While Trump in a couple of days eases tension between super powers, Theresa May hasn't after half a year figured out what Brexit means.

However, Theresa May "knows" that the Brits need more sharia and less "islamophobia"

With these "allies" she certainly isn't "islamophobic" - but how many Brits (incl. non-sharia "muslims") share her view? And what about the economy?

Trump talks to Russia but May (and BBC) wants confrontation with the world's second military and space super power - although only 12th in financial power. However, how wise is it to prefer confrontation instead of cooperation with the world's largest country with endless resources yet to be explored and utilized - starting with its strategic position between China and EU/UK.

India buys six times more technological products from China than it manages to sell. What would May like to import? Gems, clothing, chemicals or perhaps students - incl. some 15-20% muslim ones. Is that what the Brits wanted with Brexit - more muslim immigration?

Budget > Revenues:   
India  $172.10 billion Ranked 23th.    
Russia $416.80 billion Ranked 12th.   

On the foreign debt list UK is among the worst hit. Does May need a better financial advisor!

Is defending the most basic Human Rights against islamofascist sharia all that's needed to be classified as "right-wing extremist" and "islamophobe"?

Nowadays defending the most basic of Human Rights against islamofascist sharia totalitarianism seems to be enough to be labeled "far right". And if you happen to be too pale to classify as "colored", you will automatically be labeled "white supremacist" on top of it. Not to mention if you're a man and older than thirty and - God forbid - a deplorable non-zo ialist Atheist without any other moral guidance than the crazy thought about equality for all - incl. women.

The dirty gray zone of islam - created by PC "diversity" and "islam is a great relgion" and "that's not islam" and "there's only one islam"rhetoric - is the open gate to Koranic sharia fascism, racism and sexism.

Who is more "koranic"? BBC's muslim sharia presenter Saudi raised Mishal Husain, who doesn't fast on Ramadan but rather drinks some alcohol etc., or the Saudi sponsored Islamic State and Saudi based and steered muslim world organization OIC with its basic Human Rights violating sharia declaration in UN? Do they all fit in islam? And if not, who has to go?

Mishal Husain: My way of life under no threat. Klevius: Thanks to Human Rights - not sharia!

According to Google 'racist muslims' don't exist - only "islamophobes".

Klevius question: Who created these "muslim communities" which are so extremely "sensitive"? And how come that muslims are always "targeted by "islamophobes" but never the other way round? And all these attacks by muslims around the world shouting "allahu akbar" and trying to stab people's necks etc?

When is it right for non-muslims to be offended?

Or why not do as Klevius has proposed since 9/11: Criminalize every Human Rightsophobic muslim who is racist and sexist based on a fascist koranic sharia ideology that violates the civilized idea about Human Rights equality. Because those "muslims" who share Human Rights equality pose no risk at all - except for islam's own survival of course.