China (laws against sharia islamofascism) and EU (Human Rights against sharia islamofascism) are now the only ones protecting basic (negative*) Human Rights.
* Religious people and socialists don't like negative Human Rights simply because they prefer collectives ("communities") rather than individuals. That's why the web is full of misinfo about these rights. Read Peter Klevius definition instead if you want a deep view - or listen to Lauren Chen starting from 7:11 if you want it light
The Saudi "custodian of islam" has some 1.5 billion "citizens" in the muslim world Ummah nation - and demands the world to bow them no matter what (as long they aren't Shia or so, of course). China, on the other hand, keeps its citizens and laws within its own borders. IS islam IS fascism and islam (even the archbishop agrees). So why is sharia fascism not separated from an "islam" that submits to basic Human Rights? As it stands now Saudi based and steered OIC's sharia (the 1990 Cairo declaration) still stands as the basic Human Rights violation via sharia muslims all over the world. And whereas China actively tries to erase sharia islamofascism, EU keeps promoting import of it while judicially telling us it's not right, yet doing nothing to stop it.
Unlike the West, China hasn't aggressively meddled militaristically in other countries around the world, but rather being the world's foremost spreader of new technology and wealth. And whereas the West has eagerly supported Mohammed's totalitarian aims, China has, in practise, implemented in law most of the Human Rights advices that The Council of Europe has directed against OIC. Against this background West's Saudi backing and China smearing is deeply bigoted and hypocritical.

John le Carré: I'm depressed and ashamed of British nationalism. Nationalism needs enemies but today we really have no identifiable enemies except among ourselves.

North Atlantic (sic) Treaty Organization invades a country in Mideast and attacks a people without a country.

Read K.S. Lal (free online) on islam's evil spread!

A Google (i.e. U.S. web monopoly) search (20191006) reports 'islamists Hong Kong' "missing". Really! No islamists in Hong Kong? Peter Klevius also wonders if EU citizens in UK are UKongers and can peacefully demand the same rights as Joshua Wong violently demands (and eagerly broadcasted by BBC) for Hong Kongers?

Peter Klevius congratulates Savid Javid for abandoning the islamofascist "islamophobia" smear. BBC’s bigoted hypocrite Mishal Husain and others ought to follow!

BBC's Mark Mardell couldn't get a visa to China because of his extreme and hateful Sinophobia - but that didn't stop him/BBC from producing a fake anti-China program series while pretending to be there. Is Sinophobia really better than cooperation?


Are EU citizens in UK included in Tom Tugenhadt's "British people"?

Sinophobe Tom Tugendhat, chair of UK's Foreign Affairs Committee (who has studied islam and Arabic in Mideast) suggests that English speaking universities should consider banning Chinese students because "they might be used as leverage like Huawei". Peter Klevius wonders if one could be any more racist than this, and if he doesn't see any islamofascist sharia supremacist "leverage" at all? Btw, there are more than 50,000 Chinese muslims in Hong Kong. Peter Klevius wonders how many of them are "radical" ones and participate in BBC's lengthy anti-China propaganda "news" - while the world doesn't suffer from Chinese but from muslim violence and Human Rights violations?
US/UK destroyed the lives of millions of Chinese during some hundred years of evil militaristic meddling. BBC is now busy smearing China all the time while supporting Saudi islamofascism and violent Hong Kong demonstrators - but neglecting the mass of peaceful pro-China demonstrators. BBC also "worries" about Chinese "surveillance state" while the truth is China's technological superiority. US is much more insidious in its surveillance policies but lacks the techno - can't even produce a working 5G so far. US/UK follow exactly China but utilize the meantime to smear it. And who is really behind the Hong Kong riots? Someone who can't take China's success? But the Syria tactics won't work. US (and its UK puppet) wants to be able to meddle militarily near China - therefore its interest in Taiwan, Hong Kong, Korea, Tibet, Myanmar, Uyghur extremist muslims etc.

As Greta Thunberg is allegedly reported to the Swedish social authorities, Peter Klevius suggests that her parents read his thesis Pathological Symbiosis in LVU, Relevance, and Sex Segregated Emergence. Keeping in mind that Peter Klevius daughter was only 15 when she entered university and at 16 made her graduate paper about women in ancient times, it shouldn't be considered too sensitive for Greta either. Also read the attached email correspondence which clearly shows how democracy is manipulated. And why not consider Angels of Antichrist, the Social State vs the People (P. Klevius 1996). And last but not least, Peter Klevius 1981/1992 Demand for Resources (original titel Resursbegär).
Peter Klevius and the Council of Europe share exactly the same "islamophobia".
Council of Europe. Resolution 2253 (2019), Sharia, Saudi based and steered OIC's Cairo Declaration and the European Convention on Human Rights: Human Rights protect the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion as enshrined in Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The right to manifest one’s religion, however, is a qualified right whose exercise, under Article 17 of the Convention, may not aim at the destruction of other Convention rights or freedoms.

People in UK-land (especially women) will loose their Human Rights after Brexit - while sharia prevails in UK, and UK citizens in EU are protected by the European Court of Human Rights.

Brexit was meant to protect UK from muslim invasion via Turkey's proposed visa free deal with Merkel. Even the possibility of temporary membership in ECHR (in case of a deal) isn't enough - especially considering UK will be out of reach of the European Court of Justice.

US loosing the tech war - and starting a real one?

US loosing the tech war - and starting a real one?

Do Americans and Pompeo share the Saudi hate against Shia muslims?

BBC supports muslim persecution of Christians etc.

BBC supports muslim persecution of Christians etc.

Saudi investigating Saudi double tap airstrikes aided by US and UK

In the 8 October 2016 Sana'a (Yemen) funeral bombing by Saudi Arabia 155 people were killed and at least 525 more wounded when two airstrikes, about three to eight minutes apart, hit the packed Al Kubra hall. US and UK happy with the Saudis investigating it.

This Swedish muslim MP wants to criminalize Peter Klevius islamophobia. Really!

West's indulgence of islamofascism (sharia) has made its boasting against China about "democratic values" empty. The risk of you being stabbed, raped etc. by a hateful jihadi is created by your political leaders, BBC etc. - who also have arranged so it's not even called a hate crime.

BBC squeezes in Eng-land cricket in every news report - while UK-land plays borderless Brexit - and football is divided in four UK-lands, Welsh, English, Irish and Scottish players, and two top leagues with whatever players!? Confusing? Not even close to the "British" measuring decaphobia. English isn't "British", it belongs to the world. British stands for imperialism, colonialism, slavery and cooperation with islamofascists.

Peter Klevius stands for these "stops" and due huge implications - all shame on him if you can prove him wrong (click links if you need to educate yourself before saying something stupid): Stop using the misleading 'gender' instead of sex (sociology)! Stop islam's abuse of Human Rights (jurisprudence)! Stop saying humans came "out of Africa" (anthropology)! Stop talking about "consciousness" when you don't know what you're talking about (philosophy/ai).

Islam is the problem - China is the solution.

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.

Peter Klevius: BBC supports the islamofascist Saudi dictator family's strategic use of supremacist islam which has spred muslim hate all over the world's streets, institutions etc. (and usually not correctly, if at all, reported by BBC which instead doesn't hesitate to give long coverage of "alternative news" that better suits its propaganda) - while muslim terrorist organizations keep it within muslim territories. So if true Salafists became the "gurdians of islam's holy places" then that would mean less muslim terror elsewhere. And less to cover up for BBC. How big a contributor to the suffering of islamic supremacist hate crimes has BBC's fake (and lack of) info been? Will we in the future see BBC in an international court accused of crimes against humanity? As it stands now the spill over effect of BBC's cynical support of proxy evil is stained in blood and rape etc. over innocent people. And if true Salafists took over in muslim countries, they would quickly become non-muslim countries. A better option than today's prolonged suffering caused by the hopeless effort to "adapt" a medieval slavery ideology to a modern world based on everyone's Human Rights equality. And if it's so important to keep islam in name only - then islam would loose all of its racist and sexist "we and the other" appeal anyway.

Why is BBC aiding islamofascism?

Why is BBC aiding islamofascism?

Why didn't islam go to the moon?!

Why didn't islam go to the moon?!

Sex segregation/apartheid (aided by religion and poverty) means over-population.

Sex segregation/apartheid (aided by religion and poverty) means over-population.

Statues of football player Nilla Fischer and Caroline Seger vandalized in Sweden

Statues of football player Nilla Fischer and Caroline Seger vandalized in Sweden

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?


UK introduced face recognition after for many years accusing Chinese for having it. Peter Klevius wonders how this fits UK's face covered muslims and others who utilize it?

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?

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

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!

Stop US global bullying! What moral right does US have trying to dominate Earth and space? "God"?! Or the Saudi murderer and mass murderer "prince"?! Hasn't US sucked out enough already from the rest of the world? A global dollar manipulation favoring US and paid by the rest. A US marked global license and patent imperialism - and Android. Is Internet next?

26 June 2019: BBC's leading presenter, the alcohol drinking and not ramadan fasting Pakistan rooted muslim, Mishal Husain (brought up in Saudi Arabia), worried about Boris Johnson not having cricket as his hobby.

