Calling critics of islam "islamophobes" is pure racism and also supports islamic racism and sexism

Calling critics of islam "islamophobes" is pure racism and also supports islamic racism and sexism

A global world is only possible under the guidance of (negative – i.e. individual freedom from racist/sexist impositions) Human Rights - as outlined in the original anti-fascist Universal Human Rights declaration of 1948. It excludes any religious or other supremacist tenets or impositions on the individual.

Due to the above and due to the West (politicians and media) having locked itself in with the islamofascist Saudi dictator family (the custodians of islam) we now have a deficit of (negative) Human Rights education – but massively more religious propaganda (e.g. Saudi spread “islamophobia” smear) against these rights. Against this background it's utmost hypocrisy to point against wealth spreading China while supporting islamic hate, terror and war crimes spreading hegemonic Saudi dictator family.


If you don't like Klevius (very few do) you may check if it's him or the anti-racist, anti-sexist and anti-fascist Universal Human Rights declaration you can't digest - but which Klevius stubbornly keeps feeding you.

Iran, Corbyn, bin Laden's son etc. - it's more about protecting BBC's poster boy, war criminal and state terrorist Mohammad Salman, than protecting people on the streets from Saudi exported racist islamic hate terror.

Saudi and BBC hate propaganda against Iran and Shia muslims behind attacks on Corbyn's "anti-Semitism"? BBC's inflammatory and offensive hate mongering use of the oxymoron "anti-Semitic" (reinforced by "islamophobia") protects Semitic (Arab/Sunni/Saudi) muslims from criticism while excluding non-Semitic Shia muslims (e.g. Iran). BBC also use "Asians" when they mean non-Semitic former British Asian muslims, i.e. again not incl. Iranian Shia muslims. Why? Because BBC's poster boy Mohammad Salman hates Shia. England also got a massive problem with "Asian" (sic - read 'mostly Sunni muslim') sex offenders. But no one dares to ask if islam's hate teaching of taking "infidel" sex slaves - and "muslim sensitivity" policies - may encourage it?

The world's biggest fake news producer, UK state media BBC, 20190221 gave the Japanese asteroid landing just a few seconds but managed to squeeze in the fake "info" that "it is the first attempt to bring back samples to Earth" (Cathy/PM 17:00) when the previous Japanese sond already 2010 brought back samples from an other asteroid. No one else has managed to do this except the Japanese. This is in line with BBC's usual racist attitude against Japan and China.

Klevius wonders whether BBC/UK government count Islamic State muslims who can't be directly tied to atrocities, as "peaceful muslims"?

Klevius wonders why semitic attacks on Jews are called "antisemitism"?

WARNING about "Five Eyes" and BBC, and their "close ally", the hate, terror and war crimes producing islamofascist "custodian of islam", the Saudi dictator family!
If you prefer peace, democratic non-fake information and positive development - ask your politicians to avoid US/UK's war mongering militarism and the world's biggest state propaganda tool BBC, which constitutes the most serious threat to free information. UK government is pushing for neo-British imperialist militarist meddling and intervention around the world - and making its propaganda tool BBC "the custodian of fact checks", i.e. a wolf among sheep.

Theresa May wants to leave EU. That should include UK militarist meddling within EU as well. Leave means leave! Don't let UK and its "close ally" the islamofascist Saudi dictator family contaminate EU citizens lives. Don't let the insidious spy organization Five Eyes spy on EU citizens and their leaders and parliamentarians.

Don't let BBC's or islam's glossy surface (i.e. normal news/info and non-sharia muslims respectively) lure you to not see the evil core. Klevius is the opposite. WYSIWYG. No hidden evil core, just defense of your (whoever you are) basic Human Rights that islam wants to deny you.

Do you support Human Rights or sharia?
Klevius islam logic: If I is SI and SI is not HR then I is not HR. For those who don't understand formal logic: If islam is sharia islam and sharia islam violates Human Rights, then islam violates Human Rights.

Theresa May & Co defend sharia by saying "it's just a a contract". This is utter lie because any meaningful islam demands sharia and stepping out of the "contract" is the worst sin you can commit as a muslim (s.c. apostasy). Theresa May's and others deception is built on the mass of secular muslims, i.e. not true muslims. And these "secular muslims" get away with it as long as there's not enough true muslims to demand sharia all over the pitch - as yet. Moreover, Saudi led sharia finance demands sharia compliance - as does Saudi based and steered OIC, all muslims world organization.

Klevius supports "secular muslims" - Theresa May supports sharia muslims.


Klevius supports no border on Ireland. Follow the will of the people, i.e. let England leave and let Scotland and Northern Ireland stay.

UK government wants to force EU to put a border on Ireland - so it can blame EU for something UK-Brexit caused.

UK is an unconstitutional mess which now wants to leave EU without controlling its border to EU. A proper constitution would have demanded qualified majority in two consecutive elections/votes about such a crucial matter as Brexit - and being aware what the vote is about. The root of the problem is England's mad man Henry 8's colonialization of Ireland and lack of constitution. The preposterous "British" Brexit parody is then spiced with the government's and BBC's use of religious hate mongering etc. In summary UK is an anomaly of countries trying to be a state in a world of federal states united as countries.

Martina Big (aka Malaika Kubwa) wanted to be "black". We don't know exactly why. However, fair skinned politicians and media people who support black supremacism, Nation of Islam etc. might consider following her example.

Are "whites" the new Jews - and in need of a burqa or skin color change?

Are "whites" the new Jews - and in need of a burqa or skin color change?

