Saudi war crimes investgated by the Saudis
If China today became a full democracy (and even accepting full Human Rights) - nothing would change, because it's not the rulers but the high tech industry in China that outperforms the West. And unlike islam, China doesn't have tenets against Human Rights. However, islam is tied to its supremacist and sexist sharia tenets (OIC) which deny women full Human Rights - just the opposite to what is said in the anti-fascist Universal Human Rights declaration from 1948. If islam would accept full Human Rights it would not be islam anymore. China's economic expansion has been a non-aggressive big contributor to wealth around the world, but when China reached out its Belt and Road hand, then the West bit it and supported extremist muslim terrorists. Islam induced hate crimes and terror are based on a shared evil ideology (a global muslim collective rather than as nationals, which inspire and hail each other) - but because most are committed by lonely or gang muslims, and because police and media are told muslim "ethnicity" ought not to be revealed, then the public are kept unaware of most muslim hate crimes. How come that evilness is protected? The answer is in the question. To hide its original evilness. And how come that BBC and UK politicians dare to support islamofascism in Kashmir? Freedom from sharia for women in Kashmir!
* UK PM Theresa May opposed Human Rights.
Islam (represented in UN by Saudi based and steered OIC and its sharia called “islamic human rights”) is against Human Rights!
Sweden’s Supreme Court has found a man guilty of rape for having sex without explicit consent from a teenage woman who had been passive and gave no clear expression that she wanted to participate in the sexual acts. Lack of a partner’s spoken agreement or any other clear approval can hence be considered rape. However, islamic sharia gives a muslim man the "right" to have sex with wives and and concubines his "right hand possesses" (e.g. "infidel" girls/women). The neo-islamist rational (original openly supremacist islam didn't need one) is that "it satisfies the sexual desire of the female". Peter Klevius wonders if Swedish Courts will accept this reasoning - perhaps only for muslims?!
Peter Klevius also wonders whether BBC's leading presenter, the alcohol drinking and not Ramadan fasting, Pakistan rooted and Saudi raised muslim, Mishal Husain, approves of sharia?
In UK both Tories and Labour are against "islampohobia" - so apparently also against Human Rights? And if not, then they are "islamophobic" after all. So how do you vote for someone critical of islam's Human Rights violations if parties don't allow "islamophobia"? Is it democracy?
What do BBC and Jeremy Hunt have in common? Both support the islamofascist murderer and war criminal Mohammad bin Salman.
Peter Klevius: Girls' emancipation needs more football and less cricket, netball etc.
BBC's cricket propaganda is a slap in the face of young girls who need equally much moving around and spatial skills as young boys. However, there's a huge sex segregation in females motivation and access to football - not only the world's by far most popular physical sport, but also the only one that doesn't use tools or hands to handle the ball, and which makes all participants moving most of the time even without the ball. Moreover, the very nature of the sport forces participants to a never ending series of spatial and strategic challenges - with or without the ball and even while playing alone. So why is BBC so hostile to the Queen of sports (the "beautiful game") that is perfect for the physical and spatial development of girls - and in the face of the football loving majority who has to pay compulsory fees (and paying extra for football channels) to this faking regime propaganda media that uses stiff and lifeless colonial cricket for neo-colonial purpose?! England banned football for girls/women already 1921 and suggested cricket, land hockey and netball instead - almost like today except it's not called a ban. And what about the laughable notion of a "world cup" in cricket?! When is the "world cup" in caber tossing between Gotland and Scotland?
The murderous war criminal, Saudi muslim "custodian of islam" (and OIC) "prince" MBS is OK but Human Rights defender Peter Klevius isn't. Why?! Because the former isn't an "islamophobe", dude!
BBC thinks the militaristic Saudiphil Jeremy Hunt "is a safer option" as UK PM. What about you?
Racist Sinophobia disguised as "security" while muslim terror spreading Saudi murderous dictator and war criminal is "an important security ally"!?
Nothing in Primate/Haplorhini evolution came out of Africa - not even Africa (it was disconnected due to tectonics).
A “definition” of “islamophobia” ought to be balanced with a definition of muslim Human Rightsphobia.
"Diversity" without basic (negative) Human Rights is like having a car without steering - dangerous.
