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

Jacob Rees-Mogg, UK's top far right religious extremist, hates Human Rights and laughs at Germans

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

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").

"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.

Klevius 1979: Human Rights rather than religion

Klevius 1979: Human Rights rather than religion

BBC (imp)lies that 84% of the world is "monotheist" although most people are A(mono)theists

BBC (imp)lies that 84% of the world is "monotheist" although most people are A(mono)theists

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.

Klevius 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).

Racist Theresa May robs EU citizens of their Human Rights

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

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

Sharia finance is locked to islamofascism against Human Rights

Sharia finance is locked to islamofascism against Human Rights

UK's security pact with the Devil himself

UK's security pact with the Devil himself

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

The islamofascist Saudi dictator family spreading its hate and losses over you

The islamofascist Saudi dictator family spreading its hate and losses over you

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

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

Tuesday, November 21, 2017
Today England's parliament vote between islamofascist sharia and Human Rights - without even mentioning sharia. Shame on you England, to even have to vote about it!

While Theresa May tries to pave the way for islamofascist Saudi friendly sharia by trashing Human Rights, BBC fills its news with the suffering of Rohyngia muslims - without a word about the Saudi backed muslim terrorist attacks against Buddhists that preceded it.

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".

Theresa May's sharia = >23,000 jihadi - before Brexit. How many after?

Theresa May's sharia = >23,000 jihadi - before Brexit. How many after?

Theresa May's secret security pact with Saudi Sunni islamofascists is divisive

The earliest truly modern human skull was found in Liujiang/China.

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

UK DID NOT vote Brexit. EU residents weren't allowed to vote while non-EU residents were.

The islamofascist Saudi dictator family is the root of most islam induced suffering

The islamofascust Saudi dictator family spreads Koranic hate over the world and commits war crimes

Prince Charles blames Saudi atrocities in Mideast etc. on "European populists like the Nazis"

Prince Charles blames Saudi atrocities in Mideast etc. on "European populists like the Nazis"

While Klevius is forcing islam into a Human Rights corner, Obama continues supporting islamofascism

The "Birmingham Koran" hoax - and a sonless "prophet" invented after it!

Homo Naledi - and a late "West" hating lawyer relative. A judge for May?

BBC lies and fake news

Lego won't sponsor the defense for Human Rights equality - but islamofascism and sharia is ok

Apostate (?) Obama's bio- and adoptive dads were both muslims

Choudary and May both want more sharia and less Human Rights - so what about Brits?

Islam is the hide-away for racist/sexist supremacists

Nazi-muslim cooperation: Audi then built by Jewish slaves - today dangerous quality problems

Japan 10 yrs ahead of Europe ln hybrid/fuelcell cars, space tech etc

God is bad semantics - Science is good math

Origin of Goths and Vikings

The world's oldest real portrait ever found (Central Europe). Carvings dated to 26-29,000 bp.

From tropical island SE-Asia to cold and protein/fat rich Northern Eurasia - and over the world

Origin of islam: Sharia slave finance and sex apartheid

Muslims and Hillary against Human Rights

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

Sharia restricts Human Rights and promotes supremacism (drawing 1979 and photo 2012 by P. Klevius).

"Allah" is man made racist/sexist interpretation against Human Rights

Muzzammil Hassan (the man on the pic who receives award from the influential islamofascist US organization CAIR-PA's Chairman Iftekhar Hussain and CAIR National's Chairman Parvez Ahmed) founded Bridges TV "to correct misconceptions about islam in America". He then stabbed his divorcing wife nine times and decapitated her in accordance with islamic Sharia tradition in the premises of Bridges TV. Being a believing muslim he was leniently sentenced only for second degree murder for this gruesome islamic honor killing.

Contrast these scumbags against those (incl. Klevius) who relentlessly volunteer for spreading knowledge about Human Rights and are called "islamophobes" simply because islam doesn't submit to Human Rights (this is why the islamofascist organization OIC has openly abandoned Human Rights and replaced them with islamofascist Sharia).

Klevius is probably now the world's foremost expert on sex segregation (sad, isn't it) and islam (the worst hate cime ever) is the most evil expression of sex segregation. By 'islam' Klevius means Sharia as described by Bill Warner and as adopted by OIC in their Human Rights violating Saudi initiated Cairo declaration (Sharia) from 1990 which replaces Universal Human Rights for women and non-muslims with sexism and racism! Why? Because it's the very soul and origin of islam which wouldn't survive if applied to full Human Rights!

When will this disgusting web troll called Ms Lucy Black be prosecuted?!

The islamic extermination of the Jews

Burn OIC's islamic anti-Human Rights declaration!

Samantha Lewthwaite, Mishal Husain and Michael Adebolajo have sharia islam in common

The distinct art tracks of the first truly modern humans

Iceage refuges were rooted in Eurasiatic - IE came much later

Klevius altruistic virtual volunteering in defense of Universal Human Rights

Ferrari is a poor quality but expensive Fiat

Ferrari is a poor quality but expensive Fiat

Wednesday, February 14, 2018

Is UK EU's main security threat? UK's Br?exit "vote" was unconstitutional (UK lacks a modern democratic constitution) and without known content. And only England barely voted .