Theresa May & Co and state media BBC play with race cards

Theresa May & Co and state media BBC play with race cards

Is UK/Saudi cooperation a security threat to EU - and people in UK

Is UK/Saudi cooperation a security threat to EU - and people in UK

US/UK is a security risk - not China. Tell your EU politician!

US/UK is a security risk - not China. Tell your EU politician!

Klevius "islamophobic" heroine Nawal El Saadawi from Egypt

Klevius "islamophobic" heroine Nawal El Saadawi from Egypt

Politicians against the people

Politicians against the people

Rule Britisharia Human Rightsphobia

BBC isn't much interested in anti-semitism, homophobia etc. but uses them as an excuse for its Saudi/OIC supported "islamophobia" smear campaign against Human Rights.

Is BBC's Pakistan rooted and Saudi raised muslim(?) presenter Mishal Husain an "islamophobe" against evil* islam, or an apostate supporting toothless** "islam"? She doesn't fast during Ramadan but rather drinks some alcohol, and doesn't veil herself and says she doesn't feel any threats to her way of life (Klevius: thanks to Human Rights - not sharia islam), well knowing how muslim and non-muslim women suffer in muslim sharia countries like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia without Human Rights. What would she say to a muslim terrorist asking her if she's a muslim? Isn't it about time to stop this bigoted and hypocritical indirect support of islamofascism that this Saudi/OIC initiated "islamophobia" smear camopaign against Human Rights*** is all about?

* Human Rights equality violating sharia islam
** in line with the anti-fascist, anti-racist and anti-sexist U.N.'s 1948 Universal Human Rights declaration.
*** Socialists have an ideological problem with individual Human Rights, and are therefore vulnerable for islamism (see Klevius 1994).

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.

British militarist neo-colonialism and conflict mongering

British militarist neo-colonialism and conflict mongering

UK sells weapons to Saudis - and smears peaceful China who can do better weapons themselves.

UK sells weapons to Saudis - and smears peaceful China who can do better weapons themselves.

Why is Theresa May excused for her secret ties with Saudi islamofascism?!

Why is Theresa May excused for her secret ties with Saudi islamofascism?!

Euronews/BBC kept for long a low profile about Saudi state terror. Why?

Euronews/BBC kept for long a low profile about Saudi state terror. Why?

A "close ally" of the islamofascist Saudi dictator family mixes OIC sharia with Human Rights

A "close ally" of the islamofascist Saudi dictator family mixes OIC sharia with Human Rights

Negative Human Rights for a Positive Human Future

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.

Definition of Negative Human Rights - i.e. the very foundation of the freedom part of the anti-fascist Universal Human Rights declaration of 1948.

Most people today are A(mono)theists, i.e. not "believing" in an impossible "one god"*. Such a "collective god" would mean equally many personal "gods" as there are believers/interpretors. "Monotheisms" are for racist/sexist movements - not for individuals. Human Rights are for individuals living among individuals with same rights.

Religion always means a total or partial reduction of some people's (e.g. women''s) Human Rights equality.

Being against A(mono)theism must be categorized as contempt of basic Human Rights equality because "monotheists" have doctrines which can't comply with basic Human Rights equality.
Klevius moral formula is a bedrock you can't beat:

1 There's no absolute and fixed moral in a dynamic society.

2 Therefor we have to repeatedly agree on a minimum moral and equality for all.

3 In doing so we are logically forced to approve of negative Human Rights, i.e. not to impose restrictions other than necessary in a democracy based on as much freedom as possible for all individuals - no matter of sex, race etc. And, for the truly dumb ones, do note that this definition excludes the freedom to restrict freedom.

* Though some people keep calling their own racist/sexist "interpretation" as "god's/allah's will").

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

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

UK PM escapes muslim terror induced by her "close ally", the islamofascist Saudi dictator family.


Saudi terror, war crimes, sharia - and "islamophobia" smear campaign against Human Rights.

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

Warning for BBC's faked "news" and support for Human Rights violating Saudi/OIC islamofascism

Warning for BBC's faked "news" and support for Human Rights violating Saudi/OIC islamofascism

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

Sharia and weaponry keeps Brexit-UK in EU - with leaking borders and against the will of the people

Sharia and weaponry keeps Brexit-UK in EU - with leaking borders and against the will of the people

While EU closes internal borders it opens external ones.

While EU closes internal borders it opens external ones.

"Brits" who are racist against EU citizens but dare not criticize muslims - here's your passport.

"Brits" who are racist against EU citizens but dare not criticize muslims - here's your passport.

Welcoming UK's main security threat - and committing treason against the will of the people

Welcoming UK's main security threat - and committing treason against the will of the people

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

The ultimate treason against people in England, Ireland and Scotland

The ultimate treason against people in England, Ireland and Scotland

True Brits for the islamofascist Saudi dictator family and against Human Rights

Klevius: Face it, Wikipedia, BBC etc. fake media - Finland was first in the world with full suffrag

The network that reignited evil Human Rightsphobic sharia islam via al-Saud

Human Rightsphobe Jacob Rees-Mogg and BBC News crack jokes about Germans lacking humour

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

Klevius "islamophobia" CV

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).

Klevius 1979: Human Rights for girls/women rather than religion

Klevius 1979: Human Rights for girls/women rather than religion

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.

Racist Theresa May is robbing EU citizens of their Human Rights

Is Mrs Theresa May digging a miserable "British" sharia "empire" under the Brexit cliff?

Mrs May plays sharia with the islamofascist Saudi dictator family - skipping Human Rights. Right

This (via Saudi sharia finance) is the main threat to your Human Rights

This (via Saudi sharia finance) is 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

Support Klevius' Atheist anti-fascism against islamofascism

This is what BBC's muslim sharia presenter Mishal Husain "forgot" to report. Mishal grew up in the very same theocratic medieval dictatorship which now harbors and rules all muslims world organization OIC and its Human Rights violating sharia. While also spreading islamic hatred over the world through a variety of channels.