In its senseless and continuous "islamophobia" ranting BBC says to be 'muslim' is the same as to be 'English'. Klevius thinks not. A 'muslim' is one who wittingly or unwittingly adheres to what historical records show being the most evil enslaving ideology ever around (from a Human Rights perspective). And Klevius doesn't count as real muslims those who call themselves "cultural muslims" for the purpose of benefiting from a certain "ethnicity", or those who against their will are trapped in muslimhood because of the evil apostasy tenet in islam. And islamic "modesty" attires is a protected way of calling other women "whores".
The most serious threat to our Human Rights is the hate campaign against "islamophobia" which really is directed against Human Rights.
As long as most muslims in the world are ruled by a sharia (e.g. Saudi based and steered OIC) that gravely violates the most basic of Human Rights, and as long as the most devout muslims do the same by simply following original evil (according to Human Rights) islam, you can't legislate against criticism of islam without simultaneously legislating against Human Rights. Why do you want to hinder muslims from apostating? It's a Human Right! Islam should not be allowed to traumatize apostates. Authentic original (e.g. Wahhabi/Salafi) islam doesn't fit in the boots of "Euro-islam" and Human Rights.
Klevius suggests the UK baby should be named Muhammad. After all, according to BBC, the Queen is related to him and all politicians love islam. And several hadiths describe him as white (one even proposing the killing of anyone who says he was black). Only problem being that he then may be described as a white supremacist. Luckily the baby, according to BBC, is “mix-race”.
Klevius to EU voters: If you respect Human Rights - don’t vote for anyone who supports the islamofascist Saudi dictator family who spreads Human Rightsphobia via the Saudi based and steered OIC’s world sharia!
No true muslim can be fully human.
Why? Because islam's dividing the world in muslims and (not fully human) "infidels" makes it impossible. Only by fully accepting the basic (s.c. 'negative') Universal Human Rights equality - which islam can't accept (see e.g. Saudi based and steered all muslims world Ummah sharia organization OIC) without committing ideological suicide - can we meet every human as basically equal, in the same way as we can give every road-user a basic equality in traffic, i.e. we have traffic sense. So Klevius asks muslims whether they have "traffic sense"? And for all the rest of you - to be 'human' in a global sense can only be achieved by giving every human you meet basic equality - no matter how alien that human might feel to you. Because every human has the right to be "alien" and there can't even be any alternative to this as long as we don't accept brainwashed totalitarianism (see e.g. Klevius 1996 paper Angels of Antichrist). This is the only way to meaningfully talk about 'humankind'. And to alien hunters Klevius says you probably meet them every day already.
So when BBC and other fake media talk about xenophobia against muslims, they actually contribute to spread xenophobia themselves.
A "good muslim" is one who suppresses and distorts original islam so to fit Human Rights. However, some just pretend to do so - and some just continue hating the "infidel".
Peter Klevius to Greta Thunberg: Saudi salafist oil funded supremacist islam or Chinese Taoist (kindness) high tech - which one do you think is the real threat to the people and environmment in EU and the world?
Ultimate bigotry and hypocrisy – militant spying and war mongering 5 Eyes instead of true 5G?
Saudi hate spreading antennas (Salafi/Wahhabi mosques etc.) or Chinese world leading 5G tech? No one knows the amount of street etc. victims of Saudi hate because when the haters are muslims their attacks are not recorded as hate crimes. If a Chinese would attack shouting 'Tao' it would most certainly be classified as a hate crime. However, chances are slim that it ever occurs compared to hate attacks made by muslims.
Arabic (not "white" etc.) islam has been the by far biggest enslaver throughout 1,400 years. Islamic language imperialism via the Koran. And all races have been complicit in the muslim Koranic slave trade. So how do you distinguish between descendants of slaves or slave traders? Will Cambridge check today's "Caribbeans", "Africans" etc. about it? Klevius warns there might be unwelcomed surprises, e.g. that many of those who come to Europe are actually descendants of slave trading black Africans on whose wealth lineage top they are better privileged than those from slave lineages. And what about "whites" like Klevius who were cut off from any lineages? Should the skin color Klevius was born with be used against him because of the privileges of others with the same skin color? Same question may be asked about sexism. Klevius doesn’t see it fair to blame him for male sexism just because he happens tp be male, do you!