* A vote of such dignity as questioning a country's democratically agreed on constitutional status as an EU member state, is a given candidate for an informed (i.e. not without stated meaning) vote with usually 2/3 majority (and possibly even repeated). The "British" Br?exit vote was a dangerous joke from the perspective of civilized democracy. England lacks a functioning constitution - not to mention that it also lacks a constitutional court. "UK" is a sloppy old creation based on England's institutional colonization of a Scotland that was on the brink of bankruptcy many hundred years ago.

A referendum result is democratically legitimate only if voters can make an informed decision.

The Br?exit question assumed a binary choice — Remain or Leave the EU — while voting theory warns that allowing only two options can easily be a misleading representation of the real choice. When the true situation is more complex, and especially if it is one that arouses strong passions (especially by playing the race card against EU citizens), then reducing the question to a binary one might suggest a political motivation. As a result we actually don’t know how people would have voted when they had been offered the true options - comparable with when they joined EU (the Maastricht treaty which was open for everyone to see and hear about).


Frank Gardner is BBC's plaster when the islamofascist Saudi dictor families terror links around the world and war crimes in Syria and Yemen etc. need some silencing and calming down of BBC's in deep ignorance kept listeners who not only have to pay a compulsory fee for being fed with worse propaganda than Goebbels managed, but also to give all their personal details if they want to listen to BBC later on the web. Why?






UK didn't vote Br?exit. However England barely did so with the help of "British" non-UK/non-EU citizens while EU citizens weren't allowed to have a say about their own status in what is legally and democratically their country of home. UK citizens within EU are still within EU and protected by Human Rights. EU citizens in England are not.

People need to claim back legal right to democratic representation and
preventing the anti democratic and Human Rightsphobic  dark forces which are against democracy and nurtured by playing the race card against EU citizens and Human Rights.


The strange racist cooperation between museum items from Eton/Oxford and what Hillary would call "deplorable" "British" EU haters. And all for Sunni muslim Arab billionaire dictator families who have been behind most of the world's security breaks after WW2 - not the least on a low profile (i.e. hidden as "sensitive") street level jihad.


Human Rightsphobe Jacob Rees-Mogg is either incredibly dumb when it comes to democracy and the role of the individual and basic (negative) Human Rights -
 or alternatively, he is deliberately using methods not distinguishable from fascism.

Klevius seems to have been wrong when he noted in his article 'Social Democracy and the Rights of the Individual' (1993) that state socialism is the main opponent to individual (negative) Human Rights. But Klevius excuse is that he thought fascism died 1945 - and was ultimately erased by the 1948 Universal Human Rights Declaration.

Little could Klevius imagine Saudi based and steered OIC sharia against Human Right taking over UN and figures like Jacob Rees-Mogg taking over in the English parliament - and eagerly of course supported by BBC.


.

Tuesday, February 06, 2018

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

BBC's deeply bigoted and hypocritical* muslim sharia presenter Mishal Husain is a disgrace and insult to women's liberation movement.

* She doesn't fast during Ramadan and she drinks alcohol and isn't bothered by fulfilling muslim traditions and says she sees no threat to her way of living (thanks to "Western" Human Rights, reminds Klevius)  - which is a deep insult to all her suffering muslim sisters in sharia ruled countries and ghettos around the world and in England.


Why is BBC using their deeply bigoted and hypocritical muslim sharia presenter, Pakistan rooted and Saudi raised Mishal Husain spreading lies about suffrage? By defending islamic sharia, which violates women's most basic Human Rights, Mishal Husain contributes to violations against women's Human Rights.


Those very Human Rights that guarantee women equality with men, are denied by Mishal Husain's own religion via Saudi based and steered OIC's worldwide sharia declaration in UN.

Drawing (1979) and photo by Peter Klevius.

Klevius: There's no British empire anymore - so why pretend when it just hurts you and covers your beautiful side? Get rid of the racist/sexist dark forces within your team for a much better performance.


Finland was much earlier than "the British" not only in being first in the world to give women full suffrage, but has since constantly been a much more progressive and developed* country than the "country" called England (England, as you know, belongs to UK).

Klevius apologizes for his tone but wants to defend himself by referring to the pompostrous belittling "Brits" show against other countries/people. Klevius thinks the "Brits" could greatly benefit themselves by lowering their tail.