Klevius to dumb (or just evil) alt-left "antifa" people who support the worst of Human Rights violating evil:

True anti-fascism in its purest form is laid down in the Universal Human Rights declaration of 1948. Islam (OIC) has in UN decided to abandon the most basic of these rights (the so called negative Human Rights).

Fascism is, according to Google's top hit, "a political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation*, and forcible suppression of opposition." 23 Aug 2017

So let's face islam with this definition.

A political philosophy, movement, or regime (islam) that exalts nation (Umma) and often race (muslims) above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government (Koran text/Mohammad's example) headed by a dictatorial leader (the caliph - e.g. the Saudi based OIC's Saudi leader), severe economic and social regimentation* (sharia), and forcible suppression of opposition (apostasy ban against muslims wanting to leave islam, and demonizing defenders of Human Rights by calling them "islamophobes").

And islamofascism gets away with it by calling itself a religion and thereby being protected by those very Human Rights it opposes.

* According to Cambridge dictionary, "extreme organization and control of people".

Saudi muslim war criminal and Human-rightsophobe is loved by BBC

Is the islamofascist Saudi dictator "prince" Mohammad bin Salman the world's most dangerous man?

Is the islamofascist Saudi dictator "prince" Mohammad bin Salman the world's most dangerous man?
Is the islamofascist Saudi dictator "prince" Mohammad bin Salman the world's most dangerous man?

Saudi islamofascism attacks Buddhists - again and again - backed by Mrs May.

When will the world finally turn on the hateful Saudi dictator family - rather than on its victims?

The islamofascist Saudi dictator family spreading its islamist hate and losses while FEEding Lnd

The islamofascist Saudi dictator family spreading its islamist hate and losses while FEEding Lnd
The islamofascist Saudi dictator family spreading its islamist hate and losses over you

How an organization of islamic crimes (OIC) violates Human Rights

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

What is "islamophobia"?

Human Rights is diversity - sharia is the opposite

The evil of Sharia islam is what makes it incompatible with Negative Human Rights (i.e. why islamic OIC violates Human Rights by replacing them with Sharia, hence excluding women and non-muslims from equality). The evil of islam and its origin may be easier to grasp with historical examples, e.g. the Origin of Vikings.

It's racism and sexism even if proposed by a "god"! Klevius altruistic virtual volunteering for the world community in defense of Universal Human Rights . Yes, I know, it's unfair. Klevius vs islam, i.e. Universal Human Rights vs Sharia (OIC) racism/sexism! Of course Klevius will win. The question is just how long we should allow the dying beast to make people suffer. (Negative) Human Rights is not a ”Western” invention! It’s where you end up when you abandon racism and sexism, idiot! After you have abandoned islam! Your confused islamophilia and ignorance about Human Rights make YOU an accomplice to islam's crimes! Whereas Human Rights work as egalitarian and universal traffic rules (no matter who you are or what you drive you have the same rights as everyone else) islam/Sharia differs between muslim men and the rest (women and "infidels")!

Ask yourself, why can't racist islam (OIC) accept Human Rights? The answer reveals the difference between totalitarianism and freedom. And even if everyone converted to islam we'd still have Sharia sexism.
Have you noticed that when the history of slavery is (PC) debated islam is always excluded/excused? Atlantic slave trade and Roman slaves are eagerly mentioned while the world's by far worst, longest and most extensive one is blinked, as is the fact that islam not only sanctions slavery but is itself built on slavery and sex slavery (rapetivism)! The core idea of islam is the most thoroughly elaborated parasitism ever, i.e. what in 1400 yrs has made it the by far worst crime ever. But thanks to islamic teachings muslims are kept extremely ignorant about the evil origin of islam (institutionalized parasitism based on slave finance, rapetivism and pillage). Ohlig: The first two "islamic" centuries lie in the shadows of history. Klevius: There was no islam or islamic Mohammad (that's why the Saudis have levelled Mohammad's "grave" etc), only the evil murdering, pillaging and raping Aramaic-Arabic Jewish("Christian") led illiterate Arab thugs chasing for booty and sex. The "success" of this formula became later institutionalized and codified as a one way (Koran/Sharia) moral excuse (Allah) for further racist/sexist genocides. The bedrock and currency of this system was racist slavery. However, with Enlightenment the new idea of individual (negative) Human Rights emerged (incl. abolishing of slavery) and were, much later (1948), written down in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights according to which everyone is equal no matter of sex, beliefs etc. Just like in traffic! But unlike traffic rules no one really seems to care about guarding our most precious asset as human beings. Instead racist sexist islamofascism (OIC and the Cairo Sharia declaration) is protected by Human Rights while they strive to undermine and eventually destroy these Human Rights! And most people don't seem to get it. Always remember, there is no islam without Human Rights violating racist/sexist Sharia. So a "vote" for Sharia-islam is AGAINST democracy and the freedom part of Human Rights!

Sayeeda Warsi (UK's non-elected OIC/Sharia politician) in essence doesn't differ from those muslim Saudi women who approve of sex slavery etc, other than that she is either ignorant or a traitor (against democracy and Human Rights) of the worst kind.

We're all born unequal - that's why we need Human Rights, not islam!

Audi then built by Jewish slaves - today dangerous quality problems

Myth vs Truth

Sunday, March 17, 2019

Cynical populist use of tragedies: Don't let BBC and politicians smear critics of islam's lack of Human Rights!

The ideology of hate vs. Human Rights for everyone.