The real threat is the US led Saudi supporting spy organization 5 Eyes, which 1) tries to block superior tech, and 2) uses China as a scapegoat for US/UK privacy breaches. It's not China but US that wants to control you! So "securing 5G from Chinese influence" actually means giving US/UK a technical space for spying/influencing etc. In short, trying to hinder US/UK customers from accessing the best technology while spying on them.
Muslim terrorists get legal aid to stay in UK - EU nationals don't!
BBC collected a UKIP hating mob to shout "islamophobia" against islam criticism.
However, the very same BBC also willfully misleads people about islam so that most people in UK are completely unaware of that Saudi based and steered OIC and its extreme Human Rightsphobia is a world guide for (sharia) muslims. Moreover, BBC's top presenter (Mishal Husain) who seems to be muslim in name only (drinking alcohol, not fasting on Ramadan, no muslim attire, no Haji, no sharia, etc) so to dupe the public about islam.
The 1948 Human Rights declaration was created to protect against fascism. Accepting islam without a clear border against sharia that violates the most basic Human Rights, allows space for islamofascism (i.e. original supremacist islam).
However, the new fascist mob is shouting "islamophobia" because islam can't comply with it (compare Saudi based and steered OIC's sharia declaration against Human Rights). This smear is then "enhanced" by connecting it to murderers, Nazis, right wing extremists etc. Islam's sharia sexism and racist supremacism is the problem - so why is addressing it "bad"?!
BBC is also keen on silencing the only truly free media, i.e. bloggers etc. social media.
The crystal clear connection between the surge in knife, rape etc. attacks and islam - and its custodian, the islamofascist Saudi dictator family - is desperately silenced by BBC and politicians (BBC now tries to cover this up by airing long programs about "conventional" knife crimes instead). This means they are directly complicit, doesn't it. Klevius suggests boycotting BBC and Saudi bribed politicians. They constitute the worst security threat.
Peter Klevius evolution formula
Stop security cooperation with UK whose close connection to the the suspected murderer, war criminal and islamic terror spreading islamofascist Saudi custodian of islam, Mohammad bin Salman, constitutes the by far worst threat against the security of people in EU! Moreover, sharia islam (the only real islam for real muslims) which is a racist and sexist supremacist ideology that violates Human Rights, is supported by UK.
Don't let haters and Human Rightsphobes get away with it by calling themselves 'believers'!
Either religion is (grades of) supremacist hate and sexism and you better become an Atheist (and therefore universal human) - or you keep your "beliefs" for yourself. In traffic you can think what you want about other people, but you can't drive over them!
- and take responsibility for your own supremacist sharia, represented by Saudi based and steered all muslims world organization OIC, which violates the most basic Human Rights! And do note the difference between universal impositions and universal freedom! Full respect of the other rests on accepting her/his freedom. This is the only way of being universally human.
Islam is an evil* supremacist and divisive ideology - why isn’t this told by BBC, schools etc.?
* weighed against the anti-fascist, anti-supremacist, anti-racist and anti-sexist Universal Human Rights declaration of 1948 that all civilized people are supposed to build on. Islam doesn't fit these goals, so OIC (the legal world Umma steered from and by the Saudi dictator family) decided to replace them with medieval racist, sexist and supremacist sharia.
Article 24 of the Saudi based and steered OIC's sharia declaration (CDHRI) states: "All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Sharia." Article 19 says: "There shall be no crime or punishment except as provided for in the Sharia." CDHRI also fails to guarantee freedom of religion, in particular the right of each and every individual to abandon their religion, as a "fundamental and non-derogable right".
Article 10 of the Declaration states: "Islam is the religion of unspoiled nature. It is prohibited to exercise any form of compulsion on man or to exploit his poverty or ignorance in order to convert him to another religion or to Atheism." Since in Islamic society all reasons for conversion away from Islam are considered to be essentially either compulsion or ignorance, this effectively forbids conversion away from Islam.
CDHRI denies women equality with men by imposing "own rights" and "duties to perform".
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.
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?
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.
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.
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?
Negative Human Rights for a Positive Human Future
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.
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").
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 can no longer distinguish between the techniques of BBC and Nazi propaganda - can you!
Racist Theresa May is robbing EU citizens of their Human Rights
Support Klevius' Atheist anti-fascism against islamofascism
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".
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")!