25 June 2019: BBC's leading presenter, the alcohol drinking and not ramadan fasting muslim, Mishal Husain (brought up in Saudi Arabia), sounds desperate when trying to smear Johnson. Is it because Boris 2016 was critical against the Saudis while foreign minister and 2018 critical of muslim women packed in burqas etc.?
BBC thinks the militaristic Saudiphil Jeremy Hunt "is a safer option" as UK PM. What about you?

BBC News 8:00 AM 23 June 2019: Johnson financially unfit because he spilled wine on a couch.

BBC  News 8:00 AM 23 June 2019: Johnson financially unfit because he spilled wine on a couch.
Is the Saudi "custodian of islam" a muslim - and is the very question "islamophobic", "muslimophobic" or "Saudiphobic"?
Why is BBC comparing Saudi with China?! China's leader isn't a murderer, war criminal, and spreader of terror on the streets! "If we drop the Saudis then we can't deal with China either." Really?! BTW, 'Diversity' means different/conflicting whereas its antonym stands for similar/friendly.

Blinked by BBC's fake "news" which instead boost militaristic confrontation and the smearing of China: The Saudi war criminal "custodian of islam" who murdered Khashoggi is now the world's new Hitler. However, unlike Hitler's Germanic language imperialism, bin Salman's Arabic language imperialism is added by a totalitarian imperialism due to the fact that he is a muslim and as such represents the totality of islam (inc. the Saudi based and steered all muslims world organization O.I.C.'s sharia declaration against Human Rights). Peter Klevius has for long pointed out that we need to distinguish between Human Rights obeying "muslims" and "extremist" muslims, but for some reason they are all bundled as 'muslims'.

Your choice: China high tech or US/UK bombs?

Your choice: China high tech or US/UK bombs?

US puppet empire UK's Jeremy Hunt wants to double spending on militaristic meddling for US

US puppet empire UK's Jeremy Hunt wants to double spending on militaristic meddling for US

Racist Sinophobia disguised as "security" while muslim terror spreading Saudi murderous dictator and war criminal is "an important security ally"!?

Peter Klevius evolution formula

Peter Klevius serious questions to you "out of Africa" believer! Ask yourself: How come that the oldest primates came from outside Africa; that the oldest great ape divergence happened outside Africa; that the oldest bi-pedals are from outside Africa; that the only australopithecines with a Homo skull lived as far from Africa you can get; that the oldest truly modern looking skull is from eastern China; that the oldest Africans are mongoloid; that the latest genetic mix that shaped the modern human happened in Siberia and is traced to SE Asia; that the earliest sophisticated art is found from Iberia to Sulawesi - but not in Africa; that the oldest round skulled Homo sapiens in sub-Saharan Africa are much younger than similar skulls in Eurasia; that we lack ancient enough DNA from Africa, etc. etc.? Peter Klevius theory answers all these questions - and more.

Peter Klevius evolution formula.

Existence-centrism (Peter Klevius 1986)

When muslim terrorists mass murder more than 100 in Mali, BBC gives it less time (2 min.) than an item on animal cruelty, Russian journalist arrest etc. in a 45 min "news" program!

Read this: The "out of Africa" hoax is worse than the Piltdown hoax - and much bigger and more worrisome. When will “out of Africaphobia” be criminalized?

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!

And if you respect your Earthly home – don’t support a hate ideology that encourages over-population and sex apartheid. We don’t need more workers because the most profitable sectors have the least jobs – a trend that AI accelerates.

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.

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.

Muslim terrorists get legal aid to stay in UK - EU nationals don't!

The best explanation to the surge in knife crimes since 2015 is the Islamic State's exhortation to street jihad.

However, the police don't record hate crimes as muslim - other than if directed against muslims. And do consider that IS and the Saudi dictator family both rest on the same Salafi islam that most young true muslims in the West follow. Following Salafism (etc. true muslimhood) involves distinguishing muslims from others, to show that one only belongs to islam and that true muslims ought to be strangers to the "infidels". When Klevius sees a muslim woman in burqa, veil etc. he thinks that's a supremacist and rapist attitude towards other women. And certainly contempt of Human Rights.

UK/BBC's extreme double standard re. the islamofascist Saudi dictator family and China.

Klevius: How come that islamofascist tech poor Saudi property-, media-, infra structure- etc. 'vulnerable' investments and supremacist hate spreading mosques, is considered no threat to UK but instead an 'important ally' while China, which doesn't tick any danger boxes, is deliberately painted by BBC propaganda as the worst threat? And how come that China's peaceful Belt and Road spreading of wealth and high tech is considered worse than UK's continuing militaristic and (un)security meddling within an EU that UK decided to leave for the purpose of EU not meddling within UK?!

UK continues even after Brexit to use EU citizens as bargaining chips by placing their rights in an unsafe statutory instrument instead of in the law.

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!

You muslim should be ashamed of calling Human Rights defenders "islamophobes"

- 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.

This Viking tells you a lesson you didn't get in school, but you really need.

Klevius 1992-2010: From tropical SE-Asia to cold and protein/fat rich North Eurasia to global human

Peter Klevius was the first to connect the big Jinniushan woman with small mongoloid Khoisan (1992) and SE-Asia with the new brain setup due to island dwarfing (2004).

"Out of Africa" is no longer terminally ill - it's equally dead as Monty Python's parrot. So why do media and some anthropologists keep babbling when faced with overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Not even all tricks in the book (like e.g. the spurious stretching of what counts as "anatomically modern human" - i.e. incl. long skulled species) can save OoA. But the simplest way of understanding human evolution is to place it where all primates originally came from, i.e. SE Asia and its volatile tropical archipelago which could do evolutionary tricks the African continent couldn't. The oldest "Africans" are the mongoloid Khoisan. However, no one can become mongoloid (i.e. cold adapted) in Africa. This means they must originally have come from northern Eurasia - just as their look-alikes, e.g. Shompen and South American natives. Khoisan population is extremely small and, except for Pygmies, most "Africans" entered the continent within the last 10,000 years. Khoisan are mongoloid together with e.g. Shompen in SE Asia, and tribes in South America.

Do you support Human Rights or sharia?

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

Theresa May wants to leave EU. That should include UK militarist meddling within EU as well. Leave means leave! Don't let UK and its "close ally" the islamofascist Saudi dictator family contaminate EU citizens lives. Don't let the insidious spy organization Five Eyes spy on EU citizens and their leaders and parliamentarians. Don't let BBC's or islam's glossy surface (i.e. normal news/info and non-sharia muslims respectively) lure you to not see the evil core. Klevius is the opposite. WYSIWYG. No hidden evil core, just defense of your (whoever you are) basic Human Rights that islam wants to deny you.

UK government wants to force EU to put a border on Ireland - so it can blame EU for something UK-Brexit caused. Brexiters want to eat the cake while still having it. Unconstitutional UK has become a cancer that hopes to survive by creating metastases in line with old fashioned British imperialism.

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

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

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

Fake journalism steered by Saudi islamofascism

Fake journalism steered by Saudi islamofascism

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

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

UK is drowning in sharia islamofascism while BBC is silent

UK is drowning in sharia islamofascism while BBC is silent

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

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

Klevius "islamophobic" heroine Nawal El Saadawi from Egypt

Klevius "islamophobic" heroine Nawal El Saadawi from Egypt

Anti Human Rights muslim or not?

When Klevius writes 'islamofascist' it should always be understood as islamic default tenets (e.g. OIC's world sharia) that are gravely opposite UN's anti-fascist 1948 Universal Human Rights declaration. So Klevius suggests every muslim to openly declare if they oppose the most basic Human Rights or not. This is particularly important when it comes to media people and politicians who say they are muslims but hesitate on this most crucial issue.
Klevius supports no border on Ireland. Follow the will of the people, i.e. let England leave and let Scotland and Northern Ireland stay. UK is an unconstitutional mess which now wants to leave EU without controlling its border to EU. A proper constitution would have demanded qualified majority in two consecutive elections/votes about such a crucial matter as Brexit - and being aware what the vote is about. The root of the problem is England's mad man Henry 8's colonialization of Ireland and lack of constitution. The preposterous "British" Brexit parody is then spiced with the government's and BBC's use of religious hate mongering etc. In summary UK is an anomaly of countries trying to be a state in a world of federal states united as countries.

Britisharia Human Rightsphobia

Calling criticism of islam "islamophobia" is pure racism and also supports islamic racism and sexism

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

Calling critics of islam "islamophobes" is pure racism and also supports islamic racism and sexism
BBC isn't much interested in anti-semitism, homophobia etc. but uses them as an excuse for its Saudi/OIC supported "islamophobia" smear campaign against Human Rights.

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

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

British militarist neo-colonialism

British militarist neo-colonialism

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

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

Saudi induced muslim attack on UK Parliament. How many elsewhere? And what about Saudi/OIC's sharia

Saudi induced muslim attack on UK Parliament. How many elsewhere? And what about Saudi/OIC's sharia

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

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

Is UK turning into a militaristic unconstitutional islamofascist rogue state?

First UK people voted to join and share borders with EU. Then England voted to leave while Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to stay. And now UK politicians want to leave while keeping the Irish EU border open. UK lacks a modern constitution according to which a constitutional issue has to pass at least two majority votes.