Klevius at his countryside house 1993 (with internet, computers with flight simulators and 3D games, mobile phones - NMT, ie Nordic Mobile Telephone - etc.) with his already old communication tools - at a time when average people in England lived in a communication stone age compared to the Nordic countries (no wonder Linux was invented by a Finland-Swede and not a "Brit"). And Klevius wasn't rich - that's why he used old stuff. Btw, this was the same year Klevius published The Social State and its Daughters. Klevius already used the same car when filming in DDR and dealing with Human Rights issues in Strasbourg. The Japanese car had no problem pacing way over 200 km/h for almost a whole day in both West Germany as well as on DDR's Autobahns from the Nazi era. Only trouble being all the smelling Trabants with a top speed of at most 70 km/h. Not even The Grand Tour guys can repeat the feeling of such passing of kilometer long cues of small smelly noisy plastic cars in the right lane in their own inflicted cloud of poisonous oil smoke - usually with a smoking guy at the wheel. Luckily most of them passed each other within their own lane.


Already 1907 19 women were elected MPs in Finland. Some of them on this picture from the same year.

In Finland in 1906 both women and men were given the right to vote and stand for election. Finland was first in the world to allow women as parliamentary candidates, and the first to adopt universal suffrage. 1907 19 women were elected as members of the Finnish parliament of a total of 200 representatives. Norway granted voting rights to women in 1913 but it took a long time before they came even close to Finland in numbers of female representatives. And do note the difference between female representatives voted in under discriminatory laws (i.e. only certain upper class women) not in line with full suffrage.

Women were not eligible to be appointed to the New Zealand Legislative Council (the Upper House of Parliament) until 1941. The first two women (Mary Dreaver and Mary Anderson) were appointed in 1946.

In 1965, Queensland in Australia became the last state to remove restrictions on Indigenous voting in state elections, and as a consequence all Indigenous Australians in all states and territories had equal voting rights at all levels of government.

England (under UK*) got full sufftage 1928.

* England is dependent on UK, i.e. not fully a country on its own and much less so than EU member states who can't meddle inside their respective parliaments.

Sunday, February 04, 2018

The moral decline of England - and the darkness under the cliff edge


Are the English about to be lured onto a racist/sexist Saudi sharia path away from democracy and Human Rights?


This heroic woman from Yemen gets little attention from far right Brexiter extremists and BBC.
BBC is far more interested in muslim Uyghurs and muslim Rohingyas than muslim Yemenis. If you check BBC News "reporting" you will easily see that it's all about what is best for the islamofascist Saudi dictator family.


Is China unwittingly becoming the world's main defense for Human Rights? Who could have guessed? Not BBC, that's for sure.


China has vowed to crack down on the "three evils" of terrorism, separatism, and religious extremism. I.e. same agenda as Theresa May - except that May also includes "far right extremism". And Jacob Rees-Mogg ticks all the boxes.

Yes, there are racists in all populations, and yes, they aer easily turned on by playing the race card. But does it belong to civilized democracy? Klevius doesn't think so.

No civilized country would even dream about having a "referendum" on something unknown to be decided once and for all by two percent of a part of that country.

Klevius has always wondered how Germany could slip to fascism. However, the example of England today siding with the world's most intolerant "country" and its sharia islamofascism, seems to give a clue.

UK (aka the so called "British") is an unconstitutional undemocratical mess now utilized by dark religious Human Rightsphobic forces moving towards fullblown fascism.

No one knows what UK really means. And no wonder when there's no foundation.

EU rescued UK but what about the future?

The "Brits" (i.e. the racist nationalists without a proper nation* of themselves) say they will lead the world - but towards what - and how? Without functioning brains in the lead and without a moral foundation.

* England and Scotland are both hampered by each other as nations - only that the former has more say over the latter. And they aren't states either. The Treaty of Union was the agreement Scotland accepted 1707 under the threat of going bankruptcy that led to the creation of the strange and diffuse creature called United Kingdom. It wasn't a masterpiece of jurisprudence back then, and is now far beyond any acceptable modern frameworks of democracy. Klevius guess is that, apart from pure financial gains, what still keeps it alice is an equally outdated feeling of colonial nationalism under the more pompous name "British" - which actually goes back long before the British empire, meanaing Bretagne of France, i.e. The Isles of Bretagne. No wonder Macron smiled.

BBC's eager boosting of nostalgic nationalist "British pride" (while simultaneously wholehartedly paving the way for sharia fascism) the fighters against fascism seem themselves to mutate to what they use to fight against. How else could we possibly interpret the strange fact that a pathetic clown from the 18th century is seen as a possible Tory leader/PM?

Jacob Rees-Mogg is just the top of a far right extremist wing in the Tory party which leans towards sharia finance and therefore Saudi Arabia.
  
Klevius hint for analyzing the main tumor and its metastases. Just check who stay in the way for the spread of Saudi influence in Mideast (Russia), or alternatively, who might compete in dealing with Arab states (China), and the result is a copy of BBC's extremely biased and cherry picked "news" agenda.

Keeping the world's muslims hostage via sharia finance and a piece of a meteorite, and US hostage via threat against petro dollar. And England, who created this monster, sacrifices not only basic Human Rights (which are illegal in Saudi Arabia) but also any other moral aspect on the fact that Saudi spread sharia islamic hate mongering against "infidels", is continuously attacking people in UK.