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.
Sunday, May 23, 2010
How Klevius childhood friend turned into a monster: A kind & nice Finnish teenager who got lost in a series of moves which ended when his professor dad got a job at Uppsala University in Sweden at a time when lethal Marxist French Maoism was especially abundant. Later he visited me bragging abt Pol Pot & Co & "the important work for the peasants made by the Democratic Kampuchea", while I tried to explain how hard it was for a young outcast single poor father to get a decent home of your own in Finland if yo didn't possess massive funds &/or relatives - even if you, as I, were able to build it yourself but lacked the lot) . He (who was surrounded by wealthy relatives & in inheritance line for an abundance of property) even sent me photos of himself in the Cambodian jungles & fields.
Only later I realized the truth, and even then extremely reluctantly because massmurder/genocide & pure fascism were words that were almost impossible to affix on this timid & spartan chap with a long Santa Claus beard & a hobo outfit travelling on flip-flops.
Muslim born Mr X "president", the main puppet of Saudi Arabia/OIC/islam, is hailed for his skin color & "good" acting/speaking (what an actor Hollywood missed - much better than Ronald Reagan, isn't he). However, he also shares many characteristics of my ex-friend. Not only is he a victim of rootlessness (like my ex-friend), & hailed despite his effort to undermine the US Constitution by the stealthy introduction of islamic Sharia, but he is also actively applauding islam's past & present genocides. So how is his evilness connected to the average Joe?
Hitler is long since given a moral verdict & posthumously rightly sentenced. However, when is it time for his keen supporter average Fritz to make a stand, and, even more importantly, who are the average Fritzes of today, not only in Germany but throughout the world? And how many of them are just nice people cheated by propaganda?
Btw, whereas Mr X praised his absent father, my ex-friend used to spit on his present father. This latter attitude may be connected to the extremely common Swedish phenomenon of blaming parents in general & fathers in particular when turning to Marxism. To my knowledge my ex-friend has no kids of his own that he has taken care of. My own experience of having carried home & taken full care of some kids, I think, may have given me an advantage in assessing these issues compared to my ex-friend.
The Swedish Maoists were responsible for a main part of the Swedish state trafficking in foster children. Although this extremely anti-human "child protection" policy has long roots in Sweden (see Angels of Antichrist), it really took pace in the 1970's with the Maoist slogan "down with the family" which generated the world's perhaps most totalitarian "child protection" act LVU (see Klevius revealing thesis on how this fascistoid legislation was stealthy introduced behind all democratic principles but eagerly accepted by the greedy bureaucrats of the social state).
The main Swedish Pol Pot supporter was/is Jan Myrdal who, btw, is the son of Gunnar Myrdal, who extensively (but stupidly) wrote abt "the Negro problem in USA" & his notorious wife, Alva Myrdal, with whom he, in in the 1930's, laid the ground for the disgusting Swedish social state described by Klevius in Angels of Antichrist, Pathological Symbiosis, & a bunch of other articles etc.
After his disastrous failure in Kambodia my ex-friend turned (by the help of Swedish state sponsored leftist SIDA - who btw has been a keen supporter of my ex-friend's idol Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe) to Africa (Afrikagrupperna) where he has now spent some third of his entire life as a teacher. I guess he feels he's compensating for something. However, what's really the difference between him & a "colonialist" missionary except that he's more evil & might continue spreading support for fascism, now in the form of islam (I really don't know his stance abt islam). And he gets paid for it by those taxpayers he used to despise! Yes, it looks very nice when a well off communist white male hides his wealth under a white trash appearance, but always remember what Klevius has repeatedly emphasized. A timidly talking islamist murderer is usually more fashioned albeit at least equally evil & dangerous!
Klevius brief history lesson on the origin of islam
The origin of islam is purely evil in the sense that islam's main & only, truly islamic feature is parasitism (booty & sex jihadism followed by "imperialist" blood sucking). This complete lack of any positive feature in itself is very specific to islam compared to most other ideologies/religions.
Islam is piracy! Ever thought abt why piracy emerged at the same time & places as islam? Yes there has always been thieves & rapists etc but historically there is an undisputable emergence of a specific "piracy" movement initimately connetred to islamic Sharia slave finance!