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

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

The islamofascist Saudi dictator family criminalizes Human Rights and calls them "islamophobia".

Are you or your representative(s) for or against basic universal Human Rights equality?

Peter Klevius global morality can only be challenged by violating the most basic of Human Rights.

Everything Peter Klevius writes (or has written) is guided by the anti-sexist. anti-racist, and anti-fascist Universal* Human Rights declaration of 1948. In other words, what is declared immoral and evil is so done as measured against the most basic of Human Rights (the so called "negative" rights - i.e. the rights of the individual not to be unnecessarily targeted with restrictions and impositions). Unlike the 1948 Universal Human Rights (UHR) declaration, islam denies Human Rights equality to women and non-muslims. And violation of such basic Human Rights can't be tolerated just by referring to "freedom of religion".

* This means accepting everyone - without exception due to e.g. sex, religion, lack of religion, "security" etc. - as equal in Human Rights. The individual is protected by negative Human Rights, but of course not against substantiated legal accusations - as long as these are not produced as a means that violates the basic Human Rights (compare "not necessary in a free, democratic country"). The legislator may not produce laws that seek to undermine some individuals rights. This also includes e.g. "freedom of religion", i.e. that this freedom doesn't give the right to unfree others, or cause others to be in an inferior rights position. If by islam you mean something that fully adheres to basic Human Rights equality, then you aren't targeted by Peter Klevius islam criticism. However, if you mean islam accepts violations of the most basic of Human Rights, then you may also call Peter Klevius an "islamophobe" - and he will be proud of it. And when it comes to "security" it can't mean "offending" opponents to basic Human Rights.

This is why any effort to twist or accuse the writings of Peter Klevius as "islamophobia" etc. can only be made from a standpoint against these basic Human Rights. As a consequence, no body of authority can therefore accuse, hinder etc. Peter Klevius without simultaneously revealing its own disrespect for these Human Rights. Conversely, Peter Klevius can not accuse anyone who agrees on these rights - i.e. this leaves e.g. "islamophobia" etc. accusations against Peter Klevius without merit.

Every effort against these basic Human Rights is treason against a country calling itself free and democratic.

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

Racist UK Government and BBC

Racist UK Government and BBC

The world's most dangerous war criminal is the guardian of islam's holy places and OIC

The world's most dangerous war criminal is the  guardian of islam's holy places and OIC

UK's sharia ties to Saudi islamofascism threaten EU (and UK) security

UK's sharia ties to Saudi islamofascism threaten EU (and UK) security

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

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

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

Saudi war criminal "prince" "reforms" islam to fit Saudi islamofascism against Human Rights

Saudi war criminal "prince" "reforms" islam to fit Saudi islamofascism against Human Rights

Saudi "ally" responsible for chemical attacks (Jaysh al-Islam)

Warning for a muslim robot!

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

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

EU closes internal borders - and opens its external ones.

EU closes internal borders - and opens its external ones.

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

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

What's left for UK when finance is fully AI? Profiting from conflicts and wars.

What's left for UK when finance is fully AI? Profiting from conflicts and wars.

The ultimate treason against people in England, Ireland and Scotland

The ultimate treason against people in England, Ireland and Scotland

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

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

* The son of one of Sweden's best chess-players and an even more intelligent Finnish mother. He was mentored by G. H. von Wright, Wittgensteins's successor at Cambridge. However, G H v Wright sadly didn't fully realize back then (1991) the true power of the last chapter, Khoi, San and Bantu, in Klevius book. Today, if still alive, he would surely see it.

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

UK's security pact with the Devil himself

UK's security pact with the Devil himself

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'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?

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

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.

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!

"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!

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, January 29, 2014

Is this Brit 'seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the UK'?


Are Human Rights 'seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the UK'?


Klevius answer: If Sharia is the 'vital interest' then yes!



The Home Secretary has tabled a last-minute change to the Government's Immigration Bill so people whose conduct is deemed 'seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the UK' can be deported and even stripped of their British citizenship, if they have one, and even if it leaves them stateless.




OIC has now via UN made EVERY muslim a violator of Human Rights. But how many muslims (and normal people) are aware of it? And what about Theresa May?! And, more importantly, how many muslims bother about it? But people critical of this fact are chased by every means!




Media Hawk on 27 June 2013: Home Secretary Theresa May recently banned Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller from the United Kingdom, claiming that their presence would not be “conducive to the public good.” May cited Spencer and Geller’s views on Sharia and Jihad as the reason for the ban. By banning people for criticizing Sharia and Jihad, Great Britain has just enforced Sharia blasphemy laws.

Britain likes to trumpet itself as a 'tolerant' country. The government and politicians certainly do. It sounds lovely, doesn't it? We're incredibly 'tolerant' over here, don't you know?

But not so much that we can tolerate people who have a critical reading of Islamism and Islam, it seems. No. That'd be too much. Deport the atheists (like me) while you're at it. Because we think all religions are cuckoo. So perhaps the Home Secretary's rationale for banning Gellar and Spencer (being 'not conducive to the public good') would extend to all of us, too?


Listen to this British citizen's love declaration to islamofascism!






Wednesday, January 22, 2014



Why do you let your politicians keep licking the most evil dictator family on Earth?!


Saudi Arabia and islam - the terror curse of the world

 Not since the German National socialists has the world seen such an apparent pure evil as what the Saudis (+accomplices) have produced by the help of oil money and the most hateful of ideologies. The Saudis have been behind most major terrorist attacks incl 9/11, Iraq (most atrocities since Bush's speedy victory over Saddam), Libya, Egypt, Syria, Russia, UK etc around the world; OIC, the islamofascist organization against Human Rights is based in Saudi Arabia and its Fuhrer is a Saudi named Iyad Madani; Saudi Arabia is the center of muslim racism and intolerance; the Saudis have deliberately covered with concrete and various constructions all sites that could reveal the total lack of archaeological evidence about the islamic myths. And on and on!



Religious fascism - the curse of today

The fanatic boosting of religion today always favors the worst of them and in them! Hint: Saudi islamofascist Iyad Madani is now the Fuhrer of the most powerful totalitarian religious fascism (Wahabism, Salafism - or whatever you prefer to call it).

Islam has always been used for evil. Why? Because it's originally made as a tool for evil!


Finian Cunningham: Russian intelligence has now reportedly obtained solid proof that Saudi Arabia was directly involved in the twin terror attacks on the city of Volgograd.

The attacks killed more than 32 people and injured over 100 others. Most of the victims were civilians.

According to an informed Russian official source, reported by the Fars News Agency, Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) has informed President Vladimir Putin of the Saudi link to the Volgograd massacre.

This will come as no surprise to Putin. The Russian leader was warned by the Saudi intelligence chief Prince Bandar Bin Sultan during a heated four-hour private meeting back in July that Wahhabi-sponsored terrorists based in the North Caucasus region of Russia would be targeting the Sochi Winter Olympics.

    There are unconfirmed reports that Putin and his senior intelligence officers have already drawn up plans to “destroy Saudi Arabia” over its systematic sponsoring of terrorism on Russian territory.

The Volgograd atrocity is just the latest in a long series of
terrorist acts connected to Saudi-sponsored radicals in the North Caucasus. Back in October, another suicide bomb on a packed bus in Volgograd left six dead.

The group believed to be behind these attacks is known as the Caucasus Caliphate, led by Doko Umarov. Saudi Arabia is a major source of funds for the Caucasus Caliphate, which espouses the same fundamentalist
ideology as the Saudi-sponsored Takfiris operating in Syria, Lebanon, Pakistan, Yemen and Iraq.

Bandar reportedly boasted to Putin: “We control them (the Caucasus militants).” This implies that Saudi Arabia can turn on and off the conduct of these terror groups. That places Saudi Arabia as the ultimate author of a catalogue of crimes that Russia has endured for the most part of 20
years, the latest being in the city of Volgograd.

One of the suicide bombers in the Volgograd double attack has been identified as Russian national Pavel Pechyonkin (32). He reportedly traveled to Syria last year and fought in the ranks of Saudi-backed extremists trying to topple the government of Bashar al Assad.

Many other Russian nationals have also been recruited by Saudi Arabia’s terror sponsors to wage regime-change war in Syria.

In a second meeting between Bandar and Putin, the Russian leader reportedly told the Saudi in no uncertain terms that his support for terrorism was “a double-edged sword” that would eventually inflict damage on those who wield it.

For years now Saudi Arabia has gotten away with covert state-sponsored terrorism disrupting its Middle East neighbors. Syria, Lebanon and Iraq are but the latest victims.



This is what Klevius wrote

Tuesday, August 27, 2013


An evil racist ideology, evil Saudis, and US' worst "president" ever unite for even more suffering in Syria


Where are the Bush bashers now?!

The worst "president" ever was "elected" on a purely racist agenda fueled by skin color bias and islamofascism.


Do those who orchestrated the gas attacks against Syrians now use their own atrocities as a pretext for even more attacks?





Wall Street Journal: Officials inside the Central Intelligence Agency knew that Saudi Arabia was serious about toppling Syrian President Bashar al-Assad when the Saudi king named Prince Bandar bin Sultan al-Saud to lead the effort.


