arabia is the most intolerant of the world's countries and has even criminalized Human Rights.Moreover. the Saudi regime is the hate mongering mastermind behind islamic terror around the world. And while most people point to islamic "scholars" (aka clerics, imams, etc) as the driving force, Mishal Husain asks these muslim "scholars" to contribute even more.

Ask your muslim friend if s/he supports Saudi based OIC and its Sharia against Human Rights!  If s/he doesn't then s/he is an apostate (i.e. committing the worst "crime" known to islam) and ought to be welcomed by every non-muslim.


 Saudi based OIC - and its islamofascist Saudi sharia Fuhrer Iyad Madani - constitutes islam today, and it's against the most basic of Human Rights!


Catherine Brennan, Reclaim Australia spokeswoman: "We are pro-Australian values and anti-extreme islam, but we're not anti-muslim".

Klevius: Meaning what?! Who are then the followers of "extreme islam" if they aren't muslims?


Islam was born out of backwardness and hate - that's why islam is still backward today!



Economic activity in Muslim countries remains scant, low tech and strictly oriented towards local consumption.

Sayyid al-Qimny: It seems that the reason, in the end, for our backwardness is the men of religion themselves and their opportunistic allies throughout history. When compared with the language of modernity, does not their discourse today appear somewhat redolent of the Middle Ages?

Our shaykhs tell us – God grant them mercy – that what the likes of people like me are aiming for is that we live as westerners, with all their ‘moral degeneracy’, so that our Nation and its traditions should collapse; as if we had made enough progress in the first place to fear a collapse, and as if the life of westerners has led to backwardness and collapse in them!

Given this perception of modernity as a deliberate cultural raid targeting our nation via its religion, (now that imperialism has ‘reconfigured itself to use new methods’), that is, that the Crusader West is waging a Crusade campaign, one thing remains difficult to decide: is the West a right-wing, religious, Crusader West extremist in its religiosity, or a place of debauchery, degeneracy and atheism?

So there is no connection between on the one hand religion or faith, and on the other hand progress or backwardness. Rather, behind every crime there is someone who benefits from it. This crime is the one committed by the professional clerics throughout history against the rights of the nation in toto. They are the ones who were responsible all this time for Islam and the Muslims; for ten centuries its ‘defenders’ have turned out to be its thieves.


Klevius: Atheism is the very precondition for Human Rights. Even for people "believing" in a "god".


Here's a Frontpage view on islam and muslims

Why Muslim Cultures Lag Behind


    In the past fifty years, many countries have caught up with the rich and developed Western World. Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore, with virtually no natural resources, have created advanced, urbanized and prosperous societies, complete with world-class technology that often exceed that which is found in the West. India, Brazil and China, although not yet fully developed, now all possess large and affluent middle classes that did not exist just a few decades ago. There is no reason to believe why their economic and social progress of all of these countries will not continue for the foreseeable future.

    The Muslim world, on the other hand, has struggled during this era of unprecedented global wealth creation. These countries have profited almost solely, by happy geological accident, from oil and gas extraction. Beyond these activities,  trillions of dollars in oil revenue over the past sixty years, Muslim progress in many other areas, such as scientific research, social issues and education, lags badly behind the rest of the world.

    How could this be the case? The answer, which the major media dares not touch, lies in the very culture of Muslim countries themselves. Consider the following cultural traits which are all typically found in majority Muslim countries:


Belief in magic

State-owned Malaysian newspapers and television stations routinely run breathless stories about witch doctors (‘bomoh’), evil spirits and other forms of the supernatural. Visitors to Malaysia get a good laugh out of such quaint cultural practices, until they realize with a shock that Malaysian belief in such superstition is absolutely sincere. But it’s not just here in Malaysia where this happens. In Saudi Arabia, witchcraft is considered very real and a capital offence. In Iran, laws are on the books that make ‘sorcery’ a crime. And in Iraq, many of the locals are absolutely convinced that American soldiers wear sunglasses that can see through clothing and have bases protected by force fields. A culture that is eager to embrace the supernatural takes a giant step away from rationality and deceives itself fundamentally. Self-deception is always, sooner or later, the path to failure.


Belief in conspiracies

Muslims take it as an Article of Faith that various groups of so-called infidels or other outsiders are engaged in various conspiracies to keep Muslims down, make Islam look bad, or are otherwise up to No Good. The lack of evidence means little to a society where ‘skepticism’ is already an unusual and foreign concept. For instance, even well-educated Muslims will tell you, with total earnestness, that the 9-11 terror attacks were actually perpetrated by Zionists, or the CIA, or the U.S. Government, or some other nefarious group. Never mind the vast amount of evidence to the contrary. When presented with rebuttals from non-Muslims, Muslims will usually just shrug it off and carry on with their nonsensical conspiracy theories.