Klevius advise pic for curing your ignorance about islam and Saudi Arabia. Learn it by heart!


Klevius World Factbook: How did Saudi Arabia become the world's most evil moral cancer? 1. The racist/sexist origin if islam was an Arab bandit gang raiding, enslaving and taxing oasises along old slave routes, and kept together by a "religion" that was based on Jewish/Christian texts and which was then tailored to "justify" Arabic language imperialism and the declaring of non-Arab speakers (Allahu's messenger Gabriel allegedly spoke in Arabic to an other "messenger" called Mohammad who couldn't read or write but produced scores of daughters and not a single son) as "infidels" who could be slaughtered, enslaved, raped, taxed, humiliated etc..
2. UK meddling in Mideast and making of a local warlord ally a "king" and "custodian of islam's holy places". 3. US oil exploration bringing huge wealth to the Saudi war lord family. 4. The 1974 petro dollar treaty between US and Saudi Arabia. 5. The 1990 creation of the Cairo declaration (aka sharia) and bringing it into UN via a muslim voting block led by Saudi steered and based OIC. 6. US fear of loosing the petro dollar. 7. Brexit.

By demolishing the real threat of original islamic teachings in a similar way as the islamofascist Human Rightsphobic Saudi dictator family demolished any possible remains from early islam (except a small black pre-islamic meteorite stone now glued together with other pieces and kept at a huge Saudi built black building as a muslim idol), a path to reform (i.e. ending) original evil islam - i.e. so called "Westernized non-extremist islam". However, in doing so the sharia part of islam has inevitably to be replaced with those very basic Human Rights it opposes (compare OIC) and which are now considered terrorist crimes in Saudi Arabia and other muslim nations.

Btw, Iran isn't an Arabic country and islam is just a thin frail theocratic filter on the Iranians. In fact one could say that upholding/supporting an all encompassing "religion" that at its core has Arabic language imperialism, is treason.

England is fast going down the moral sewer cheered by Jacob Rees-Mogg and his racist nationalist (without a proper nation) far right Brexiter extremists.


And playing the race card against EU citizens has proven successful among racists in England. BBC: "...non UK people who live here...". This quote from BBC News really illustrates it. They of course knew that "UK people" included the strange and imprecise "Brits" but not EU citizens living in England.


BBC also doesn't miss a single opportunity to fake a story that fits Saudi sharia islamofascism, the worlds leading Human Rights violator. But BBC has no problem complaining over "lack of Human Rights" for Uyghur muslim jihadi.

However, the very fact that China isn't a monotheist theocracy, and that China so successfully has managed by peaceful manufacturing and trading to not only empower its own population but also more poor people around the world than any other nation has done so far, means that China also unwittingly protects vasic Human Rights around the world than most other countries - and certainly more than the spreaders of islamic anti Human Rights hate.

BBC using muslims in general to boost Saudi sharia islamofascists in particular - and often by referring to muslim's Human Rights, i.e. to those very right which are criminalized in Saudi Arabia.


When a derailed and mentally disturbed alcoholic who initially had planned to drive over Jeremy Corbyn, runs his van over a muslim already lying ill on the ground and allegedly dying from the injuries rather than his initial health problem, two other muslims jumped or where pushed aside by the van. However, BBC reported day after day in long sequences (do note that the opposite is true if it had neen a muslim attacker) it as "far right extremist terrorist drove over a crowd of war-shipping muslims leaving one dead and twelve injured". How come? Well, nine of them were injured while they attacked the driver and tried to kill him until an imam from a nearby mosque stopped them. And BBC also forgot to mention that it's a crime to try to kill someone who is already restrained. These muslims, most of who got very minor injuries in the attempted lynching of the mentally ill driver, will now be awarded similar compensation as the victims of the muslim terrorist attacks, instead of facing a court.


Through the unconstitutional Britisharia Brexit gate towards Human Rights violating islamofascism


England voted Brexit - UK did not.

Of course the slim Brexit vote of 2016 needs a follow up vote - by the parliament or the people.

Only England voted to leave EU. And did so with the smallest of margin. Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to stay with a much higher margin.

And EU citizens living in the UK weren't even alloved to vote about their own legally settled EU country of choice. A choice made under UK law.

However, non UK citizens from other parts of the world were alloved to vote.

Also, the very foundation for the Brexit vote was completely lacking. Klevius has never heard about a civilized European country that has voted completely in the dark on a groundbreaking matter, i.e. with no substance whatsoever. When UK voted to become a member state of EU in the 1990s they had the Maastricht treaty at hands and were already members of EEC since the 1970s.

A yes/no vote in the dark about the most important question would normally at least demand a 2/3  majority according to most civilized constitutions.

However UK lacks a constitution. And therefore UK's hastily and poorly effectuated Brexit vote comes nowhere close a civilized democratic process.



Tuesday, January 30, 2018

A Yemeni woman is suing islamofascist Saudi Arabia at ICC - and asking England to arrest Mohammad ibn Salman (the war criminal dubbed "the world's most dangerous man"). And BBC is silent.