Like Swahili in East Africa, Malay in South East Asia reflects islam's grim, ruthless 1400 year tradition of slave parasitism. When you eventually realize that by understanding islam you get a wonderful tool for understanding much medieval & later historical "mysteries", like for example, the Vikings, Catholicism, the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, the Atlantic slave trade, Africa's backwardness, Great Zimbabwe, the Rwanda genocide etc etc (all explained in Klevius A Roots Guide - which isn't allowed to be published because it could offend muslims - not to mention how it could offend islam), then you also realize the true meaning of Negative Human Rights & sex segregation (incl. the islamic initiation of Chinese footbinding etc)!
Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge was historically connected to the Khmer empire which was intimately connected with islam's early rooting in South East Asia. The disgusting creeping islamic/Arabic/Koranic slave raiding/trading system little by little paved the way for an expanding class of greedy local accomplices kidnapping/selling their own people, while the poorer ones turned muslims for the sole reason of (often in vain) trying to protect themselves from - yes, islam. Compare this to East Africa, only with the difference that the pre-islamic culture differed radically, hence resulting in such different monuments as Angkor & Great Zimbabwe!
No matter if we talk Chams or Gypsies or whatever grouping, the historical explanation to their misfortunes can only be understood when we understand islam - the one and only!
The historical understanding of the origin of islam & its expansion is best understood by the example of the Vikings & their slave trade with islam.
Klevius concluding question: How come that I (& other "islamophobes") who defend EVERY individuals Negative Human Rights, in general are treated as something that the cat has brought in while my ex-friend & other supporters of fascism/genocides etc are seen as decent people? I mean, it's a fact that top state & media positions in Sweden have been unproportinally populated with former Pol Pot supporters. I guess the same could be said abt BBC etc. So such an ideological background seems not to hinder a career in any sense, perhaps even boosts it.
However, if you "come out" as a critic of islam (the more serious/informed you are the more "islamophobic" you'll be treated) you're automatically excluded from almost every position available! You may be able to critisize "radical islam" or "islamism" or "fundamentalism" but never islam, of which there's "only one kind" according to the Turkish PM Erdogan. The one that can't be criticised - because the truth is assumed to be unbearable - which it's not, just look at the Nazi Holocaust, which has been openly disussed ever since!
Klevius, your unbiased & informed guide to islam
This is OIC, the islamofascist cancer of the world in the form of its evil leaders' evil influence on UN & world politics, girls/women's rights etc high above the heads of most of the population in OIC countries. However, the map lacks many of islam's atrocities throughout 1400 yrs!
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Vincent Akanmode: "Of course, there have been allegations that Yerima himself soiled his hands in the state‘s handling of a dam project financed by the Federal Government. But if Yerima‘s detractors think they can do him in with such minor acts of misdemeanour, or the allegation that he attempted to bribe the former chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission with N1 million on August 10, 2006, they are wasting their time. Any right-thinking individual would know that prompting four states to adopt the life-transforming code called Sharia is too big an achievement to be decimated by such peccadilloes. The people of Zamfara knew that much and rewarded their man with a seat at the Senate."
President Yahaya Jammeh (Gambia): “The disintegration of Nigeria means the end of Africa.”
World Peace Foundation: “How the north-south split on the use of the shari’a will be resolved, given its unconstitutionality,is unclear.” Moreover, “It was originally expected that the use of the shari’a would mean punishment for high-level embezzlers and other corrupt rulers. Unfortunately, that has not turned out to be the case; the governors of the twelve northern states that have introduced the shari’a for criminal matters since 1999 have done so as populists, not in order to clean up the pervasive official criminality in their states.”
Klevius comment: You can’t have a pact with the devil without some problems, can you!
Is "islamophobia" really the main problem for Africa?
Aishatu Umar (a representative of Nigeria’s - and Africa’s - islamist media idiots): It is unfortunate that nongovernmental organizations attack islam as part of islamophobia. This is caused by a conflict of ideology because people's cultures, religions and histories differ.
Klevius comment: They differ indeed! Especially islam. This is the very reason why it's so easy to point out islam as the worst crime ever against humanity. Yes, I know, I've always been lazy.
Aishatu Umar: Everyone has the right to his own belief
Klevius comment: Except in the homeland of islam & some other places!