Lack of innovation

Here in Malaysia, it is telling that the word in the Malay language for innovation (“inovasi”) did not exist until it came from English, quite recently, as a loan word. Innovation, meaning to create something without precedent, is a risky and therefore dangerous business in the Islamic world. The reason for this is because Islam already has a word for innovation, “bid’ah”. In Islam, this word is essentially the same in meaning as ‘heresy’, which is yet another capital crime under Islamic law. Hence creativity and individuality are utterly stifled in a totalitarian fashion, even in Muslim countries where Islamic law has not yet been fully implemented. Improvisation is also discouraged for similar reasons. This is a major reason why Islamic countries are usually characterized by a near-total lack of scientific research and reluctance to embrace technology in general.


Lack of devotion to non-family/non tribal/non-clan organizations

In most Muslim societies, loyalty often runs no farther than one’s tribe or sect. People from the far-off central government, or those from the next valley over for that matter, are foreigners to be met with suspicion or hostility. Afghanistan is a perfect example of this sort of chaos. Even if these differences are eventually papered over, so to speak, by the force and coercion of a dictatorship, the lack of cohesion and distrust remain. Muslim leaders usually come into and stay in power by exploiting this very characteristic, by playing one tribe or group off another. Patriotism amongst the general public is another foreign concept, taken for granted in the West. Muslims may remain loyal to Islam in general, but more importantly, to the tribe in particular.


Lack of empowerment of women

The future, no matter what form it may take, is almost certainly going to involve more technology, not less. How well equipped is a society for this future if half of its members are only (at best) grudgingly given their rights? In many Islamic countries, women are often illiterate and have no rights in essential critical life decisions, such as those involving child-rearing, marriage or education. And why should they? Various Quranic verses, age-old Islamic traditions, and core Islamic teachings render women as nothing more than chattel and the property of their male relatives—never the equal of men. And no one can ‘reform’ these teachings to something more enlightened—see the penalty for “bid’ah” above.


Lack of personal responsibility

Muslim leaders often lie to or deceive their own people, to subordinates, or to allies in order to advance their own personal agendas. Remember that most Muslim countries are a patchwork of tribes who barely tolerate one another in the best of times. Loyalty to one’s country as a whole is next to non-existent. So, the main objective of these leaders, whether at the top, middle or bottom, is to steal as much as they can, while they can, in order to enrich themselves and their families, clans or tribes—’national interest’ be damned. If you’re one of the rare incorruptible types, or are otherwise too stupid to steal when presented with the opportunity, then more the fool you are. Other tribes or groups are useful as scapegoats when the need arises or when blame must be deflected.


Lack of skilled labour

Rich, developed and successful countries like Germany, Japan and others do not just spring into existence. It takes the efforts of millions, skilled specialists toiling endlessly in dangerous and/or monotonous drudgery for decades, to build and also maintain the ever-growing complex web of systems that modern nations depend on to function. But Muslim countries, even the ones with trillions from oil revenue, have consistently failed to create large enough castes of technical specialists that modern nations must have. As there are never enough people willing or able to work within their own borders, Muslim nations are forced to outsource their labour needs. In Saudi Arabia and most Arab states, for instance, cleaners and maids come from India or the Philippines, while engineers and others in the technical trades come from America, Europe and increasingly east Asia. This trend is accelerating, paradoxically enough, at a time when the governments of the burgeoning Arab world are having an increasing problem just feeding their exploding populations.

   
Lack of meritocracy

The West has thrived not only because they have learned to hold people responsible for their actions, but also they have learned to give out rewards based on individual achievement. Hence higher–performing individuals tend to be eventually in charge and reap the most rewards (in prestige, rank, money, etc.). Westerners do not always manage to live up to these ideals, but the concepts themselves are not questioned. In the Islamic world, however, what counts is personal loyalty, personal connections, and tribal/sect membership. Incompetent leaders are preferable to competent ones, so long as they are properly loyal. Such a state of affairs makes for incredible inefficiency on a normal day and catastrophic consequences when any sort of crisis arises. Muslims are fond of saying “it’s God’s will” at difficult times, which for Muslims seems like most of the time. Actually, it’s not so much “God’s will” but more like the inevitable consequences of their dysfunctional culture.

    If you’ve read up to this point, no doubt that you could add a few more things to this list. But remember, political correctness dictates that all cultures are somehow “equal,” and Muslims are convinced their cultures are somehow superior, never mind the reams of evidence to the contrary. So while I want to be optimistic, the smart money is not riding on the would-be reformers of the under-performing societies of the Muslim world. At least not yet.


Does the problem lie in the way islam is utilized?


Sayyid al-Qimny: The problem lies not in the religion, nor in any religion. It lies in the way this religion is utilized. Some make use of it to achieve progress, others to maintain backwardness. Some respect religion and distance it from political games and the intrigues of shaykhs and sultans, but there are others who continue to exploit it to maintain a single way of thinking and a single vision, so as to stay master of the castle in every sphere and every issue. To these, issues concerning the nation, the people or the religion do not pre-occupy him so much as maintaining domination and authority over the mind of the Muslim, and retaining this all-embracing authoritarian control by effectively enslaving the people.

