You coward! Yes, you! Try for once to show you're a true vertebrate by supporting Human Rights instead of sharia. No dude, you can't pick both - ask Saudi based and steered OIC and its sharia declaration which nullifies HR!Make a New Year 2019 promise to carefully check the validity of Klevius writings about the muslim world Umma represented by OIC and its sharia declaration against Human Rights at UN.
UK is fast turning into islamofascism. Klevius suggests that member states who don't want to be dragged down in Britisharia make mutiny and leave the sinking ship ASAP.Or that people open their eyes for what's really going on at BBC and among politicians.
In BBC's overwhelmingly with muslim propaganda filled Boxing Day three hours "news" program, Pakistani rooted muslim home secretary Sajid Javid proudly states that he isn't "a white man", while BBC's Pakistani rooted and Saudi raised bigoted and hypocritical muslim sharia presenter Mishal Husain led the show - on the most important Atheist and Christian Midwinter celebration in a country where the overwhelming majority is either Atheist (incl. cultural Atheists) or Christian while muslims stand for some 5% but are part of the world's biggest nation, i.e. OIC's islamic Umma, and therefore far from being a "vulnerable minority".
How come that Saudi based and steered OIC, all muslims world Umma organization, and its Human Rights violating sharia declaration, is never reported about by BBC?
Before you "defend" sharia muslims against "islamophobes" - think again, is your "defense" of religious racism and sexism (and in an islamist extension pure religious fascism), really worth more than the anti-fascist Universal Human Rights declaration of 1948?! Especially when many (most?) muslims probably agree with Klevius.
Moreover, might it not ignite Human Rightsphobia and propel anti-white and anti non-muslim sentiments?!
How come that Theresa May is more sharia muslim than Linda Sarsour?!
Laura Loomer, a conservative investigative journalist asked #MeToo campaigner actress Alyssa Milano
You are friends with Linda Sarsour, both of you ladies have positioned yourselves as speakers and representatives of the #MeToo movement.”
Sarsour is a muslim, a co-founder of the Women’s March and the former executive director of the Arab American Association of New York.
“I want to ask you right now to disavow Linda Sarsour because she is a supporter of Sharia. And under Sharia, women are oppressed, women are forced to wear a hijab,” Loomer said. “My question is, will you please disavow her because she is advocating for Sharia?”
Audience members began jeering Loomer as Milano tried to respond.
“She’s not,” the actress said.
Klevius comment: Really! So UK PM Thersa May is more islamist than Linda Sarsour?!
Compare Klevius "islamophobic" writings with Wikipedia's on muslim sharia:
The Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam (CDHRI) is a declaration of the member states of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation adopted in Cairo, Egypt, on 5 August 1990, (Conference of Foreign Ministers, 9–14 Muharram 1411H in the Islamic calendar) which provides an overview on the Islamic perspective on human rights, and affirms Islamic sharia as its sole source. CDHRI declares its purpose to be "general guidance for Member States [of the OIC] in the field of human rights".
This declaration is widely acknowledged as an Islamic response to the United Nations's Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), adopted in 1948. It guarantees many of the same rights as the UDHR and serves as a living document of human rights guidelines prescribed for all members of the OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation) to follow, but restricts them explicitly to the limits set by the sharia. This greatly restricts rights with respect to the Universal Declaration, since for example, women and members of other religions do not have the same rights as men under sharia, and that freedom of expression can be severely limited for religious reasons: for example, blasphemy can even now be punishable by death, in clear opposition to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
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 non-derogable 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 that "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." In September 2008, in an article to the United Nations, the Center for Inquiry 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 of the CDHRI's reference to Shariah, it implies an inherent degree of superiority of men.
Adama Dieng—a member of the International Commission of Jurists—has also 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 sharia (Law)" to justify the legitimacy of practices, such as corporal punishment, which attack the integrity and dignity of the human being.
In 2009, the journal Free Inquiry summarized the criticism of the Cairo Declaration in an editorial: "We are deeply concerned with the changes to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by a coalition of Islamic states within the United Nations that wishes to prohibit any criticism of religion and would thus protect Islam's limited view of human rights. In view of the conditions inside the Islamic Republic of Iran, Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, the Sudan, Bangdalesh, Iraq, and Afghanistan, we should expect that at the top of their human rights agenda would be to rectify the legal inequality of women, the suppression of political dissent, the curtailment of free expression, the persecution of ethnic minorities and religious dissenters—in short, protecting their citizens from egregious human rights violations. Instead, they are worrying about protecting Islam."[