A US’ attack against Syria was planned many years ago in order to replace the Syrian government with a pro-Saudi/Sunni one.


Stephen Lendman: “The issue is very clear. Syria is Washington’s war. Any government that is independent gets targeted for regime change. This is longstanding US policy and the situation in Syria is very grave”.

Klevius: However, central to the US strategy is islam (the worst ideological crime ever against humanity - that's why it has to be so defended against scrutiny) and its "guardian", the islamofascist Saudi family who target Shia muslims in an effort to eradicate them or at least leave them without support.





So, Mishal Husain, why don't you tell the Brits that you support Saudi/OIC Sharia evil against Human Rights?!










Klevius' EMAH theory 'really fits with the scientific literature'!


New research - same old problem

From a scientific report in January 2014 (clarified with Klevius comments):

'After visual input hits the retina, the information flows into the brain (Klevius: No, it flows into the Thalamus!) where information such as shape, color, and orientation is processed. In previous studies, Potter at MIT has shown that the human brain can correctly identify images seen for as little as 100 milliseconds. In the new study, she and her colleagues decided to gradually increase the speeds until they reached a point where subjects' answers were no better than if they were guessing. All images were new to the viewers (Klevius: But the content was expected).

The researchers expected they might see a dramatic decline in performance around 50 milliseconds, because other studies have suggested that it takes at least 50 milliseconds for visual information to flow from the retina to the "top" of the visual processing chain in the brain and then back down again for further processing by so-called "re-entrant loops." These processing loops were believed necessary to confirm identification of a particular scene or object. Klevius: Yes loops are necessary in EMAH but only to marginally alter what is already preloaded in Thalamus.

However, the MIT team found that although overall performance declined, subjects continued to perform better than chance as the researchers dropped the image exposure time from 80 milliseconds to 53 milliseconds, then 40 milliseconds, then 27, and finally 13 -- the fastest possible rate with the computer monitor being used.

"This didn't really fit with the scientific literature we were familiar with, or with some common assumptions my colleagues and I have had for what you can see," Potter says.'

Klevius EMAH explanation: According to EMAH there's no need for time consuming information transport via cortex because the appropriate association pattern is already flickering on the Thalamic "awareness monitor".

The latencies at which we respond to environmental stimuli are not only related to cortical pre-movement states (actual Thalamic connections) but are, more importantly, correlated with an anticipatory thalamic association pattern (awareness) which is extremely fast because it's in immediate contact with the rest of your body.

Read EMAH for more! Yes, I know, the text is in urgent need of updating. After all, proto-EMAH was born in Klevius' Demand for Resources (1992). And I will start this monumental task when I see that I get some support for it. But in the meantime, do as I suggested in the foreword to Demand for Resources: Try to be positive in your reading. The quality of information is dependent on both sender and receiver. And don't forget that text is linear whereas thinking is parallel.

And dear reader, if you wonder why klevius.info hasn't been updated for a decade or so - between us, blame islam, not Klevius!






Monday, January 13, 2014




When it comes to the social state and islam ordinary people are kept in complete ignorance. Why?

 

re:


Dear reader, this is true inter-disciplinary research and gives you a hint of how Klevius works out his strange results!


Daily mail today:

Parents should flee UK to stop social workers taking children, says Lib Dem family campaigner

  • Liberal Democrat MP John Hemming spoken out as evidence emerged suggesting children are being wrongly taken into care




Why haven't people listened to Peter Klevius?!



Although Peter Klevius, who has also worked as a solicitor in child custody cases (incl. some in the ECHR), has for decades scientifically studied, reported and informed about this at a depth (anthropology, criminology/sociology, critical studies on psychoanalysis, feminism etc)  and breadth (books, web, articles, radio, TV, lectures etc) that is second to none, nothing seems to have changed. Why? And just as with islam, sex segregation is at the core of the problem. Is that why it's so difficult to digest?

                                                             This drawing was made by Peter Klevius
                                                             in the late 1970s (text and rose added later).


Here's your starter kit:

1   Angels of Antichrist - social state vs kinship (Klevius 1996)
The most important sociological paper from the last century.

2   "Pathological Symbiosis" in LVU- Relevance, and Sex Segregated Emergence (Klevius 2002)
A thesis that could be seen as just an appendix to to Angels of Antichrist but which serves you with the bedrock of data connections needed to understand the problem with state child abductions.

Warning! Pathological symbiosis is an extremely scary* thesis - despite the fact that it's purely dry science!

* Professor Tham at Stockholm University first thought that I just made it up - he could in no way first believe the scientific facts presented in text form but had to see them in original! Moreover, he then believed that this could possibly not be a common view among social workers. That's why he asked for interviews to back it up! And you, please don't miss the extremely revealing email correspondence in the appendices.

Also, have a look at Klevius Psychosocial Freud timeline (it contains important new original research revelations made by Klevius re. the background to Freud's intellectual madness - e.g. the Caton connection. You won't find an earlier reference than Klevius - no matter where you look!).

Acknowledgement: Klevius is sorry if his language feels offensive but the horrible truth is that not a single word is exaggerated - it's just you who has been misled all the time! So feel offended by universities, the social state and islam instead!


Abstract of Pathological symbiosis:

“Pathological symbiosis” is a psychoanalytic concept that is incorporated 1991 as a legal criterion for compulsory separation of children from their parents. The purpose of the study is: a) To elucidate whether “pathological symbiosis” is familiar and relevant for social welfare secretaries, b) to present research on risk and prevention, c) to understand the emergence of “pathological symbiosis” in the light of sex segregated opportunity structures and traditional sex role attitudes affecting main female child psychoanalysts. The questions addressed are: 1) Is the concept of “pathological symbiosis” familiar and relevant for social workers in Stockholm?

2) Can the emergence of the concept be better understood as a result of  sex segregation? The first question is answered by a semi-structured survey among 18 social districts in Stockholm in the fall of 2002. The latter questions are answered by a hermeneutical method. Data from the writings of main critics of the psychoanalytic movement, as well as from original psychoanalytic authors and their biographical material are included. The study focuses on Margaret Mahler as the main author associated with the concept and Anna Freud. According to 17 out of 18 social welfare officers, representing one district each, “pathological symbiosis” is a necessary and usable tool for their work with children. The main interpretation of the hermeneutical understanding is that the emergence of “pathological symbiosis” is intimately connected to sex segregated opportunity structures and traditional sex-roles. Research on risk and prevention suggests the lack of parental attachment as a major cause of deviancy.



Abstract of Angels of Antichrist:

The Nordic child protection system is resulting (also see World Values Survey) in decreased parenthood and a disproportional strong social state that threatens human rights in the area of social policy. Instead of reducing poverty, taxes are used to feed the growth of bureaucracy. Due to a peculiar and almost entirely social democratic dominance of power in the 20th century, Sweden has become the symbol not only of the Nordic welfare state but also of a totalitarian social state with limited possibilities for parents to make their own decisions for their children. Unfortunately, Sweden also has a law that makes school attendance (but not learning) compulsory, while in Denmark, Finland and Norway, there is no such a law (although children’s reading- writing-, and math-skills are at least the same). The authorized and monopolized interpretation of "the best interest of the child" (created by small and non-representative but strongly influential groups of legislators) has established a powerful and legal child trade system within the social state. (This legal child trade works within the "margin of appreciation" and thus, until now, out of reach for e.g. the European Convention of Human Rights.) Parents live under constant threat from the social workers, and their children can be abducted and placed into commercial foster "care" on the basis of purely subjective (e g psycho-dynamic) opinions. This constitutes a serious threat to kinship and is, according to foster care research, not "in the best interest of the child" but rather  destructive to the welfare of children and their future as adults. Moreover, the Nordic child protection law is not in congruence with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Social democracy with main stream feminism and a hostile psychoanalytic view to family, has strongly influenced this development pattern. Other effects are a high rate of juvenile delinquency and a disproportional high amount of girls trapped in technical incompetence due to a strong, state controlled sex apartheid in caring and education. A considerable absence of fathers reinforces the negative influence on girls’ education, physical development and self-esteem. Another view on the welfare state would emerge from the idea of global human (individual) rights and citizen salary (e g combined with an abrogation of income taxes - see Fair Tax Bill) and compulsory health and education insurance. In the end, the question is to be whether we want to support pluralism or centralized state power and totalitarian movements.10th anniversery update (2006):Social democracy has been especially vulnerable to political Islam. This is well in line with the thesis below, especially when it comes to sex segregation and state power. Interestingly, Islam (via the Swedish government's Muslim "expert") now demands that Swedish Muslims should be protected from the Swedish child protection act! Also it's notable that the Swedish social democratic women are now headed by a Muslim! And although the Swedish social democrats in the 2006 election had to step aside, the heavy social state bureaucracy ("women trap") has its own inertia as described below.

Wednesday, January 08, 2014


Rapetivism is the very soul of islam and its Koran - but BBC, Aftonbladet, and a professor in "islamology" had no clue!

Why hasn't BBC's blood thirsty islamofascist* muslim Sharia presenter Mishal Husain told the Brits about how islam/Koran approves of slavery and rape?

 * I.e. against the most basic Human Rights (see below about OIC - all muslims world Sharia) and ask yourself why you weren't properly informed about what was going on in UN behind your back!