It is a stand taken by everyone who is engaged in Islam as a profession and as a source of income, by those who have the power to mould the consciousness of the people according to imperious, authoritarian priorities. It is a consciousness of the single view to the exclusion of all others. They claim that this is the true Islam and that all else constitutes sinful disbelief. This leaves no room at any time for any alternative view to emerge. Accordingly no opposition has ever appeared over the entire history of the Muslims. If anything of this nature did appear its ideological instrument was invariably some alternative reading of this same Islam. But in general, over the entire length of Islamic history, their efforts petered out to leave in place a type of society that only knew of one, uniquely saved, denomination.

So we have therefore uncovered a first reason that we may connect with Islam:

That is, the absence of any other point of view which could foster a rich discussion concerning religion and life and come up with something new, as occurred when the earliest Christians differed on their interpretations of the Gospel, of God and the Holy Spirit. Those who differed held councils which relied on the strength of the arguments of the protagonists, so that the matter ended with a settlement that the majority conceded to. When new differences surfaced, new councils were convened. Such were the Councils of Nicaea, Chalcedon and Ephesus, and the like. This attitude was the afterglow of Greco-Roman culture. But on the Islamic side the first and the last ‘council’ was that of the Saqīfat Banī Sā‘ida [1] in which was decided the formula for Islamic rule, politically and religiously, all other things being deemed outright error.
Rhazes' Book of Medicine - a medieval preeminence

This formula went from crisis to crisis until some resolution emerged, but only after a series of crushing civil wars beginning with the Apostasy Wars and carrying on and beyond Karbalā. During this time this isolated, oppressed region continued to give off the appearance of power, but it did not take long before it was suppressed and its leaders wiped out, whether by the Zanj rebellion or the Assassins or the Qarmatians or by others. All that remained operative was the primordial, tribal, Caliphal principle that cannot accept rivals, due to its claim that this is the true Islam that God demands – as if they had somehow ascended into the heavens and taken down all the miraculous details in their writings on fiqh: all their interpretations, sanctions, commentaries and fatwās, straight from the mouth of God Himself, who privileged them above all others with this insight.

Christianity since its very inception spoke to the people of the time in their language and their way of thinking. It gave to Caesar what was Caesar’s and to God what was God’s, separating the two domains, and by doing so stood in the Greek tradition where democratic principles were still operating.

The Islamic caliphate system, complete with its religious dressing and the close alliance of its professional clerics, was an example of the total amalgamation of religious and worldly powers, taking the example of the Prophet, who held all the powers in himself in his fledgling state, as a template for rule under an absolute ruler in terms of his powers, influence, and absolutely dominant, single religious conception. By so doing they failed to make a distinction between the Prophet as the unique prophet and the Seal of the Prophets, and themselves as heirs to the Prophethood – an office which is not in fact a hereditary one.


Klevius: However, this analysis completely misses the very origin and soul of true islam namely its evilness that was and still is its main attraction. It's islam's violations of Human Rights that constitutes its main allure. Without it islam wouldn't be popular anymore. OIC realized it when it declared islamic sharia as superior to Human Rights.


'The reason for muslim backwardness is the "men of religion" themselves and their opportunistic allies throughout history'



Sayyid al-Qimny: It seems that the reason, in the end, for our backwardness is the men of religion themselves and their opportunistic allies throughout history. When compared with the language of modernity, does not their discourse today appear somewhat redolent of the Middle Ages?

Our shaykhs tell us – God grant them mercy – that what the likes of people like me are aiming for is that we live as westerners, with all their ‘moral degeneracy’, so that our Nation and its traditions should collapse; as if we had made enough progress in the first place to fear a collapse, and as if the life of westerners has led to backwardness and collapse in them!

Given this perception of modernity as a deliberate cultural raid targeting our nation via its religion, (now that imperialism has ‘reconfigured itself to use new methods’), that is, that the Crusader West is waging a Crusade campaign, one thing remains difficult to decide: is the West a right-wing, religious, Crusader West extremist in its religiosity, or a place of debauchery, degeneracy and atheism?

So there is no connection between on the one hand religion or faith, and on the other hand progress or backwardness. Rather, behind every crime there is someone who benefits from it. This crime is the one committed by the professional clerics throughout history against the rights of the nation in toto. They are the ones who were responsible all this time for Islam and the Muslims; for ten centuries its ‘defenders’ have turned out to be its thieves.

Klevius: This nonsense rhetorics resembles someone sitting on a branch while cutting it! Islam is always excluded from its consequences and placed in an "islamophobia" bubble outside the reach of "islamophobic" criticism. 

No comments:

Post a Comment