"A decent fire bomb can islamize a world". This note was found on a toilet at Stockholm University 2006 after someone had flooded the library with water. However, neither the police nor the press said anything about it.

The custodians of islam, the hateful islamofascist Saudi dictator family (incl. Saudi based and steered OIC) has made every effort to silence critics of Saudi's lack of Human Rights, by calling such criticism "islamophobia". 


BBC and your politicians keenly follow this perversion - rather than defending Human Rights.

Thanks to Saudi hate mongering Kosovo now seems to be the most hateful European "country" when it comes to views on Shia muslims. Are you listening EU!

In doing so they utilize their position as custodians of islam for all the world's muslims - most of which are only "cultural muslims" hesitant to commit apostasy and/or just using any favor muslimhood may give them - while simultaneously spreading divisive hate.

How come that no matter if the terrorists are muslims or non-muslims, "islamophobia" always gets the blame?!


When islam(ists) attack non-muslims it's not only blamed on the elusive "islamophobia", it also leads to warnings about "islamophobia" because of the attacks. And when the proportionally much rarer attacks happen against muslims, then again it's all because of "islamophobia".

 Compare this to Mishal Husain's view on the proportionality of muslims and Jews killed:



If, as archbishop of Canterbury says, Islamic State really has something to do with islam, then these similarities also must have something to do with early islam, e.g. what happened in Medina with the Jews.

Saudi Arabia is the biggest trader in sharia finance, which in turn is connected to Saudi islamofascism.

Could the lives in New Zealand have been saved if media had been more keen on teaching potential terrorists about basic Human Rights? However BBC does its utmost not to do so because it could offend the islamofascist Saudi dictator family.

Terrorists don't support Human Rights.

According to himself in his "manifest" the New Zealand terrorist isn't an "islamophobe". That's a relief for all of us Human Rights defending "islamophobes". Perhaps more knowledge about Human Rights could have de-radicalized the perpetrator. But again, BBC and politicians seem to prefer islamic sharia rather than universal Human Rights.

Blaming terrorism on "islamophobia" is in fact a direct attack on Human Rights - just like in Saudi Arabia where Human Rights are criminalized and equalized with terrorism.

Does Saudi spread "islamophobia" smear mean that Human Rights have lost and islamofascism has won? Only if you and your political representatives approve of it.


Islam has friends all over the place. When will basic Human Rights be treated the same?



Making propaganda through faking and cherry picking: When muslims mass murder Coptic Christians in Egypt it went almost unnoticed by BBC. Why? Was it because of a lack of "islamophobes" in Egypt? Or was it because of Saudi meddling in UK?

Mishal Husain (left), a Pakistan rooted and Saudi raised muslim (who doesn't fast during Ramadan but rather drink some alcohol) is now leading BBC's most important "news", the three hour Today. Sajid Javid (right) is now Home secretary in charge of hostile environment for immigrants - especially those from EU and Iran.




It's Saudi inspired Sunni muslim terror that you as an individual are more likely to be targeted by than from Shia. Almost every muslim street hate crime has a Saudi/Sunni label - printed via Saudi steered channels.


The English language isn't "British" - it's old Nordic and it now belongs to the whole world - not to an "Anglospheric" conspiracy group.


Making robbery, pillaging, enslaving etc. a "great religion" based on language and race, cost a lot of slaves and oil. The Viking faith (Klevius is an apostate of that particular faith) could also easily have become a "great religion" - or has it?! Is it what we now call the West? And did it start, like Medieval islam, as a Hadith has it that islam started, via the revelations of a tall and blond man?


Can anyone of the "islamophobia" shouters tell the difference between Saudi based and steered OIC's world sharia declaration, which in its last article says it overrides any Human Rights?

Scape-goating Human Rights defenders for the purpose of

Like it or not, this murderous war criminal and muslim state terrorist is today's de facto custodian (or dictator, if you prefer) of islam - with the keen assistance of US/The Five Eyes and islam (i.e. not Human Rights) steered BBC.



The main ally of Five Eyes is the islamofascist Saudi dictator family - and especially the murderous war criminal Mohammad bin Salman (MBS). And the target list includes EU politicians, e.g. Merkel etc. This spy organization, which in effect is all about US interest, doesn't hesitate to spy each other as well. And you dare reader, are almost certainly targeted.

The islamic monster called Saudi Arabia was created by the West and is still supported by the West despite all the countless, murders, rapes, terrorist attacks, war crimes that have emanated from it all over the world - including most muslim terrorist organizations.


Terrorism is always against Human Rights - and always blamed on "islamophobia", never islam, no matter who the terrorists are.

Do muslims who don't propose islamic violence harbor less dangerous views than right wing people who don't propose violence? What about Jacob Rees-Mogg? Is he dangerous? After all, he isn't equally concerned about Human Rights as Klevius, and he seems to like the islamofascist Saudi dictatir family - at least when it comes to business.

A Saudi raised and Pakistan rooted Sunni muslim, Mishal Husain,  will now be in charge of what state/fake-media BBC feeds the compulsory licence fee paying people in England. How come that islam, which has a clear sharia problem with Human Rights, is more protected and supported tha - Human Rights.

When will Human Rights be fully criminalized? "Islamophobia" accusation against Human Rights defenders who dare to criticize islamic sharia that violates Human Rights, is the first step. And no matter if muslims or non-muslims commit terror, "islamophobia" is always blamed. However, only non-muslims are called "islamophobes" although many (most?) muslims prefer Human Rights rather than sharia.

Who is more Human Rights-phobic, Jeremy Corbyn or Theresa May?











.