Aftonbladet and Jan Hjärpe reveal total ignorance about islam - or bottomless hypocrisy! 


Scandinavia's biggest news paper Aftonbladet together with an old and confused (?!) professor emeritus in "islamology" (sic), Jan Hjärpe, try to dismiss a less educated islam critic belonging to Sweden's only islam critical party Sverigedemokraterna, by stating that there is 'nothing in the Koran that says rape can be used as a penalty' against women. Klevius comment: Of course not, but that doesn't change the fact that islam/Koran clearly approves of rape - and slavery! Do whatever you llike with what your right hands possess (sex slaves).

Linus Bylund allegedly said that it's written in the Koran that rape can be used as a penalty against women.


Jan Hjärpe: It's a myth.

Peter Klevius to Jan Hjärpe, Aftonbladet and BBC: You're not only pathetic but also endangering the lives of millions and prolonging the suffering caused by the worst racist/sexist ideology ever!



No wonder so many are misled about islam!

Two young British girls got acid thrown in their face because of islam. But no one, except the muslims who caused it, say so!



Klevius: Yes, it's perfectly normal. What a pity no one has told you before. Islam is the very essence of ultimate racism! This is why muslims are so sensitive about criticism against islam while showing extreme contempt and insensitivity against non-muslims and "wrong-muslims". And this is also why OIC (all muslims world organization) not only has abandoned and even criminalized Human Rights (via UN) but also made it a crime to criticize islam (the worst ideological crime history knows about).


Rape in the Koran


Klevius acknowledgement: Before reading about rape in the Koran, do keep in mind that there was no Mohammed before he was inserted in the islamic/Koranic fairy tale.

The evilness of islam explained in simple English

There are no Human Rights in islam - only islamic "human rights" (Sharia)

Because islamofascists and their supporters lack any credible argument in favor of islam, but 1,400 years of historical evidence* for the very opposite, they have to use the lowest of means to blur the picture of the evil medieval slave Leviathan. So, for example, are those who dare to criticize this pure evilness

* Not to mention the extremely obscure origin of islam. According to Britain's (and the world's - after Klevius) foremost islam researcher when it comes to its extremely violent early stages, Hugh Kennedy, "Before Abd al-Malik (caliph 685-705) Mohammed (allegedly dead 632) is never mentioned on any official document whatsoever".

The main reason that Klevius considers himself the world's foremost expert on the origin of islam is that he (sadly) still happens to be the world's foremost expert on sex segregation/apartheid, i.e. what constitutes the basis for rapetivism and islam's survival (and which is the main reason OIC abandoned Human Rights in UN and replaced them with islamofascist Sharia).


Only truly pious (so called "extremist") muslims are truly evil. However, all non-extremist (secularized) "muslims" aren't necessarily good either if they knowingly use the evilness of islam for their own satisfaction. Only ignorant "muslims" can be excused.



There is no equivalent term for ‘rape’ in the Koran. However, neither is there a single verse in the Koran which even remotely discourages forced sex. In contrast, there are several verses in the Koran which give the green light to rape and other sexual crimes against women.

One has also to remember that although islam/the Koran sees all women as inferior to men, non-muslim women are even worse off. That's why so many non-muslim women convert if they are stupid enough to fall in love with a muslim man. Stupid if they do it while knowing they have to give up their most basic Human Rights!

Surah an-Nisa discusses lawful and forbidden women for pious muslims. Before we delve into the particular verse, it should be noted that it is not easy to understand what is being suggested using the verse alone. Therefore, relying on authoritative Tafsirs (Koran interpretations) and Sahih (authentic) Hadiths associated with it, are necessary to get the exact picture.

Koran verse 4:24: Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess. Thus has Allah ordained for you. All others are lawful, provided you seek them from your property, desiring chastity, not fornication. So with those among them whom you have enjoyed, give them their required due, but if you agree mutually after the requirement (has been determined), there is no sin on you. Surely, Allah is Ever All-Knowing, All-Wise. Koran 4:24

What we see in the beginning of this verse as “forbidden” refers to sexual intercourse. The Koran dictates, women already married are forbidden for muslims except those whom their right hands possess (sex slaves).

It is important to know the context of this verse, as it sheds light onto the nature of allowance. If we go through a Sahih Hadith in Sunan Abu Dawud:
Abu Said al-Khudri said: "The apostle of Allah sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the apostle of Allah were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Koranic verse, "And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess". That is to say, they are lawful for them when they complete their waiting period." [The Koran verse is 4:24]

Abu Dawud 2:2150

Here in the above hadith, we are told why verse 4:24 was revealed to Muhammad. It was to encourage his muslim fighters, who were reluctant, to have sexual contacts with female captives even while their husbands were alive as prisoners of war. This is made clear when we read:

    "Some of the Companions of the apostle of Allah were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers."

The Abu Dawud hadith is confirmed by the two Sahih collections, namely Sahih Bukhari and Sahih muslim.

In Sahih Bukhari we read:

Narrated Ibn Muhairiz: I entered the Mosque and saw Abu Said Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl (i.e. coitus interruptus). Abu Said said, "We went out with Allah's Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So when we intended to do coitus interrupt us, we said, 'How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allah's Apostle who is present among us?" We asked (him) about it and he said, 'It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist."

Sahih Bukhari 5:59:459

Similarly in Sahih muslim:
Abu Sa'id al-Khudri reported that at the Battle of Hunain Allah's Messenger sent an army to Autas and encountered the enemy and fought with them. Having overcome them and taken them captives, the Companions of Allah's Messenger seemed to refrain from having intercourse with captive women because of their husbands being polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that:" And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess (Koran 4:. 24)" (i. e. they were lawful for them when their 'Idda period came to an end).

Sahih Muslim 8:3432

There is an entire chapter devoted to this in the Sahih Muslim collection. The title of the chapter speaks in volumes as we read:

    Sahih Muslim. Chapter 29: Title: It is permissible to have sexual intercourse with a captive woman after she is purified of menses or delivery. In case she has a husband, her marriage is abrogated after she becomes captive.

Ibn Kathir, the most prominent of all Koran interpreters, had this to say in regards to verse 4:24:

The Ayah (verses) means Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess.), you are prohibited from marrying women who are already married, except those whom your right hands possess) except those whom you acquire through war, for you are allowed such women after making sure they are not pregnant. Imam Ahmad recorded that Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri said, "We captured some women from the area of Awtas who were already married, and we disliked having sexual relations with them because they already had husbands. So, we asked the Prophet about this matter, and this Ayah (verse) was revealed, Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess). Accordingly, we had sexual relations with these women." (Alternate translation can be: as a result of these verses, their (Infidels) wives have become lawful for us) This is the wording collected by At-Tirmidhi An-Nasa'i, Ibn Jarir and Muslim in his Sahih.
Forbidding Women Already Married, Except for Female Slaves
Tafsir Ibn Kathir

Similarly in Tafsir al-Jalalayn (Koran interpretation by two Jalals namely: Jalaluddin Mahalli and Jalaluddin Suyuti):

And, forbidden to you are, wedded women, those with spouses, that you should marry them before they have left their spouses, be they muslim free women or not; save what your right hands own, of captured [slave] girls, whom you may have sexual intercourse with, even if they should have spouses among the enemy camp, but only after they have been absolved of the possibility of pregnancy [after the completion of one menstrual cycle]; this is what God has prescribed for you.
Koran 4:24

Tafsir al-Jalalayn

The tafsir attributed to Ibn Abbas, Muhammad's paternal cousin, further confirms:

And all married women (are forbidden unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess) of captives, even if they have husbands in the Abode of War, after ascertaining that they are not pregnant, by waiting for the lapse of one period of menstruation. (It is a decree of Allah for you) that which I have mentioned to you is unlawful in Allah's Book.
Koran 4:24

Tafsir 'Ibn Abbas
Further Verses
Verses 23:1-6

There are other verses in the Koran similar to verse 4:24. For example, Surah al-Mumenoon makes mention of successful muslims and their characteristics:
Successful indeed are the believers, who are humble in their prayers and who keep aloof from what is vain and who are givers of poor-rate and who guard their private parts, except before their mates or those whom their right hands possess, for they surely are not blamable.
Koran 23:1-6

Guarding private parts is denotative of abstaining from sexual activities. The Qur'an points out successful believers are those who are indulging in sexual activities only with their wives and sex-slaves.
Verses 70:29-30

This is confirmed again in Surah al-Maarij:
And those who guard their private parts, except in the case of their wives or those whom their right hands possess-- for these surely are not to be blamed,
Koran 70:29-30
Muhammad

This practice of raping war captives was practiced by islam’s very own prophet Muhammad, in his life. On two occasions, he married (for the sake of sexual gratification only) war captives and raped them. Those victims were namely Safiyah and Juwairiyah.
Safiyah

Safiyah the daughter of Huayy was the wife of a Jewish Rabbi named Kinana. When Muhammad conquered the Jewish village of Khaibar, he tortured and killed the Rabbi and took captive his wife. Sahih Hadith in Bukhari testify to this fact:

Narrated 'Abdul 'Aziz: Anas said, 'When Allah's Apostle invaded Khaibar, we offered the Fajr prayer there yearly in the morning) when it was still dark. The Prophet rode and Abu Talha rode too and I was riding behind Abu Talha. The Prophet passed through the lane of Khaibar quickly and my knee was touching the thigh of the Prophet . He uncovered his thigh and I saw the whiteness of the thigh of the Prophet. When he entered the town, he said, 'Allahu Akbar! Khaibar is ruined. Whenever we approach near a (hostile) nation (to fight) then evil will be the morning of those who have been warned.' He repeated this thrice. The people came out for their jobs and some of them said, 'Muhammad (has come).' (Some of our companions added, "With his army.") We conquered Khaibar, took the captives, and the booty was collected. Dihya came and said, 'O Allah's Prophet! Give me a slave girl from the captives.' The Prophet said, 'Go and take any slave girl.' He took Safiya bint Huyai. A man came to the Prophet and said, 'O Allah's Apostles! You gave Safiya bint Huyai to Dihya and she is the chief mistress of the tribes of Quraiza and An-Nadir and she befits none but you.' So the Prophet said, 'Bring him along with her.' So Dihya came with her and when the Prophet saw her, he said to Dihya, 'Take any slave girl other than her from the captives.' Anas added: The Prophet then manumitted her and married her." Thabit asked Anas, "O Abu Hamza! What did the Prophet pay her (as Mahr)?" He said, "Her self was her Mahr for he manumitted her and then married her." Anas added, "While on the way, Um Sulaim dressed her for marriage (ceremony) and at night she sent her as a bride to the Prophet . So the Prophet was a bridegroom and he said, 'Whoever has anything (food) should bring it.' He spread out a leather sheet (for the food) and some brought dates and others cooking butter. (I think he (Anas) mentioned As-SawTq). So they prepared a dish of Hais (a kind of meal). And that was Walima (the marriage banquet) of Allah's Apostle ."
Sahih Bukhari 1:8:367
Juwairiyah

The following hadith from Sunan Abu Dawud bears out how Muhammad obtained Juwairiyah, a beautiful woman of a tribe called Banu Mustaliq. Muhammad was attacking the tribe without warning and conquering them:
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin: Juwayriyyah, daughter of al-Harith ibn al-Mustaliq, fell to the lot of Thabit ibn Qays ibn Shammas, or to her cousin. She entered into an agreement to purchase her freedom. She was a very beautiful woman, most attractive to the eye. Aisha said: She then came to the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) asking him for the purchase of her freedom. When she was standing at the door, I looked at her with disapproval. I realised that the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) would look at her in the same way that I had looked. She said: Apostle of Allah, I am Juwayriyyah, daughter of al-Harith, and something has happened to me, which is not hidden from you. I have fallen to the lot of Thabit ibn Qays ibn Shammas, and I have entered into an agreement to purchase of my freedom. I have come to you to seek assistance for the purchase of my freedom. The Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) said: Are you inclined to that which is better? She asked: What is that, Apostle of Allah? He replied: I shall pay the price of your freedom on your behalf, and I shall marry you. She said: I shall do this. She (Aisha) said: The people then heard that the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) had married Juwayriyyah. They released the captives in their possession and set them free, and said: They are the relatives of the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) by marriage. We did not see any woman greater than Juwayriyyah who brought blessings to her people. One hundred families of Banu al-Mustaliq were set free on account of her.
Abu Dawud 29:3920

The following hadith from Sahih Bukhari is evidentiary to the above:
Narrated Ibn Aun: I wrote a letter to Nafi and Nafi wrote in reply to my letter that the Prophet had suddenly attacked Bani Mustaliq without warning while they were heedless and their cattle were being watered at the places of water. Their fighting men were killed and their women and children were taken as captives; the Prophet got Juwairiya on that day. Nafi said that Ibn 'Umar had told him the above narration and that Ibn 'Umar was in that army.
Sahih Bukhari 3:46:717

Muslim Apologetics
Claims about verse 24:33

Muslims will frequently quote the following when confronted with the passages provided in this article and others like it:
Let those who find not the wherewithal for marriage keep themselves chaste, until Allah gives them means out of His grace. And if any of your slaves ask for a deed in writing (to enable them to earn their freedom for a certain sum), give them such a deed if ye know any good in them: yea, give them something yourselves out of the means which Allah has given to you. But force not your maids to prostitution when they desire chastity, in order that ye may make a gain in the goods of this life. But if anyone compels them, yet, after such compulsion, is Allah, Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful (to them),Koran 24:33

The first part of the verse is telling unmarried people to keep themselves chaste. Now, the important thing to remember is that the Islamic definition of chaste is different than the commonly agreed upon definitions of the word. According to Koran 23:6, Qur'an 33:50, Qur'an 33:52, and Qur'an 70:30 a muslim man is considered "chaste" so long as he only has sex with his wives (of whom he may have up to four) and his right-hand possessions (female captives/slaves). An unmarried muslim man who has sex with his slave girl is still considered to be "chaste" by islamic standards.

The second sentence speaks about slaves who ask for a way to pay for their freedom (like indentured servants) as long as the master knows of "any good in them". It would be interesting to discover how female slaves could earn any money at all if they had been kidnapped from their families and forced into slavery and did not have money-making skills. And if a female slave was to earn her freedom, where then could she go if her family had been massacred? How could she support herself and keep herself safe from rape, prostitution, etc.? Practicalities aside, this verse only tells muslims to let their slaves purchase their freedom (but puts in a convenient disclaimer of "if ye know any good in them"). Muhammad did stipulate that the masters should give their slaves something but conveniently left out what and how much.

The third sentence is what pertains to the muslim claim that rape is forbidden. However, the word used is not simply sexual intercourse but is more specifically "prostitution" or "whoredom". Prostitution is not simply about sex, but sex for a price. This is why it is often referred to as one of the oldest professions. What this verse speaks of is a master forcing his maid to be a prostitute thereby making money by allowing other men to have sex with her. This verse says nothing about a master forcing himself upon his slave-girl who is considered "halal" for him according to Islamic law. The fourth sentence says that if a girl is indeed forced into prostitution, then Allah will forgive her for committing zina. What this verse does not say is what the punishment should be for a man who forces his maid into prostitution. All it says is that he should not do it. And what it definitely does not say is that a muslim man cannot force himself on his own slave-girl. Hint hint, for BBC and others wondering what "caused" muslim atrocities of all kinds!


From 4:24, it can be rightly assumed, that the Koran does not see any wrong-doing in muslims having sex with captive women even if these women are married and their husbands are still alive. This clearly indicates that the Koran allows rape, as captive women, even in the unlikely case of agreeing to sexual intercourse, would still be having that intercourse under duress, i.e. rapetivism.


References

    Gaines, Larry; Miller, LeRoy (2006). Criminal Justice In Action: The Core. Thomson/Wadsworth. ISBN 0-495-00305-0.
    1st Class Investigations Glossary
    Ruling on having intercourse with a slave woman when one has a wife - Islam Q&A, Fatwa No. 10382, November 24, 2005


There can be no doubt that islam has been the worst slave ideology ever. Not only does islam approve of slavery, the scale of islamic slavery early on was such that no other interpretation is even possible!



Islam originated in the bloody enslavement campaign by Abu Bakr who became the first muslim caliph over the firtst islamic caliphate. As seen on the map below its Northern part followed almost exactly the campaign by its modern successor, the Saudi fueled al-Qaeda branch called the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria  and led by Abu Bakr Baghdadi (sic) aka Ibrahim Awwad Ibrahim Ali al-Badri al-Samarrai.






Islam's mosques, already more than 1,000 years ago, constituted the center for the worst slave finance the world had ever experienced - and it got worse!


Klevius comment: Do note that already more than thousand years ago in what is now Iraq, some 500,000 African Zanj slaves started a rebellion against their muslim masters! It gives a hint of the scale of muslim Sharia slave finance based on "infidel" racism - which is clearly also sanctioned in the Koran. In fact, it's the very root of islam!

The Zanj Rebellion or the Negro Rebellion took place near the city of Basra, located in present-day southern Iraq, over a period of fifteen years (869−883 AD). The insurrection is believed to have involved enslaved Black Africans (Zanj) that had originally been captured from the African Great Lakes region and areas further south in East Africa. It grew to involve over 500,000 slaves who were imported from across the muslim empire and claimed over "tens of thousands of lives in lower Iraq" - i.e. actually smaller numbers than today's islamic campaign in Iraq.


Islam today


Viktor Titov (July, 2013): The objective of Saudi Arabia in this game is crystal clear – to attain the uncontested control over the Arab world. For this reason Libya is lying in ruins today, for this reason Egypt found itself on the brink of collapse, for this reason Yemen obeys any order he gets from “Bandar Bush”, for this reason the regimes in Qatar and Kuwait are being suppressed, for which Iraq fails to attain stability, for which the war in Syria rages on. And when everything went just great for the Saudi “Godfather”, Assad managed to crack the resistance of the rebels. Which meant that all these intrigues and innocent human lives were a waste – since Saudi Arabia can’t get to its only rival in the region – Iran without breaking Syria’s back. Back in 2011 Henry Kissinger, a close friend of “Bandar Bush” said on a closed press-conference that “they” need to conquer seven more Middle Eastern countries in order to get their recourses. Syria was the sixth country in this list, and Iran was the last to go down.