The real reason connecting BBC's faked and propagandistic sharia islam/Saudi agenda* and the racist and Human Rightsphobic part of "British" haters of EU/EU citizens, and "love" of islamofascist Human Rights violating oil wealthy muslims. 


* and due Human Rightsphobia and war  and hate mongering against Russia which is seen as a disturbing factor in the islamofascist Mideast led by England's "close ally", the islamofascist Saudi dictator family who has repeatedly attacked England on its own soil by the help of sponsoring muslim terrorists and spreading islamic hate against Western "infidels".

This "the world's most dangerous man" and likely war criminal is welcomed to England. Why?

Germans! Do you think BBC's chat with Jacob Rees-Mogg is funny? No? Well Klevius has tried his best to make it funnier by ornamenting it with some additional details on this blog posting.

Fake and disgusting BBC News and UK's 18th century PM candidate and Human Rightsphobe (but positive to oil wealthy muslim sharia dictators such as e.g. Saudi Arabia) Jacob Rees-Mogg have a good laugh together: Germans have no sense of humor - and there has never been a chancellor able to crack a joke.


The potential Conservative leader Jacob Rees-Mogg voted to repeal the Human Rights Act in 2012. At the time, even Conservatives like Theresa May, Michael Gove and Iain Duncan Smith were absent from the vote. Rees-Mogg voted to repeal the act again in 2016.

Mr Rees-Mogg clearly agrees that there are "huge areas of collaboration" between the UK and the Arabian Gulf islamofascist sharia dictatorships and war criminals. Especially selling more arms to them.

His fanatic and racist Human Rightsphobic Brexit speeches have paid off. He topped a survey of ruling Conservative Party members as the favorite to replace the incumbent leader, Theresa May. In the survey for Conservative Home, the deeply religious homophobic Human Rightsphobe and North East Somerset MP secured 23 per cent of the vote, while the Brexit secretary David Davis with his everlasting silly empty grin came in second with 15 per cent.



Dubbed "the MP for the 18th century" thanks to his unashamedly old-fashioned views, Mr Rees-Mogg has seen a surge in popularity among those very racists whom Theresa May and the "Brexiters" by playing hard with the "race card" let lose since the UK general election in June 2017. His racist and sexist grass roots movement called “Moggmentum” was set up to celebrate his every word via social media.

Klevius wonders whether Hillary Clinton would have called them "the deplorables"?

The potential Conservative leader Jacob Rees-Mogg voted to repeal the Human Rights Act in 2012. At the time, even Conservatives like Theresa May, Michael Gove and Iain Duncan Smith were absent from the vote. Rees-Mogg voted to repeal the act again in 2016.




Friday, January 26, 2018

UK's Human Rights problem: Jacob Rees-Mogg's HR ignorance (?) and Theresa May's sharia recommendation


This man, Jacob Rees-Mogg, wants to rob people in England of their most basic Human Rights



Pic text furthest down on this posting.

Jacob Rees-Mogg wants to skip Human Rights and to prefer trade/sharia finance* with Human Rights violating islamofascists: "I don’t think eternal, everlasting moral principles… go very well with the day-to-day practice of government and legislation."

* Do note that England is more dependent on finance than any other EU country, and that finance is the sector first in line to be practically 100% robotized in the very near future.

Peter Klevius: This statement either means that this homophobic right wing extremist doesn't understand Human Rights at all - or that he's lying in the UK parliament.

Here's Klevius help if it's indeed ignorance he suffers from: The individual is the basis for democracy. However, democracy is collective. Therefore the rights of the individual is the "constitution" on which democracy is based. This constitution is called (negative) Human Rights, i.e. the negative obligation to abstain from interfering with the individual. If you still have trouble understanding this, then compare it with traffic rules which are all about the individual, and with no reference to "communities", "collectives", "groups", "religion" etc. And the reason is self-evident for most people, i.e. that every individual should have the same right to proceed within the limitations the flow of traffic itself may actuate. And there are no "obligations", "duties" or restrictions dependent on sex.


No matter how "Western", "imperialist" etc. - Atheism (or A(mono)theism) is the only road to moral responsibility and Human Rights equality. Why? Simply because it eliminates "chosen people", "forgivness of sins", and totalitarian sharia racism and sexism, by giving everyone the same "rights space". This is the very foundation of the anti-fascist 1948 Universal Human Rights Declaration.

Why is Wikipedia lying, faking, and misrepresenting islam and Human Rights? How hard could it be to disinguish clear evil from good? Sharia islam imposes limitations on women - Human Rights protects women from such imposed limitations.


Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam (i.e. islamofascist sharia)


ARTICLE 6:
(a) Woman is equal to man in human dignity,
and has her own rights to enjoy as well as
duties to perform, and has her own civil
entity and financial independence, and the
right to retain her name and lineage.

(b) The husband is responsible for the
maintenance and welfare of the family.