Aishatu Umar: The trend today is that of submission to the greed and selfish aggrandizements of the Euro-American West and their Israeli allies.
Klevius comment: How is Israel connected to greedy muslim senators in Nigeria?
Aishatu Umar: Every human right activist must feel bad about these misdeeds (lesbians & gay etc people) but simply because these have to do with their selfish interests they do not make any issue of it.
Klevius comment: Whose selfish interest is it to downplay muslim pedophilia & sexism?
Aishatu Umar: Definitely, the trend around the world today is that of trying to use people's weakness to discredit Islam and Muslims in order to keep their corrupt civilisation alive.
Klevius comment: In whose interest is it to discredit non-muslims & "the West"?!
Aishatu Umar: What they (the “Euro-American West and their Israeli allies”) define as civilization is whatever they are into and those they refer to as civilised are those that enslave themselves to their monopoly.
Klevius comment: Talking abt "enslaving oneself to monopoly". Isn't that a definition of islam?!
Aishatu Umar: This unfortunate trend has given a new meaning to ethics and morality. They (the “Euro-American West and their Israeli allies”) respect moral misfits (i.e. homosexuals, lesbians, unmarried women etc).
Klevius comment: Did you hear that Elena Kagan?
Aishatu Umar: The worst part is that they (the “Euro-American West and their Israeli allies”) have even legalised same-sex marriage, even protect what they (the “Euro-American West and their Israeli allies”) assert are the rights of those who engage in it. This perversion of marriage is a practical violation of the rule of creation, and it even violates the concept of biology but it is okay with Western concept of civilization.
Klevius comment: Should it be understood then that when islamic rapetivism has resulted in enough pregnancies the islamic "perversion of marriage" gets a green card & stops being a perversion? Or perhaps OIC has already managed to persuade UN to acceot polygamy, pedophilia, sex apartheid & the violation of girls' & women's Human Rights as a new moral standard for the world?
Aishatu Umar: It is only when a 52-year-old prince in Saudi Arabia marries a 12-year-old girl that they remember they have work to do; or when a Sharia activist (muslim senator Alhaji Ahmad Muhammad Sani) in Nigeria is married to a 14 year old girl (Klevius commet: The girl, who was bought as a sex slave in a pious islamic tradition, was actually no more than 13 and most probably younger at the time of marriage) that they begin to mobilise their forces to attack his personality at the legislature. This tells a lot about their one-sidedness and partiality.
Klevius comment: One-sidedness indeed! I've always wondered why they don't talk more abt the origin of islam, hence revealing the true ideological nature of the "religion", i..e. in accordance with historical records - not in accordance with Koran! Instead of naively repeating that "this isn't islam". According to senator Alhaji Ahmad Muhammad Sani he didn't violate Nigerian law because he just followed the islamic Sharia he himself had introduced - just as the desert robber Mohammed 1400 year earlier. Moreover, the muslim senator's behavior is extremely common in sex segregated Nigeria! Only that in the Sharia parts of the country it's even legal!
Aishatu Umar: Why are they (the “Euro-American West and their Israeli allies”) against legal marriage between a 52 year old Saudi man and a 12 year old girl but in support of sex abuse of young boys by a man? Also why are they (the “Euro-American West and their Israeli allies”) against legal marriages between men and teenage girls but in support of same-sex marriages and gay activities? This is most irrational.
Klevius comment: Had no idea they were in support of pedophiles. My impression is that, except for the Pope & the Catholic church, no one in the West applaudes or silences sex abuse of young boys by men.
Aishatu Umar: In Euro-American societies (does it incl “Israel & its allies”?), social problems present the worst control problems. These include calamities like lesbianism and homo-sexuality. These trends have automatically been controlled by the Islamic systems.
Klevius comment: Indeed.
Aishatu Umar: It is now left for the Nigerian Muslims to be informed by the legislature the type of Islam the Nigerian constitution allows the Muslims to practice. If they accept it then they quit the Islam prescribed by God Almighty and practice the one prescribed by the Nigerian constitution.
Klevius suggestion: Maybe you should start seriously considering whether 1400 yrs of Arabic/islamic slavery/genocides/rapetivism might have something to do with the fact that Africa is the most backward continent!