Wednesday, March 13, 2019

How come that Albert Einstein managed to produce longlasting unbiased science - with a decent but not even close to genius brain?


Klevius was amazed when in his teens he encountered the naivety in Einstein's social and cultural writings.

Klevius taking a selfie with Einstein after having read his social etc. views.

Klevius analysis: Exactly in the same way as Peter Klevius (who had the additional advantage of a genius brain) did - by avoiding academic bias. Both Einstein and Klevius worked alone. It was only when he became more "academic" that Einstein lost his initial glory. However, unlike Klevius, Einstein talked math which logic was hard to explain away.

Unlike Klevius, Einstein had a girlfriend and later wife who was more intelligent and more precise with math and physics than himself. And of course, 'Einstein' for most decent people stand for a particular set of understanding the world we live in - not some idolatry of a particular individual. Therefore, Klevius doesn't put too much emphasize on accusations of Einstein's "plagiarism" - after all, Klevius warned in his book Demand for Resources (1992) about how selective citations (or forcing in citations when there are no relevant ones) may actually distort scientific discoveries. And the PhD-student type of struggle to chase citations just for the sake of it, has very little to do with scientific revelations. If Klevius revelations would have been all written down and somehow connected to nearest possible citations, the result would have been much more than the whole of Talmud - and definitely much more coherent. The only passus in Talmud Klevius has ever found interesting (not that he has read much - it all sounds very similar and completely falls short of old epos such as Kalevala, Eddan and their Greek copies/variants etc. - although the latter ones were written down earlier, the former are older).

However, one gets the impression that Einstein used a broad smorgasbord filled with lots of quite irrelevant stuff which was then filtered down by others for true essence (who probably knew about the ones Einstein was accused of having plagiarized). And of course there was a longing for a figure like Einstein at the time when Israel and Saudi Arabia, as well as the "Atheist" Soviet, were in creation. And although Einstein was an Atheist himself, more importantly, he was instead called a Jew because his family contained Jews (however, compare Obama who was born to a muslim father and brought up by a muslim adoptive father - yet was fully accepted as a Christian) and therefore also associated with Christians, especially in the U.S.. Calling oneself a Jew or a muslim for the sake of convenience may be personally advantageous, but may also contribute to strengthening the power of real "extremist" Jews and muslims.

Klevius: Academic bias starts with a biased portraying of the problem or topic, which then constitutes the negative to a biased "result". 

Einstein's main discoveries happened when he was 16-26 years old - before he got his PhD - and at a time when all the pieces had just appeared and only asked for mathematical formulations (some of already existed).

Klevius: Most groundbreaking research happens outside academically produced peer consensus bias.

Einstein was able to compensate lack of brain power because he also had, unlike Klevius, an upbringing that gave him loads of time for reading plus advanced private tutors. Klevius had to sneak in his "studying" before falling asleep and at times when he managed to escape his work load in the foster family he had been kidnapped to (and later at age 17 kicked out of and sent penniless and without education to a foreign country). At school Klevius curiosity was too big for the curriculum, so he sneaked to the library instead - which fact took a toll on boring algebraic rules etc.. And to be fair, Klevius also wasted a lot of time on reading classics as well as a lot of non sense. He was after all just a lost teenager without a cause.

Einstein, like Klevius, wasn't too pedantic on details, and Einstein's math expressions faltered quite regularly. And although there's nothing in math that mathematically illiterate Klevius doesn't understand, his math reading and writing skills have never been honed in engineering and physics like Einstein and his friend. However, unlike Klevius (whose cowardliness usually silences him*) Einstein didn't hesitate to put forward less well thought-through propositions.

* Klevius plays safe in issues about Human Rights, human evolution, cosmology, consciousness etc. hence not only keeping tho wolves away but also simple minded admirers.

Klevius grew up in a foster home after being kidnapped from an other country at the age of two. And when the authorities eventually were informed five years later, he was declared "rooted" (this "rooting" suddenly ended when Klevius was 17 and told to go back to his country of birth for military service). And after that Klevius was more or less an enslaved child worker in the family. However, the regular physical violence and the heavy work load didn't create the most traumatic memories. Worst of all were the blistering cold winter days (down to -20 Celsius) when early in the dark mornings Klevius had to follow the foster father to a far away forest - all the time in the cold open air. And at the logging place the only thought Klevius had in his head was that the clock would reach mid-day so he could get some warm chocolate and a bread, and after that a long wait for going home in the almost dark (lit only by stars or moonlight on the white snow and ice). And had it been a loving father and part of the survival of a loving family - perhaps with other kids to play with during the day - then it could have been a lot easier. But it wasn't. Later Klevius learned that others had worries about how Klevius was abused but no one stepped forward back then. 


As a footnote to this footnote it might be appropriate also to point out the fact that according to much populist social "science" popular in universities these kind of traumatic childhood experience will produce violent and abusive adults. Klevius may be a pervert in this respect because nothing of it has got stuck on him. On the contrary he has been the one that has protected children from female violence (not his last wife) despite the fact that those women came from stable and relatively well-off bio-families.

However, Klevius was after all "taken care of" by authorities. Klevius had three different surnames during his first eight years of life. One of them was Lindroos, i.e. the name of the foster family, which was used when Klevius was sent over the fields (no roads) to a school that wasn't used by other kids from the same area. Due to Klevius excellent performance at primary school, one might guess, the foster mother wanted to adopt him but was hindered by the foster father and, one might guess, the grown up son. Such an adoption would have rendered Klevius a third of a relatively big farm on the outskirts of the capital. Instead Klevius was kicked out to a foreign country he had never visited after his second birthday, without finished education and without any money. A decade later, still without Klevius having put his foot even close to a university, philosopher G. H. von Wright (Wittgenstein's successor at Cambridge) gave his approval of Klevius analysis of the evolution of human societies (see Klevius 1981 and 1992). This included, apart from "expanded demands for resources", Klevius "stone experiment" (abt. consciousness/awareness) as well as the new concept of 'existence-centrism' (abt. metaphysics).