The anti-fascist 1948 Universal Human Rights Declaration


Article 2
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration,
without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion,
political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political,
jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person
belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other
limitation of sovereignty.


It's all about the islamofascist Saudi dictator family. Sounds silly, does it? What could ppossibly such a small power among the world's giants do? Well, consider what the islamofascist Saudi dictator familyreally is. It's not what it looks like because the real power behind it (and all "religion" retorics) is that the islamofascist Saudi dictator family (no dude, it won't help to get rid of the Wahhabi branch) are the "guardians" of islam and that we have lumped together 1.5 Billion muslims, and that those muslims furthermore are lumped together in a judicial sharia prison via Saudi based and steered OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation) which more or less now steers UN despite opposing those very basic Human Rights UN was built around. And even this wouldn't be enough was it not for the financially tied support these islamofascists (i.e. Human Rights violators) get from Western business and politicians.

Klevius criticism of islam has nothing to do with what individual muslims might believe but all to do with the collective use of religion for financial, political and military uses.

There's a widespread conflation of individual beliefs and collective religion. Klevius couldn't care less about what individuals believe as long as they respect each other.What bothers Klevius is the faceless "community" in which the individual is lost.


There's no equality between men and Women in islam

A combination of islam and feminism has been advocated as "a feminist discourse and practice articulated within an islamic paradigm (i.e. sharia)". Islamic feminism is defined by islamic "scholars" (i.e. with "PhDs" in islamism using sharia as their pseudiscientific tool) as being anchored with the non-sensical Koran as its central text.

In islam there is a difference between men and women based on physical differences and their roles given by "Allah", i.e. what we usually call essentialism, i.e. the view that categories of people, such as women and men, or heterosexuals and homosexuals, or members of ethnic groups, have intrinsically different and characteristic natures or dispositions - i.e. what we call racism and sexism.

Muslim men are given the "right" to "take care" of "their" wives and kids, and those who do not will suffer the consequences. This is in twisted islam "logic" because men are created physically stronger than women. Islam stresses on the different roles "Allah" (i.e. the human muslim interpretor) has given to men and women because of how "Allah" created them. Men are providers and women are the caregivers at home, given more patience, resilience, and the "ability to forgive more than men".

Klevius concluding comment: Try to get some structure in this craziness. There are sharia muslims and cultural "muslims" (or secular "muslims") on a scale from poor and ignorant muslims to educated Billionary muslims. And they are all lumped together under the muslims/islam title which is then used as a sledgehammer - not the least against the most precious asset we as humans possess, i.e. basic (negative) Human Rights equality against racism and sexism.

Klevius has fought for these rights all his adult life - and did never image a time when he should be called an "islamophobic" "racist" for fighting against racism.


Pic text

Jacob Rees-Mogg  paving the way for racist and sexist religious fascism in
UK Parliament

This man wants to rob people in England of their most basic Human Rights.

Eton boy Jacob Rees-Mogg wants to skip Human Rights and prefer trade with
Human Rights violating islamofascists: "I don’t think eternal, everlasting moral
principles… go very well with the day-to-day practice of government and
legislation."

Peter Klevius: This statement either means that this religious homophobic right wing extremist doesn't understand Human Rights at all - or that he's lying in the UK parliament.

Here's Klevius help if it's indeed ignorance he suffers from: The individual is the basis for democracy. However, democracy is collective. Therefore the rights of the individual is the "constitution" on which democracy is based. This constitution is called (negative) Human Rights, i.e. the negative obligation to abstain from interfering with the individual.

   If you still have trouble understanding this, then compare it with traffic
rules which are all about the individual, and with no reference to "communities",
"collectives", "groups", "religion" etc. And the reason is self-evident for most people, i.e. that every individual should have the same right to proceed within the limitations the flow of traffic itself may actuate. And there are no "obligations", "duties" or restrictions dependent on sex.

Friday, January 19, 2018

Macron the Conquerer sees a new use for the "British", i.e. the occupants of the Isles of Bretagne - and their helicopters.

England's worst enemy is Saudi Arabia* - not Russia or China - and being an "ally" with the Saudi dictator family isn't an asset but a disaster in cooking.


* The Saudi "custodians of islam" are the world's main supporter of islamic terrorism, and the homeland and leader of the world's biggest Human Rights violating sharia organization OIC. England has repeatedly been attacked by Saudi sponsored and agitated muslim terrorists.
Macron also wants to borrow some English helicopters for killing muslims in Mali. Klevius thinks English helicopters aren't too busy right now.


An English army helicopter was reportedly yesterday seen hovering a few meters over some dog walkers and football players on a public park in southern England - for no particular reason.

Frank comes from the Germanic word for "javelin" (such as in Old English franca or Old Nordic frakka). Words in other Germanic languages also mean "fierce", "bold" or "insolent" (Old and modern Swedish fräck and frank, German frech, Middle Dutch vrac, Old English frǣc and Old Norwegian frakkr).

