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

Saturday, September 19, 2015

Who's a muslim - and who's an apostate?

Branded a muslim in the one way road of islam ending with a sharia sign declaring 'apostasy ban'. 

The only way out is committing the worst of crime or lying. And in a Western
cultural context - to pretend you're free to do what you like - much as BBC's muslim presenter Mishal Husain does in the face of islam's victims when she proudly brags about not fasting during Ramadan but instead eating and drinking alcohol, and that she "feels no threat to her way of life".

Samantha Lewthwaite (Brit), Mishal Husain (Paki/Saudi/Brit) and Michael Adebolajo (Brit) have all sharia islam in common - although one of them seems to deny/blink it.
Samantha Lewthwaite, Mishal Husain and Michael Adebolajo have sharia islam in common

Muslims are protected by Human Rights - islam is not!

The only reason such a disgusting and Human Rights violating ideology as sharia islam is possible in a modern society is that its evilness is protected by a misdirected use of Human Rights and the US Constitution. Islam is political and against Human Rights (compare what all muslims main Umma organization, Saudi based and steered OIC, says in its sharia declaration via UN) and can therefore not be protected by Human Rights. Muslims can and should be protected by Human Rights (as everyone else and equally - not more or less), but their Human Rights violating ideology should not.

The sensitive issue of islam's lack of freedom of religion is best exemplified in the desperate cover-up of the background of muslim born* (apostate?!**) Mr. X*** "president"**** Barry Barakeh Hussein Obama Dunham Soetoro (or whatever).

CNN (the Saudi steered truthsayer): A CNN/ORC poll out this week showed 29 percent of Americans believe incorrectly that Obama is Muslim. Of that, 43 percent of Republicans believe that to be true — even though it is false. And that number rises to a whopping 54 percent — a majority — among those who say they are Trump supporters.

Klevius: Rarely do we see journalists telling us in such a definitive language what is "incorrect" and "false".  Sounds like a little child, doesn't it!

Here's an other stubborn and foolish truthsayer (the red pen is Klevius attempt to cover up his stupidity).

It's not a question about Mr X "president's" beliefs - it's about sharia islam that violates the most basic of Universal Human Rights! Obama's apostasy problem reveals the darkest side of islam in a modern civilized world.

The original rant on the pic above tries to avoid the crucial question of Obama being a muslim because his father was a muslim, by confusing it with 'foreign-born', i.e. utilizing some rumors that he entered Hawai from Kenya as a baby and not in his mothers belly.

* Except that the muslim "rumor" is based on the most basic tenet in islam, i.e. that a child to a muslim father is a muslim, there is also 

**** the constitutional problem with a president born by a US citizen who is less than five years into her adulthood.

** If he sees himself as a non-muslim he must have committed apostasy - the worst crime known to islam.

*** "Mr X" means his personal records are kept tightly secret.

This cover-up has been going on since before he was "elected" "president".

And for a whole day Google News top of the top story was that Donald Trump didn't "correct" questioner (who possibly also believed Obama wasn't born in US) who said Obama is a muslim because his father (who, to our knowledge, hadn't committed open apostasy either) was a muslim, as was the grandfather.

This is the most important news you're offered via US Google News - again and again...
 and again...

 and again...
 and seemingly never ending throughout a whole day!

Who is a muslim? The racist/sexist closed one way road to muslimhood.

Obama had two muslim fathers and used to pray in a mosgue during his childhood.

So let's ask an "expert" on islam, General Supervisor, Shaykh Muhammad Saalih al-Munajjid (with clarifying comments by Klevius - the Supervisor of islamic supervisors):

If the child's parents are both Muslims, then he is Muslim too, following his parents, according to the consensus of the Muslims. The same applies if his mother is Muslim, according to the majority of scholars such as Abu Haneefah, al-Shaafa’i and Ahmad. End quote from Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 10/437.

Klevius (the supervisor of islamic supervisors) comment: What a twisted answer! Muslim mothers have no say at all. If a mother is a muslim then she isn't allowed to have a non-muslim child and strictly speaking not even allowed to marry a non-muslim. And if she is divorced or widowed she isn't allowed to change the status of the child even if she has islamic "custody" (male relatives are the factual custodians in sharia).

It says in al-Mawsoo’ah al-Fiqhiyyah al-Kuwaitiyyah (4/270): The fuqaha’ are unanimously agreed that if the father becomes Muslim and he has young children, then these children are to be regarded as Muslim, following their father. 

The majority (the Hanafis, Shaafa’is and Hanbalis) are of the view that what counts is the Islam of one of the parents, whether it is the father or mother, so the children are to be regarded as Muslims, following the parent, because Islam should prevail and not be prevailed over, because it is the religion of Allah that He is pleased with for His slaves.

Klevius (the supervisor of islamic supervisors) comment:See previous comment and do note the fascist 'islam should prevail' no matter what. And does Klevius have to point out the self-evident totalitarian meaning in this statement. This is as far you can get from civilized behavior.