The daughter in the foster family (who never married) later on gave up much of her part in the farm to her brother. However, although she never had anything to do with Klevius after he left, when she read what Klevius had published on line about her favorite poet the Finland-Swedish modernist Edith Södergran, she wrote a will in which she gave 15% of her tiny estate to Klevius, i.e. not far from the 20% she gave her own brother (who never answered Klevius request to at least be able to buy a small lot for building a house).


Max Planck: "To shun much more the reproach of having suppressed strange opinions than that of having been too gentle in evaluating them."

Comparing Klevius upbringing and scientific stimulation with that of Einstein may be exemplified by an episode when Klevius was 12 and told his foster mother that there's electricity in the phone cables and she refused to believe and gave him a hard slap in the face instead. Although both foster parents were physically very abusive, the foster mother did it much more frequently. The foster father was more evasive - except when commanding to work.

Is there a general interest in the fact that while Einstein is possibly the most overrated "genius", Klevius challenges the position as the most underrated genius?


The reason no one likes Klevius science is precisely his annoying definition of true science being chasing for whatever bias that can be spotted.
The same applies to Klevius defense of the Universal Human Rights declaration of 1948. Most people have tied themselves to religious or ideological doxies (racist, sexist or supremacist) which sooner or later clash with Klevius analysis.

So how does Klevius himself survive himself? Simple, exactly in the same way Klevius has survived his testosterone driven heterosexual attraction without having problems with sexism etc. and exactly in the same way as Klevius has been race blind - until, of course, a certain point when feminist sex segregationists and "colored" race segregationists beg for criticism. Not to mention religion which combines all these dark forces in one. Check out if you are a Human Rightsphobe, i.e. in the target line of Klevius criticism by comparing your beliefs with Human Rights - especially the "negative" freedom from impositions rights.

At the time when Einstein's most famous papers were written, he didn't have easy access to a complete set of scientific reference materials, although he did regularly read and contribute reviews to Annalen der Physik. Additionally, scientific colleagues available to discuss his theories were few. He worked as an examiner at the Patent Office in Bern, Switzerland, and he later said of a co-worker there, Michele Besso, that he "could not have found a better sounding board for his ideas in all of Europe". In addition, co-workers and the other members of the self-styled "Olympian Academy" (Maurice Solovine and Paul Habicht) and his wife, Mileva Marić, had some influence on Einstein's work, but how much is unclear.

Through these papers, Einstein tackles some of the era's most important physics questions and problems. In 1900, Lord Kelvin, in a lecture titled "Nineteenth-Century Clouds over the Dynamical Theory of Heat and Light", suggested that physics had no satisfactory explanations for the results of the Michelson–Morley experiment and for black body radiation. As introduced, special relativity provided an account for the results of the Michelson–Morley experiments. Einstein's theories for the photoelectric effect extended the quantum theory which Max Planck had developed in his successful explanation of black body radiation.

Despite the greater fame achieved by his other works, such as that on special relativity, it was his work on the photoelectric effect that won him his Nobel Prize in 1921: "For services to theoretical physics and especially for the discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect." The Nobel committee had waited patiently for experimental confirmation of special relativity; however, none was forthcoming until the time dilation experiments of Ives and Stilwell (1938),(1941) and Rossi and Hall (1941).


So Einstein's special relativity was fertilized outside academic peer review and experiments.

This is the reason it was able to avoid academic bias.


Timeline:

Before he got his PhD Einstein published everything of importance for his reputation, i.e. four short papers in 1905 in not peer reviewed The Annalen der Physik. One, about the photo electric effect, rendered him the Nobel Prize. However, the papers on special relativity, mass-energy equivalence, and the Brownian motion, together made the foundation for what we could call an Einsteinian paradigm shift. Moreover, the mass-energy equivalence paper formed the basis of his general relativity, which was published ten years later in an obscure magazine after being dismissed by more prominent ones.


1905    Einstein’s “annus mirabilis”. He publishes four groundbreaking works in the “Annalen der Physik”, which revolutionize the basics of physics around 1900. One of his works, Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper (“On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies”), contains the special theory of relativity. In another work he deduces the famous formula E = mc2.

In April Einstein hands in his work Eine neue Bestimmung der Moleküldimensionen (A New Determination of Molecular Dimensions) as dissertation at the University of Zurich and it is accepted at the end of July.
    Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper (On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies)

1906 In the middle of January Einstein is awarded a doctorate by the University of Zurich and in April he is promoted to be a second-class technical expert at the Patent Office.    

1907 Einstein starts to think about the general theory of relativity and discovers the principle of equivalence of mass and energy for continuously accelerated systems. His application for the doctorate is rejected by the University of Bern as his doctorate paper is not sufficient.    

1908 Through handing in a new dissertation, Einstein is awarded the doctorate at the University of Bern and becomes a private college lecturer. At the end of the year he holds his first lecture.


Talking about bias etc.,Klevius wrote:


Wednesday, November 12, 2014


Japan makes the world's top technology - yet Europe gets the press! Why?


Why is the media shouting FIRST EVER when a bunch of European countries try to copy what Japan did a decade ago?!



Nissan rocket no. 1 with the Hayabusa robot



Nissan rocket no. 2



With a lap time of 7 min 8 sec Nissan GTR is the fastest, (non-hybrid*) globally-homologated road car around the world's most famous race track Nurburgring in Germany.