EU is historically a "pagan" Gothic/Viking project initiated by France. And the "British" seems to become a sharia muslim project against "pagan" Human Rights.


A 70-metre-long depiction of the Bretagne Isles being successfully (re)invaded by the Vikings.

Viking ships 1066 depicted on the so called Bayeux Tapestry that Macron will borrow to England for the "Brits" to contemplate.



Christianity had been the official imperial religion of the Roman Empire, and the first churches were built in England in the second half of the fourth century, overseen by a hierarchy of bishops and priests. Many existing "pagan" (i.e. Celtic/Gothic/Viking) shrines were converted to Christian use and few "pagan" (i.e. Celtic/Gothic/Viking) sites still operated by the fifth century. The collapse of the Roman system in the late fifth century, however, brought about the end of formal Christian religion in the east of England, and the new Germanic immigrants (i.e. Gothic/Viking) arrived with their own polytheistic Nordic gods, including Woden, Thunor and Tiw, still reflected in various English place names. Some minor Christian communities still survived in more remote areas such as Gloucestershire and Somerset.

The movement towards Christianity began again in the late sixth and seventh centuries, helped by the Frankish Vikings (the Northmen) in Northern France, who carried considerable influence in England.

Gaul (from the Latin Gallia) was the ancient name for an area roughly equivalent to modern France, Belgium, Luxembourg, and Germany west of the Rhine.

In the late 3rd century, "barbarian" (i.e. Goths or Northmens if you like) raids devastated Normandy. Coastal settlements were raided by Saxon "pirates"*. Christianity also began to enter the area during this period. In 406, Germanic tribes (Goths or Northmen if you like) began invading from the east, while the Saxons subjugated the Norman coast. The Romans withdrew from most of Normandy. As early as 487, the area between the River Somme and the River Loire came under the control of the Frankish (Goth or Northman if you like) lord Clovis.

* Klevius is puzzled about the use of the word 'pirate' because muslim pirates are never called that of some funny reason. Muslim pirates are instead called "conquerers", so Klevius politely resåects this but also wants to use it consequently about non-muslims as well.

The Franks (Latin: Franci or Latin: gens Francorum, from Old Swedish/Nordic/North-Germanic) were a collection of Germanic peoples (Goths), whose name was first mentioned in 3rd century Roman sources, associated with tribes on the Lower and Middle Rhine in the 3rd century AD, on the edge of the Roman Empire. Later the term is associated with Romanized Germanic (Gothic) dynasties within the collapsing Roman Empire, who eventually commanded most of Europe incl. the region between the rivers Loire and Rhine, and imposed power over many other post-Roman kingdoms and Germanic (Gothic) peoples, later being recognized by the Catholic church as successors to the old rulers of the Western Roman Empire.

Although the Frankish name only appears in the 3rd century, at least some of the original Frankish tribes had long been known under their own names to the Romans, both as allies providing soldiers, and as enemies. The new name first appears when the Romans and their allies were losing control of the Rhine region. The Franks were first reported as working together to raid into Roman territory, but from the beginning this was associated also with attacks upon them from outside their frontier area, for example by Saxons, and a desire by frontier tribes to move into Roman territory.

Known Frankish peoples inside the Roman Rhine river frontier were the Salian Franks who were permitted to live in Roman territory, and the Ripuarian or Rhineland Franks who, after many attempts, eventually conquered the Roman frontier city of Cologne and settled the left bank of the Rhine. Later, in a period of factional conflict all over Gaul in the 450s and 460s, Childeric I, a Frank, was one of several military leaders commanding Roman forces with various ethnic affiliations. Childeric and his son Clovis I faced competition from Aegidius and his son as competitors for the kingship of the Franks, and commanders of the Roman Loire forces. (According to Gregory of Tours, Aegidius held this kingship for 8 years while Childeric was in exile, while in contrast Gregory refers to his son Syagrius as "King of the Romans".) This new type of kingship, perhaps inspired by Alaric I, represents the start of the Merovingian dynasty, which succeeded in conquering most of Gaul in the 6th century, as well as establishing its leadership over all the Frankish kingdoms on the Rhine frontier. It was on the basis of this Merovingian empire that the resurgent Carolingians eventually came to be seen as the new Emperors of Western Europe in 800.

In the Middle Ages, the term Frank came to be used as a synonym for Western European, as the Carolingian Franks were rulers of most of Western Europe, and established a political order which was the basis of the European ancien regime that only ended with the French revolution. Western Europeans shared their allegiance to the Roman Catholic church and worked as allies in the Crusades beyond Europe in the Levant, where they still referred to themselves and the Principalities they established as Frankish. This has had a lasting impact on names for Western Europeans in many languages.