Klevius comment: Saudi supported Sunni muslims linked to Al Qaeda have gained control of territory in western Iraq's Anbar province in two of Anbar's main cities, Falluja and Ramadi, that were the sites of crucial battles during the Iraq war. On Friday, militants waving the Al Qaeda flag blew up key government buildings in Falluja. More than 8,000 Iraqis died in the fighting last year, according to United Nations, making it the bloodiest year since 2008, when Saudi islam bowing muslim born (apostate?!) Mr X Barry Barakeh Husain Obama Dunham Soetoro (or whatever) via a media coup d'etat mainly based on racist prejudice became an unconstitutional* "president" of the US.

* You can't possibly approve of islamic Sharia, which is distinctly (OIC/UN) against the US Constitution and US obligations to Human Rights, while being a US president.



Across the border in Syria, Saudi (and other Sunni steered Arab states) sponsored Sunni muslim militant groups are playing an increasingly large role in the insurgency against President Bashar Assad. Among the most prominent militant groups on both sides of the border is the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. The group has roots in Iraq, but the civil war in Syria, initiated and supported by Saudi Arabia, has provided fresh supplies of money and weapons from the Saudis & Co, and fighters from the Koran. Under the leadership of Abu Bakr Baghdadi, it seeks to create an islamic caliphate including the territory of both Syria and Iraq, in other words a huge buffer zone for the Saudis against Iran.

The Saudi supported muslim jihadists of course have heavier weapons than Iraqi government forces.

Ryan Crocker, U.S. ambassador to Iraq from 2007 to '09: "It was bad enough when this contagion was just inside Syria, but now it's spreading, and that's a whole lot worse," said . Nothing could be more worrisome, he said, than the militant groups' plan to expand their grip on territory, giving them a base from which they could plot long-range operations.

The leader Abu Bakr Baghdadi, seeks to create an islamic caliphate including the territory of both Syria and Iraq.

While ISIS militants were fighting government forces in western Iraq, other muslims were battling other Syrian muslim groups (a common pattern in islam) trying to limit their reach near Aleppo, in western Syria.

The Pentagon last month sent 75 Hellfire missiles to Iraq to be used on propeller planes in the fight against the militants, and the U.S. plans to send ScanEagles, a small surveillance drone with limited tactical range.



Klevius comment:

Do the muslim test by asking them if they are against Human Rights. If they are not they are no real muslims, according to OIC and every possible form of Sharia!








 In other words, a true muslim is then per definition always a supremacist racist and sexist individual through the tie to islam and Sharia. And there is no real  islam without Sharia! Got it dude? And stop cheating yourself and others with that "moderate islam" crap, will you!





Sayeeda Warsi is Cameron's "minister of faith islam" and UK's representative in OIC, the islamofascist Sharia organization which in the UN has abandoned Human Rights and now wants Britain to implement Sharia compliance and making London a Sharia capital. And making national laws criminalizing anything critical of islam or muslims! All to satisfy islamofascists Arabs etc.


The Abu Qatada noise was deliberately used to make Brits hostile to Human Rights (which don't allow torture) so to pave the way for islamofascist Sharia money to London.

Thursday, January 02, 2014


Female patriarchy a la islamofascism


One of the worst islamofascist nations ornaments its Sharia blasphemy court with a woman. Impressed?




Klevius comment: Wonder what her muslim husband is doing?


Do the muslim test by asking them if they are against Human Rights. If they are not they are no real muslims, according to OIC and every possible form of Sharia!






 In other words, a true muslim is then per definition always a supremacist racist and sexist individual through the tie to islam and Sharia. And there is no real  islam without Sharia! Got it dude? And stop cheating yourself and others with that "moderate islam" crap, will you!





Sayeeda Warsi is Cameron's "minister of faith islam" and UK's representative in OIC, the islamofascist Sharia organization which in the UN has abandoned Human Rights and now wants Britain to implement Sharia compliance and making London a Sharia capital. And making national laws criminalizing anything critical of islam or muslims! All to satisfy islamofascists Arabs etc.


The Abu Qatada noise was deliberately used to make Brits hostile to Human Rights (which don't allow torture) so to pave the way for islamofascist Sharia money to London.





Support Peter Klevius work for Human Rights


By supporting Peter Klevius' campaign for Human Rights - and therefore inevitably against OIC and islam - you save millions of children and adults from continuous suffering, and make their future possibilities a little brighter. Negative rights for a positive future. 'Negative rights' are those most important basic rights of the individual which defend us against impositions. Similar as traffic rules - only that in Human Rights you don't have "Lexus lanes" etc. 

Peter Klevius intellectual defense for everyone's Human Rights works on two levels:

1 Keeping up a constant intellectual pressure on "reforming" islam. Of course islam can never be truly reformed so what this simply means is that islam is forced to, little by little, be less islamic.

2 Counteracting the widespread misinformation about islam and muslims, hence avoiding naive and ignorant people from falling pray to islam and muslims - while simultaneously exposing those who deliberately approve of islam's Human Rights violating Sharia - already voted through in UN by the help of OIC's more than notorious islamofascist voting bloc consisting of some of the worst dictatorships and some additional traitors.



In John Peters Humprey's (pbuh) world view "infidels" didn't exist


John Peters Humphrey (peace be upon him and Human Rights) is the last prophet of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights - and he is utterly defamated by muslim Humanrightsophobes - yet all the Billions of Human Rights followers take it (too?) calmly.

John Peters Humphrey (who actually existed and who wasn't a pedophile or a murderous scumbag or a fanatic warlord or a terrorist) wrote the first draft of the Universal Human Rights Declaration (peace be upon him and Human Rights).


So what is modern islamofascism?


The main purpose of OIC is to gather all the world's muslims under a worldwide Umma that is protected from Human Rights criticism. And for that purpose OIC (ab)uses UN, and in an extension, via UN tries to implement national laws all over the world that not only keep islam out of scrutiny but even makes criticism of islam a crime! This lobbying is going on all the time with weak and vulnerable and/or just traitor politicians while most of the people are kept in deep ignorance about islam through extremely Saudi biased education and the threats of being accused of racism or "islamophobia".

And no, it's not a conspiracy theory. It's all to be found in UN's official documents and on the web.

And no, it's not the question of some "minor adjustments". No, this is big and OIC's own actions (e.g. officially abandoning some* of the most basic Human Rights) in the UN easily proves Klevius right on this point.

* Actually those very rights that, because of their elimination, defines islam!

And basically it's all about sanctioning islamic racism and sexism, i.e. the very original pillars that in the first place made islam attractive for the lowest of human behavior!

Wednesday, January 01, 2014

Peter Klevius tutorial effort for those seemingly uncapable (or unwilling?) of understanding Wittgenstein


By supporting Peter Klevius' campaign for Human Rights - and therefore against OIC and islam - you save millions of children and adults from continuous suffering, and make their future possibilities a little brighter. Negative rights for a positive future. Peter Klevius intellectual defense for everyone's Human Rights works on two levels:

1 Keeping up a constant intellectual pressure on "reforming" islam. Of course islam can never be truly reformed so what this simply means is that islam is made, little by little, less islamic.

2 Counteracting the widespread misinformation about islam and muslims, hence avoiding naive and ignorant people from falling pray to islam and muslims - while simultaneously exposing those who deliberately approve of islam's Human Rights violating Sharia already voted through in UN by the help of OIC's more than notorious islamofascist voting bloc and some additional traitors.

When you (like Dennet*) don't understand Wittgenstein - why do you (like Dennet) blame or belittle him for it?!

* Daniel Dannet puts Alan Turing on the same footing as Ludvig Wittgenstein while calling them who really understand Wittgenstein 'fanatics'. No surprise then Daniel Dennet also wants our children to be even more indoctribated by islam "education".

To want to understand or not want to understand - that's the question


People with less understanding often tend to fill the gaps with their own wrong interpretations instead of leaving it blanc, i.e. showing some self criticism. 

So to understand the following Peter Klevius strongly suggests you read EMAH (the Even More Astonishing Hypothesis), especially the part Donald Duck in the Holy Land of Language.

It's really simple when you get rid of your fanatic (religious?) bias.



Stiff vs adaptive computing



Turing wrote that the Turing machine, here called a Logical Computing Machine, consisted of:

    ...an unlimited memory capacity obtained in the form of an infinite tape marked out into squares, on each of which a symbol could be printed. At any moment there is one symbol in the machine; it is called the scanned symbol. The machine can alter the scanned symbol and its behavior is in part determined by that symbol, but the symbols on the tape elsewhere do not affect the behavior of the machine. However, the tape can be moved back and forth through the machine, this being one of the elementary operations of the machine. Any symbol on the tape may therefore eventually have an innings (Turing 1948:61).

Turing in short: 

An unlimited memory capacity
At any moment one symbol
The machine's behavior is in part determined by that symbol, but the other symbols do not affect the behavior
However, and this being one of the elementary operations of the machine, any symbol may eventually have an opportunity to act

Klevius comment: This stiff and dumb linear computing machine is the very opposite to Klevius parallel computing machine EMAH, which, like life itself, constantly mirrors, adapts to, and reflects the flow of information in your origo, i.e. what is also wrongly called your 'consciousness'. You can't possibly be conscious of your 'consciousness' more than you can be hungry about your hunger. 'Consciousness' belongs to the same set of words as 'creation', 'god', 'ghost etc.