The old GTR was the first car to go under 8 minutes at Nurburgring.

* i.e. using a battery and Japanese hybrid technology to get extra power for the short time the ride lasts.


A Nissan Skyline* GTR ATESSA 4WD (2700 cc 6 cyl 280-1600 hp) from the 1990s  - the Japanese legend that Lambourghini Gallardo (5000 cc) was aimed to beat - more than a decade later! But consider huge difference in quality! The old Skyline GTR has the world record for legal cars abt 350 km/h on a German (!) autobahn (unofficial >380 km/h)!

What all GTRs have in common compared to non-Japanese super cars is superior quality. Already in the 1990s a Porsche CEO admitted that they can never achieve the same quality level as the Japanese.

* The new GTR has dropped the Skyline name. However, the basics are the same: 4WD and a small but powerful 6 cylinder engine.


Friday, April 5, 2013


Where's the star and where were you?


The illusion of a Universe


A ten billion year old supernova has been discovered. It means it died ten billion years ago, i.e. 5.5 billion years before our Sun was born.



The black area on the pic above corresponds to the white area on Klevius' Origin of Universe pic.




The nearest star, Proxima Centauri, is 4.2 light years from the Earth. Light travels at a speed corresponding to 7.5 laps around the Earth in one second.

The light from the farthest objects detectable by Hubble and other cameras (incl. radio waves etc), i.e. more than 13 billion years ago, marks the end of our capabilities, not the end of Universe. Because there is no "end" or "beginning". These terms are oxymorons and semantically absurd.

So next time you take a look at the stars do consider what you don't see.



Monday, January 9, 2012


The ridiculous idea about "one god" hampers CERN/LHC


Universe doesn't have limits - nor is it endless


In my book Demand for Resources (Resursbegär1992:21-22) I pointed out not only the dangers of such a senseless "model" as "Big Bang" but also how this "model" is trapped in a "monotheistic" view demanding "creation", i.e. a "starting point". Not only is such a "starting point" conceptually impossible (apart from its very obvious other limitations, e.g. how do you "bang" in "nothing") but it also fatally misdirects research focus because it assumes "a universe" or "the universe" where there's only universe.

A time trip back towards the "Big Bang" would only reveal a continuing growth of neighboring "universes". The space/time continuum and warping would make the "Big Bang" model laughable.

To my surprise I've noticed how many decently minded people seem to have great difficulties understanding how the great distances and the great limitations caused by the speed of light constant, warps every effort to take even quite small thought steps, say for example only within our own tiny galaxy. 

Cameras never lie - pictures do!

All space cameras, from our own eyes to the Hubble space telescope and its follow-ups, have in common that they don't take pictures of space but of themselves, i.e. photo reactions on the retina, CCD etc. These reactions are then interpreted by our knowledge. However, to describe such reactions as a picture of space is extremely misleading.


Sunday, September 11, 2011


Origin(s) of Universe

Universe as a language trap

Due to our human shortcomings we tend to entangle us with stupid concepts which then get a life of their own. These include not only e.g. irrational numbers but also such peculiarities as 'beginning', 'creation', 'existence', 'god' etc.

There can't be 'the', 'a', 'one' or 'many' in front of universe.

To understand this simple fact you just need to expore it by pinpointing the histories of light perceptions hitting "your world". Such light phenomenons may represent a "distance"* of everything from light traveling at 300,000 km/sec some fractions of a second to Billions of years. Moreover, some of them may be just side by side and with equal relative luminance. With this in mind then start it all over again, i.e. your theoretical mapping of "the Universe".

* If the source has moved or vanished when you perceive its light, then there i no real "distance" to be measured.

to be continued...



Some conventional views later to be commented by Klevius:













In astronomy and cosmology, dark matter is matter that is inferred to exist from gravitational effects on visible matter and gravitational lensing of background radiation, but that neither emits nor scatters light or other electromagnetic radiation (and so cannot be directly detected via optical or radio astronomy).[1] Its existence was hypothesized to account for discrepancies between calculations of the mass of galaxies, clusters of galaxies and the entire universe made through dynamical and general relativistic means, and calculations based on the mass of the visible "luminous" matter these objects contain: stars and the gas and dust of the interstellar and intergalactic medium.

According to observations of structures larger than solar systems, as well as Big Bang cosmology interpreted under the Friedmann equations and the FLRW metric, dark matter accounts for 23% of the mass-energy density of the observable universe. In comparison, ordinary matter accounts for only 4.6% of the mass-energy density of the observable universe, with the remainder being attributable to dark energy.[2][3] From these figures, dark matter constitutes 83%, (23/(23+4.6)), of the matter in the universe, whereas ordinary matter makes up only 17%.

Dark matter was postulated by Fritz Zwicky in 1934 to account for evidence of "missing mass" in the orbital velocities of galaxies in clusters. Subsequently, other observations have indicated the presence of dark matter in the universe; these observations include the rotational speeds of galaxies, gravitational lensing of background objects by galaxy clusters such as the Bullet Cluster, and the temperature distribution of hot gas in galaxies and clusters of galaxies.

Dark matter plays a central role in state-of-the-art modeling of structure formation and galaxy evolution, and has measurable effects on the anisotropies observed in the cosmic microwave background. All these lines of evidence suggest that galaxies, clusters of galaxies, and the universe as a whole contain far more matter than that which interacts with electromagnetic radiation. The largest part of dark matter, which does not interact with electromagnetic radiation, is not only "dark" but also, by definition, utterly transparent.[4]

As important as dark matter is believed to be in the cosmos, direct evidence of its existence and a concrete understanding of its nature have remained elusive. Though the theory of dark matter remains the most widely accepted theory to explain the anomalies in observed galactic rotation, some alternative theoretical approaches have been developed which broadly fall into the categories of modified gravitational laws, and quantum gravitational laws

Tuesday, March 12, 2019

Klevius take on the "web's hate problem": Why is muslim hate excluded - and why is state broadcaster BBC so interested in "regulating" the web?