The Vikings started to raid the Seine valley during the 9th century. 841, a Viking fleet appeared at the mouth of the Seine, the principal route by which they entered the kingdom. After attacking and destroying monasteries, including one at Jumièges, they took advantage of the power vacuum created by the disintegration of Charlemagne's empire to take northern France. The fiefdom of Normandy was created for the Viking leader Hrólfr Ragnvaldsson, or Rollo (also known as Robert of Normandy). Rollo had besieged Paris but in 911 entered vassalage to the king of the West Franks, Charles the Simple, through the Treaty of Saint-Clair-sur-Epte. In exchange for his homage and fealty, Rollo legally gained the territory which he and his Viking allies had previously conquered. The name "Normandy" reflects Rollo's Viking (i.e. "Norseman") origins.

The descendants of Rollo and his followers adopted the local Gallo-Romance language and intermarried with the area's original inhabitants. They became the Normans – a Norman-speaking mixture of Norsemen and indigenous Franks and Celts.

Rollo's descendant William the Conqeror, became king of England in 1066 after defeating Harold Godwinson, the last of the Anglo-Saxon kings, at the Battle of Hastings, while retaining the fiefdom of Normandy for himself and his descendants.

Besides the conquest of England and the subsequent subjugation of Wales and Ireland, the Normans expanded into other areas. Norman families, such as that of Tancred of Hauteville, Rainulf Drengot and Guimond de Moulins played important parts in the conquest of southern Italy and the Crusades against islamists.

The Drengot lineage, de Hauteville's sons William Iron Arm, Drogo, and Humphrey, Robert Guiscard and Roger the Great Count progressively claimed territories in southern Italy until founding the Kingdom of Sicily in 1130. They also carved out a place for themselves and their descendants in Asia Minor and the "Holy Land" that had been raped by muslims.

The 14th century explorer Jean de Béthencourt established a kingdom in the Canary Islands in 1404.He received the title King of the Canary Islands from Pope Innocent VII but recognised Henry III of Castile as his overlord, who had provided him aid during the conquest.

Tuesday, January 16, 2018

In racist UK Parliament yesterday: "British people", "British people", "British people" - and go whistle Human Rights and EU citizens!


Theresa May and her Tories play the disgusting race card against EU citizens' Human Rights. Is it really any good for the "Brits"?



Constitutionally Theresa May & Co are worse than Myanmar. And no one knows what would have happened because of Theresa May's divisive and inflammatory playing of the race card 'against EU citizens if there had been similar attacks on police stations etc. as those Saudi initiated in Myanmar. Btw, why is BBC's bigoted and hypocritical sharia presenter Mishal Husain in Bangladesh propagating for Rohingyas instead of in her childhood country Saudi Arabia propagating for Yemenites? Moreover, the Bangladeshi muslims seem to be extremely hostile to what used to be their own people coming back after having been displaced by the Brits in the first place.

EU citizens in what used to be their homeland are already abused on a daily basis in England - by racist "Brits" as well as by government introduced administrative hostility and the shameful use of EU citizens as cards in trade negotiations.

"British people", echoed from the racist Tories in England's parliament debating the rights of "non-British" EU citizens who have been denied to vote on their own right to exist in what was their own land (EU) when they settled there.

However, so called "Brits" from Bangladesh, Pakistan etc. former British colonies were allowed to vote for denying EU citizens their rights in their own land.


Dominic Grieve called for the human rights detailed in the charter to be protected


The Conservative Party would send out ‘a really strange message’ if it does not incorporate the EU charter of fundamental rights into UK law after Brexit.

That’s according to senior Tory Dominic Grieve who said people view issues like LGBT rights ‘as being rights of a fundamental character’.

Ministers have previously said the human rights detailed in the charter will be protected and maintained in some form.

But the former attorney general accused the Government of giving a ‘paltry’ response to the matter.

Mr Grieve added that he hoped the House of Lords would revisit the issue when the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill makes its way to them.

He said: ‘I listen very carefully to what the prime minister says about modernising the Conservative Party, about giving it a broad appeal to younger people, about trying to ensure that we reflect current norms and standards in our country and give effect to them in the sorts of policies we develop.

‘And yet it does seem to me that in simply batting this issue away and saying don’t worry, it’s all going to be perfectly alright, without even coming up with a plan for the future about possibly adding a bill of rights clause or rights clauses to the Human Rights Act, we’re sending out a really very strange message about our attitude on this side of the House to matters which I believe many people in this country now see as being rights of a fundamental character, particularly on issues like LGBT and things of that sort.’

Mr Grieve said the Government had provided a mechanism where the rights in the charter could be invoked for three months after exit day, but not in a way which challenges primary legislation.

He added: ‘I have to say that I think that the response on this matter is, frankly, rather paltry.

‘It is a minuscule change, although I will also say this, that minuscule though it may be, it is actually a little wedge in the door, because it represents quite a major surrender or change of principle on the part of the Government towards this issue.’

Mr Grieve added that he did not think the Bill would pass through the House of Lords ‘without this issue being considered’.


Klevius comment: Theresa May has long before the Brexit vote showed her disgust against Human Rights. Why? Because Human Rights are against that very sharia she says is so "good for the Brits".