What you really need to consider when trying to understand EMAH is its extreme simplicity compared to your own entanglement within a "problem" you try to "solve". You need to get rid of your Homunculus for good.



Artificial intelligence is in Klevius vocabulary immediate, continuous and seamless updating



Who or what is it that understands incoming info in your brain?


Those not sharing Klevius EMAH view need first to fight the ghost of Homunculus (the little inevtable and infinitely regressing guy/s in your brain needed to see what your senses deliver - if you keep trying to believe in an  unfounded mind/body dualism).

The core of the homunculus paradox is that it tries to account for a phenomenon (consciousness) in terms of the very (made up) phenomenon that it is supposed to explain. Instead you need to accept the simple truth that what you call your consciousness is nothing except the origo (physiologically the Thalamus) where all your incoming information is handled. And by incoming Klevius of course also means back signals from your brain and other parts of your own body.



We are all trapped in our "private languages"


A solitary individual's “private language" in a Wittgensteinian context is a language that refers to private sensations and can, by definition, not be understood by anyone else. An individual decides to write ‘S’ in his diary whenever he has a certain sensation without any natural expression, and ‘S’ cannot be defined in words. The only criterion of correctness is whether a sensation feels the same to the individual. As a consequence what is called ‘private language’ is no language at all but for others incomprehensible behavior.

However, in EMAH Klevius goes one step further by focusing on the fact  that nothing, not even 2+2=4, can be communicated in a way that fully corresponds to its source. Communication can only be understood in a game setting. Moreover,there is really nothing principal hindering us from including all our experience as communication with our surroundings including our own body and its brain. And according to EMAH the monitor for all of this is your Thalamus. In such a scheme language could be defined as everything (or arbitrarily narrow) what is outside the scope of "private language".

When your neighbor uses his hammer in the night and therefore upsets you, is it communication? Or is it communication when you use your hammer against the same wall to get him quiet? And what about pets and plants? Your car or your computer? Is it communication when you see a familiar person on the street and that person also sees you without none of you reacting in any other way?

The following poem in Swedish was an early form of what became EMAH:


Min vän

Ett synintryck
en beröring
ord som diffusa budbärare
speglar en glimt av din tanke
i chifferform redan förvrängda
förrän de blivit sagda
av mig och din förväntan
min vän

(Klevius 1979)

My friend

A perception
a touch
words as diffuse messengers
mirror a glimpse of your thought
in decipher form already distorted
before being uttered
by me and your expectation
my friend



Collapsing bridges - and concepts



Wittgenstein: “Undecidability presupposes… that the bridge cannot be made with symbols,”  and “[a] connection between symbols which exists but cannot be represented by symbolic transformations is a thought that cannot be thought,” for “[i]f the connection is there,… it must be possible to see it.”

Klevius: A computer programmed to always lie can't be ordered to say that it lies.


Self-inferred incompleteness


Turing: "You cannot be confident about applying your calculus until you know that there are no hidden contradictions in it.

Wittgenstein: "Indeed, even at this stage, I predict a time when there will be mathematical investigations of calculi containing contradictions, and people will actually be proud of having emancipated themselves from consistency."

Turing: The real harm will not come in unless there is an application, in which a bridge may fall down or something of that sort…. You cannot be confident about applying your calculus until you know that there are no hidden contradictions in it.

 Wittgenstein: There seems to me an enormous mistake there. ... Suppose I convince [someone] of the paradox of the Liar, and he says, 'I lie, therefore I do not lie, therefore I lie and I do not lie, therefore we have a contradiction, therefore 2x2 = 369.' Well, we should not call this 'multiplication,' that is all...

 Turing: Although you do not know that the bridge will fall if there are no contradictions, yet it is almost certain that if there are contradictions it will go wrong somewhere.

Wittgenstein: But nothing has ever gone wrong that way yet...


Klevius comment: Indeed, not that way!

Propositions about facts are tautologous, and thus logically true but do not presuppose the existence of special "logical facts".

Wittgenstein: 'It is either raining or not raining'.

There are no "logical objects" to experience.

There is a distinction between pure and applied logic, and 'logic must not clash with its application'.

'But logic has to be in contact with its application.'

Logical constants are parts of truth-operations making the truth-conditions of one proposition dependent on its foundation.

So similar to Turing's confusion of language game and "pure logic", the same confusion is often apparent in discussions about "metaphysics".


Metaphysics is the language trap that confuses its victims with non sense like "the first principles of things"


According to Stanford encyclopedia, 'it is not easy to say what metaphysics is'.

Indeed! Like Gods and Ghosts!

And according to Wikipedia the pseudo-philosophy called metaphysics 'studies the fundamental nature of being and the world that encompasses it'.

That's some project, huh. The nature of being! Like lifting yourself by your hair. Sounds way too labor-some for Klevius.

Stanford encyclopedia: Ancient and Medieval philosophers might have said that metaphysics was, like chemistry or astrology, to be defined by its subject matter: metaphysics was the “science” that studied “being as such” or “the first causes of things” or “things that do not change.” It is no longer possible to define metaphysics that way, and for two reasons. First, a philosopher who denied the existence of those things that had once been seen as constituting the subject-matter of metaphysics—first causes or unchanging things—would now be considered to be making thereby a metaphysical assertion (Klevius comment: i.e. the same as saying 'there is no god' or 'there are no ghosts') . Secondly, there are many philosophical problems that are now considered to be metaphysical problems (or at least partly metaphysical problems) that are in no way related to first causes or unchanging things; the problem of free will, for example, or the problem of the mental and the physical.

Klevius comment: The "problem" of free will is chaos (Klevius 1992), i.e. the "Schwarzschild horizon" of ethnocentrism* that, due to lack of understanding, hinders us from following logical determinism. Some, like my teenage son, might call it entertainment and the very soul of life. But others might wrap it in "religion" for the purpose of sanctioning racism, sexism etc.

* The meaning of this word as "explained" on Wikipedia etc is wrong. It's not synonymous with bias and prejudice, but simply describes the factual limit of your understanding, and is therefore not a laughing matter - i.e. no more valid against "white colonialists" as against their subjects!



What is ultimately there? Klevius answer: You.

What is it like? Klevius answer: You.



The "problem" of the mental and the physical has similar properties and has long since passed its best before date which was when Descartes labored with his "ghost in the machine". The so called Homunculus paradox.




Two bright minds: One imprisoned in Alqatraz and the other in Cambridge


The escape from Alcatraz and an extremely unfair life: Frank Lee Morris, very intelligent, non-violent, nice and committed to learning and working, would have been the perfect symbol for "civil righters" -  if only he'd been "black".

Ludwig Wittgenstein was imprisoned in the world's best university (Cambridge) and Frank Lee Morris in the world's best prison (Alcatraz). Both managed to escape.

It's now 50 years since Frank Lee Morris made the most spectacular escape from the safest prison in USA (see the movie or do some reading). Who was he really? Klevius gives you the best answer based on available facts. And one thing seems certain, he wasn't a violent parasitic thug who excused his behavior with islam or similar racist ideologies.


Frank Lee Morris, who was tested/evaluated as having "superior intelligence" (his IQ scores would have been even higher if calibrated for his lack of education), in good physical shape and "excellent drafting and working skills", became an orphan at an early age and was thrown by the social state* between state paid foster homes and state paid institutions where he was abused as a slave and guinea pig.

He was convicted of his first crime (escape) at the age of 13 and the only robbery was when he was around 30 (not in his teen as stupid Wikipedia puts it) and, according to himself, wanted to quit the Americn curse and move via Mexico to the south. Except for escapes and this failed non-violent night burglary to a bank called "robbery", his most serious crime seems to have been travelling over a state border with a  minor teenage girlfriend.

As a teen he eventually escaped a psychiatric "treatment" institution based on flimsy psychoanalytic** ideas (they assessed him as having too low intelligence for to be successfully "treated" when, in fact, he begged for being able to develop his drafting skills and to work as a draftsman) and therefor got labelled a "delinquent" hence making it impossible for him to educate himself, dismissed from military service, and denied real work opportunities due to his state fabricated records. Instead he was chased around USA and imprisoned for some petty crimes but mainly for his repeated escapes.

* understand the extremely important concept of a "social state" by reading Angels of Antichrist (no dude, Klevius isn't even close to a Christian).

** Klevius' groundbreaking psychosocial Freud timeline will offer you the best possible kick start for beginning to understand the extreme stupidity of psychoanalysis (yes, Klevius has gone through not only Freud and his daughters works as well as those surrounding them, he has also gone through all the main Freud critics as well as how this early psychoanalysis is connected to that of today - just like the origin of islam Freud is excused and distanced from yet his most horrifying tenets are still around - and its very core the prevailing sex segregation  - and before you smile please consider your own ignorance and the fact that e.g. Ludvig Wittgenstein did include Otto Weininger among those thinkers who had impressed on him, but not Freud).