A Google search today on muslim racism produces the very opposite. Why?


This is how fascism was made possible - and nothing our grandchildren historians will be proud of.


The only practical islam there is - is Saudi based and steered OIC's world sharia declaration which gravely violates the most basic Human Rights.


Is it really conducive to all our basic Human Rights that anti-Human Rights muslims (i.e. sharia muslims in accordance with Saudi based and steered OIC's worldwide sharia declaration) are protected from scrutiny?

Do you feel comfortable with racist muslims? Especially when they are protected by state power, media power and general stupidity about what real Human Rights really mean. And you, the victim of muslim racism and/or sexism, are called an "islamophobe" if you dare open your mouth about it.

The only solution is to criminalize racist and sexist sharia that violates Human Rights.

How can anyone tolerate a supremacist ideology which has as its most sacred tenet that leaving it (apostasy) constitutes the worst of crimes?




Monday, March 11, 2019

Klevius question: Should muslim IS women who deliberately conceived children who then died, be charged with (possibly involuntary) manslaughter?


It seems evident that deliberately conceiving children for the Islamic State is pure child abuse. However, it also seems fulfilling criterion for manslaughter.



Child neglect is a form of child abuse, and is a deficit in meeting a child's basic needs, including the failure to provide adequate health care, supervision, clothing, nutrition, housing as well as their physical, emotional, social, educational and safety needs.

A child may be put in danger or not protected from physical or emotional harm.


If the female Islamic State muslims weren't raped, then...


Sunday, March 10, 2019

Is institutionalized sensitivity covering up muslim hate attacks against Jews and non-muslims?


To answer this, Klevius suggests checking if most of the rise in knife crimes after 2015 is islam induced (IS) and constitutes of Jewish and non-muslim victims.


That would be extremely easy statistically - yet overwhelmingly difficult if avoiding "islamophobia".


Policy "experts" (read cherry picked PC people) and criminologists* put the increase down to a combination of complex factors, and say longer-term public health-style approaches may be key to reducing serious violence.

Simon Harding, associate professor in criminology at the University of West London, says the rise is partly because of cuts to youth services and police community support officers (PCSOs).

* When Klevius wrote his groundbreaking thesis in criminology it was treated as something the cat had brought in and professor Jerzy Sarnecki's (frequently invited by public service broadcaster Swedish Radio to mislead the listeners with crime stats "explanations") only comment was that "at least we get 7,500 (Sw. Kr.) for it from the state". A thesis that was vehemently opposed from scratch, and when Klevius presented his research with perfect citations from the state's own propositions etc. professor Henrik Tham didn't believe that what Klevius had described had any practical weight in social work. And when Klevius then made a smart survey of all 18 social districts in Stockholm (by targeting the appropriate social workers by pretending to report child abuse/neglect - and then presented himself as a researcher) and 17 of them all reported that they were well aware of what Klevius was talking about and used it almost daily, then the criminology department at Stockholm University just got silent and Klevius felt treated like an outcast. Btw, the one district that didn't know, happened to be represented by a man (the others were all women) who was just temporarily in the position.

The idea to the thesis was partly based on professor in sociology Sven Hessle's report from Japan which showed that Swedish decisions on taking children into state care were mainly based on subjective (psychological) reason whereas in Japan they were based on objective ones. The cases Klevius studied in his own work as a solicitor were all based on "folk-psycholgy" clad in 'legitimation' labelled reports although the outdated psychodynamic concept had already been abandoned by theorists when it became a criterion for compulsory state custody of children. And this massive tool was hidden in a few lines in a many hundred pages proposition. Moreover, in the act itself it became hidden as the cryptic "something else in the family", i.e. apart from child abuse, child neglect etc.. Moreover, all of Klevius custody cases have lacked any indication of abuse or neglect by the parent/parents (usually a single mother). And when Klevius tried some of them in the European Court of Human Rights, he was told they fell outside 'the margin of appreciation'.

Who and why were these teenagers murdered? Hate crime?


The Police have no idea about the motive. Jodie Chesney and Yousef Ghaleb didn’t know each other, but they had a lot of common. The 17-year-olds both attended high school in big cities—London and Manchester, respectively. Friends and teachers described them as hardworking and ambitious students. And they both died last week from violent stabbings in public places, 24 hours apart.

In a statement, Scotland Yard said: “Jodie’s group were aware of two males in the park who left at around 9pm without interacting with Jodie or her friends.

The duo left but returned at 9.30pm wearing balaclavas and one of them, described by the Metropolitan Police as a young black male, stabbed Jodie once in the back, all without saying a word.
 
Police said the killer and an accomplice were spotted watching the five friends, who were socializing on Friday evening in a playground in Harold Hill.

Detective Chief Superintendent Shabnam Chaudhri, who is leading the police response to the murder in the local community, said on Monday afternoon: 'We still don't have any idea (why Jodie was attacked).'

She said investigators were 'focusing totally' on a witness appeal to try and track down the suspects. Police have asked anyone who may have CCTV or dash cam footage between 7pm and 11pm on March 1.

Ms Chaudhri refused to speculate on whether the attack could have been some form of gang initiation.

Klevius wonders whether "sensitivities" may hamper Shabnam Chaudhri's investigation and information about the case?