Yes, wealthy Bantu's enslavement of non-Bantus (& weaker Bantus) started before islam. That's precisely why it was so easy for Arab islamists to drain the continent by the additional aid of an excusing immorality institutionalised in an Arabic book copied from the Jews (btw, Arabic Jews had already since long paved the way for a small scale East African slave trade before the introduction of systematic Sharia finance slavery in accordance with Koran).
Klevius concluding question to YOU: How many are islam's victims throughout 1400 yrs?
Read history instead of Koran, and when you're dome with your puking join the fast growing community of islam critics before it's criminalized by OIC, UN & your own legislators!
Klevius' blogs/sites are the only ones fully informed & unbiased addressing sex segregation as the root cause of islam.
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
History reversed: Jews & Catholics make up 100% of US Supreme Court, while UK gets rid of its last religious/socialist PM!
* Remember that the word "Atheist" is so heavily charged via its US association with Communism, that US stats using this word may be completely misleading. This fact is weighed in here, as is the amount of Atheists in comparative countries.
also see Klevius Definition of Religion
Atheism is neither "a position compatible with other forms of identity" (as proposed by charlatan Wikipedia) nor is it part of communism/socialism! Whereas godism, communism, socialism etc. are positive ideologies, Atheism is a negative response to an unfounded belief presented in the form: "If you don't believe what I believe then you're a denier of my belief!"
A non-believer in ghosts isn't an identity either, nor is a ghost "hunter" necessarily a believer in ghosts but just the contrary.
Supreme Court in defense of "god"
In 2002 US Supreme Court ruled that Michael Newdow did not have standing to point out that the wording "one nation under God" violated the Establishment Clause of the Constitution's 1st Amendment, which prohibits the enactment of any law or official policy in support of a religion, thus disposing of the case without ruling on the constitutionality of the pledge. This is btw the same judicial tactics that made it impossible to question the legality of Mr X "president"!
Moreover, the phrase "under God" was not originally in the Pledge of Allegiance, but added in 1954 during the Cold War. 1960 the phrase “In God We Trust” began appearing on US not.
The Pope: The greatest sin may have occured inside the Catholic Church"!
Klevius comment: Indeed, although pedophilia is a great sin, the worst sin of the Catholic Church is the transmission of evil fundamentalist Judaism, now in the form of its support for islam. This is the more ironic since post-Roman Catholicism got its initial power as an outcome of Europe's defense against an attacking islam.
And of course Israel is the main problem. With some half of the "Jews" being Atheists, what could be more disturbing for fundamentalist monotheisms?!
71% of British men do not believe in any "god"!
So it's perfectly representative that the new PM David Cameron says: "I think that it's perfectly possible to live a good life without having faith, by which I mean a positive and altruistic life. - I do think that organised religion can get things wrong...”, and that his deputy Nick Clegg is an Atheist.
These facts & the miserable religious swamp in which the US is now about to drown by the help of a Jewish/Catholic Supreme Court & a muslim born "Christian" "president", may be contrasted to the situation when the USA was born as a result of the mass escape from a similar religious swamp in the country of origin!
Sunday, May 09, 2010
Mohammed & the Enlightened World
An islamophobe (left) & a studious muslim mass murderer (right)
According to an idiot named Michael O. Powell, “gorgeous, incredible, articulate and intelligent Ayaan Hirsi Ali is brilliant” when she states that “Another idea is to do stories of Muhammad where his image is shown as much as possible.”
But in that very same piece Michael O. Powell also says “Being offensive or derogatory to Muslims is not a good thing, and I’ll condemn anyone who does so”!?
Klevius comment: Makes no sense, does it! Wasn’t that what it was all about?! Being offensive or derogatory to muslims by publishing as many images of Mohammed as possible?!
Ayaan Hirsi Ali also says: “But if you compare the reaction of Christians to what is written about Christianity – Richard Dawkins, who’s a supporter, says religion is a form of madness – whereby Christians just shrug their shoulders and don’t respond. If you compare the way Muslims take offence at perceived insults that are not insults, but are just a critical way of looking at their religion, then I start to ask myself, why are Muslims so hypersensitive to criticism and why don’t they do anything with it except to respond by denying it or playing the victim? And I’ve come to the conclusion it’s because of the gradual indoctrination – from parents, teachers – that everything in the Qur’an is true; Muhammad is infallible, you have to follow his example and defend Islam at all times, at all costs. Instead of going along as most people are doing now and saying, OK, let’s refrain from criticising Islam, let’s refrain from calling Islamic terrorism Islamic, I think we should do the opposite.”