Secondly: When the Muslim child reaches the age of puberty, he is not required to utter the Shahaadatayn again.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said: The Muslims are unanimously agreed that if a child reaches the age of puberty as a Muslim, he is not required to renew the Shahaadatayn. End quote from Dar’ al-Ta’aarud, 4/107.

And he said: The early generation and the imams are unanimously agreed that the first thing to be enjoined upon people is the Shahaadatayn, and they are agreed that if a person did that before reaching puberty, he should not be enjoined to renew that when he reaches puberty. End quote from Dar’ al-Ta’aarud, 4/107

Klevius (the supervisor of islamic supervisors) comment: Gives a lot of space for young muslims while still keeping them tied to this bigoted and hypocritical "religion", doesn't it.

But if after reaching puberty he says or does something that indicates that he is not content with Islam, then he is to be regarded as an apostate and is to be treated as one who has apostatised from the religion of Islam.

Klevius (the supervisor of islamic supervisors) comment: So what about Obama?

Shaykh al-Islam said: In terms of worldly rulings, the child comes under the same rulings as his parents, because he is not independent. When he reaches puberty and speaks words of Islam or disbelief, then he is to be judged on that basis, according to the consensus of the Muslims. If his parents are Jews or Christians, but he becomes Muslim, then he is a Muslim according to Muslim consensus. If they are Muslims and he becomes a kaafir, then he is a kaafir according to Muslim consensus. End quote from al-Fataawa al-Kubra, 1/64

Klevius (the supervisor of islamic supervisors) comment: "Muslim consensus" is what you see in Mideast.

Thirdly: When the child reaches the age of seven, his parents should instruct him to pray and encourage him to do so, because of the report narrated by ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Amr ibn al-‘Aas (may Allah be pleased with him), according to which the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Instruct your children to pray when they are seven years old and smack them if they do not do it when they are ten.” Narrated by Abu Dawood (495); classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood (466).

Al-Nawawi said: The imams said: It is obligatory for the fathers and mothers to teach their children about purification, prayer and other laws after the age of seven, and to smack them if they do not do them after the age of ten. End quote from al-Majmoo’, 3/11.

Klevius (the supervisor of islamic supervisors) comment: This is called brainwashing and child abuse in the civilized Western world.

Ibn Qudaamah said: This discipline is prescribed for the child in order to accustom him to prayer, so that he will feel comfortable with it and get used to it, and he will not neglect it when he reaches puberty, but it is not obligatory upon him. Al-Mughni, 1/682

Klevius (the supervisor of islamic supervisors) comment: I see.

If a child does not pray before the age of puberty, that does not put him beyond the pale of Islam, because he is not accountable for doing it and it is not obligatory for him.

Shaykh al-Islam said: Prayer is not obligatory for a child, even if he has reached the age of ten. This is the view of the majority of scholars.

Klevius (the supervisor of islamic supervisors) comment: So Obama, as a child, didn't have to do anything to keep his muslimhood. However, we do know that he did pray when his mother was married with an other muslim, Soetoro, who also became his adoptive father - which fact constitutes an interesting anomaly.

Al-Ikhtiyaaraat al-Fiqhiyyah, 1/32; see also the answer to question number 1994.

Based on this, the child who has a Muslim father and a non-Muslim mother is a Muslim. If he reaches the age of ten and does not pray, he is not a kaafir because of his not praying, because he is not accountable for that until he reaches the age of puberty. If he reaches the age of puberty and persists in not praying, then he is an apostate from Islam because of not praying. 

 Klevius (the supervisor of islamic supervisors) comment: Make your pick! This is why islamofascist countries love OIC's sharia declaration which, unlike Human Rights, gives them clean hands for cherry picking.

Obama interview March 28, 2004

What do you believe?

I am a Christian. So, I have a deep faith. So I draw from the Christian faith. On the other hand, I lived in Indonesia, the largest Muslim country in the world, between the ages of six and 10. My father was from Kenya, and although he was probably most accurately labeled an agnostic, his father was Muslim.

Have you always been a Christian?

I was raised more by my mother and my mother was Christian.

I think that, particularly as somebody who’s now in the public realm and is a student of what brings people together and what drives them apart, there’s an enormous amount of damage done around the world in the name of religion and certainty.

Who’s Jesus to you?

(He laughs nervously)

Jesus is an historical figure for me, and he’s also a bridge between God and man, in the Christian faith, and one that I think is powerful precisely because he serves as that means of us reaching something higher.

And he’s also a wonderful teacher. I think it’s important for all of us, of whatever faith, to have teachers in the flesh and also teachers in history.

Do you have people in your life that you look to for guidance?

Well, my pastor is certainly someone who I have an enormous amount of respect for.

Klevius: This racist supremacist pastor was so utterly disgusting that Obama a couple of years later had to stop seeing him if he wanted to continue his campaign.

No comments:

Post a Comment