Hollywood's & Roosevelt's approach to Germans/Nazis
In nn alliance between Hollywood and the Roosevelt administration soldiers would be
fighting against a “demonic enemy” not the German people as a nation. The officers/regime, not the people, was responsible for the actions of Germany. However, where was the people's responsibility for choosing to follow & support the Nazi (more accuratelu Nationalsocialist) ideology?!
The root cause of Western appeasement of islam, the worst ideological crime known to history
Klevius answer: Islam is the most evil form of original Judaism! Original Judaism rested on racist/sexist violence/rapetivism against the weaker, & slavery became its main currency. When the world eventually met with itself (Enlightenment) these racist/sexist values became out of fashion due to the realization of Negative Human Rights! So there's no "clash between civilizations" simply because a parasite on civilizations can never be a civilization itself! However, when the ideology eventually met with the individual, the quantity of the former sometimes manages to obscure the quality of the latter.
See Why Enlightenment crushes Sharia
(intellectual copyright Peter Klevius)
Friday, May 07, 2010
Why did Mr X "president" pick an islamist idiot to represent the free world in front of islamofascist OIC?!
Why didn't anyone think abt using a Nazi who could recite Mein Kampf by hearth as the free world's representative to the Nazis?!
Rashad Hussain, the state of the art example of muslim ignorance (yes I know I'm flattering him, it would be rude to imply deliberate intent, wouldn't it)
Mr X "president's" pick, Sharia enthusiast Rashad Hussain has convincingly proven he's an idiot by attempting to connect his "Allah" with the "Big Bang". May impress on Soros but not on informed people! Not that they aren't related, on the contrary, they're of course the same. Only they don't have anything to do with Universe! Contrary to Universe, "Allah", "Donald Duck", "Creation", "Big Bang" etc. are linguistic inventions. If Rashad Hussain isn't a complete idiot (and why should he - no one's complete) he might understand that Donald Duck doesn't exist. If so, then why on earth does he think that the far more absurd "Big Bang" existed?! No serious grown up believe in a term used as a stupid allegori for kids & ignorant adults (such as media people etc). Where dit it "bang" & how could it "bang" if it was alone? Or was it the truly primordial muslim turban bomb that damaged "Allah's" head in the first place & to an extent that could explain why islam throughout 1400 yrs constitutes the worst crime ever against humanmity? The childish view that there's some sort of "fixated universe" out there that somehow corresponds to our experience of its different waves from a myriad of different "times" & "places" is the naive birthplace of concepts such as "absolut beginning", "creation" etc. (for a discussion abt the latter concept see e.g. Klevius 1992 in Demand for Resources).
Btw, one of the stupidiest remarks on islam goes something like this:
"Does anyone really believe that radicals (i.e. muslims - remember there's only one islam according to Turkey's islamist PM & other nut heads!) in islam have the power to turn everyone into followers of their jihadist view?
Klevius comment: Well da, the "only islam's" only power source (except for sex segregation/rapetivism) is it's jihadist part!
OIC, a fast growing malign cancer
Wednesday, May 05, 2010
Where exactly in Pakistan did Mr X change from Barry to Barack? And why have all the worst US presidents been democrats*?
Mr X "president" respects Sharia & islam. Moreover, he's a born muslim & hence cannot Sharia-lawfully get rid of it. And even more, as a muslim he violates the US Constitution of freedom by "representing" it! Islamic Sharia is the absolute opposite to the Negative Human Rights which constitute the backbone of the US Constitution as well as the UN Human Rights Declaration from 1948, which was aimed as a bullwork against evil ideologies such as National-socialism, communism & islam!
Some horror examples of democratic presidents:
Truman took the decision to terror bomb two entire civilian Japanese cities with nuclear bombs! Not once but twice hence a democratic US president became the first & so far only one in the world to have used nuclear weapons of mass destruction!
Kennedy was the president who really started the Vietnam war!
Mr X "president" Barry (original name given to him by his father) Barack (during his Paki trip) Obama (his muslim dad) Dunham Soetoro (or whatever) is the "president" that has opened up for islamic Sharia in the US!