BBC again willfully and wrongly reported that it was because of European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) decision that the brain damaged Charlie boy had to die.BBC's Saudi raised muslim "diversity" mouthpieceMishal Husain doesn't fast during Ramadan but rather drinks some alcohol and gives a s--t to "islamic modesty". She also brags about being able to live her life inthe West without any of the worries facing girls/women in muslim countries. Klevius: Good for you - but it isn't thanks to islamic sharia but thanks to Human Rights.
Nothing could be more wrong. The truth was exactly the opposite to BBC's reporting - and BBC was well aware of it, yet didn't hesitate to again abuse its monopoly position, paid by license fees and tax money, to not only distort the actual case but also to use it in its never ending campaign against Human rights for the purpose of paving the way for Sunni muslim sharia. And this isn't because of any special love of muslims in general (especially not Shia muslims in Iran and Mideast) but because it benefits the islamofascist Saudi dictator family who is not only the self declared "custodian of islam" - which fact keeps all the world's muslims in a Saudi/OIC steered hostage situation while protecting the worst forms of islam - but also due to its oil/gas wealth that has bought them influence over its neighbors and Western politicians and Salafi mosque builders.
The truth re. poor Charlie boy is that ECHR didn't even touch the case but instead referred to its 'margin of appreciation' which constitutes the border line against involvement by the court in national matters.
This 'margin of appreciation' has been questioned from both directions, not the least by Klevius in some cases he brought to ECHR on the behalf of families who had been trampled on by the Swedish social state, but which were repelled by ECHR on the grounds that they fell outside the 'margin of appreciation' and that there was no reason for the court not to believe that the Swedish state had the best interest of the child highest on the agenda and that the Swedish courts had a better insight than ECHR in cases where families and the state differed in evaluation. Read more about it in Angels of Antichrist referred to below.
Tuesday, July 04, 2017
Klevius' Angels of Antichrist should be compulsory reading for everyone dealing with children and sociology.
From Angels of Antichrist to Pathological Symbiosis - a brief history about Klevius fight for Human Rights against the social state.Children 'still at risk' of being abused through state/council inventions not only in Jersey but all over England.
As Peter Klevius wrote in Angels of Antichrist (1996) 'state bureaucracy has its own inertia' based on powerful legislative lobbying by state bureaucrats themselves, poorly regulated commercial interests and without due responsibilities, authority status, and a psychosocial swamp of hoax social "science". And all of this is "justified" because the state functions as the ultimate custodian.
However, by addressing and accepting the problems above - especially the fact that the social state now functions like whatever big corporation with the added benefits of authority and legislation, no clear profit and quality responsibility, and no problem with bankruptcy etc. - a slimmed down and more effective and humane welfare state could emerge. I.e. one that puts its "clients", not itself, first.
Angels of Antichrist was based on Klevius earlier articles as well as his experience as a solicitor for parents who had been robbed of their children without no real ground for it.
Angels of Antichrist is perhaps the most important sociological paper from the last Century - yet one of the least read and understood, possibly because it's the first to combine kinship, social state and sex segregation in one clear analysis firmly mounted to solid empirical (although often hard to swallow) facts.
Angels of Antichrist now resides on several locations on the web. Here some examples:
The original version from 1996
This article 'Where the law ends tyranny begins' from 1993 was published in Finland in Hufvudstadsbladet, and is a predecessor to Angels of Antichrist. Here later published on NKMR's web site.
And here's an other from 1994.
However, Peter Klevius himself recommends the updated version from 2006 on Klevius web museum, which deliberately hasn't been touched upon for more than a decade.
The social state hides its Human Rights atrocities behind the 'Margin of Appreciation'
Some points quoted from Angels of Antichrist (Klevius 1996):
the social state creates its own problems in a way which are beyond all conceptions of human rights
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.
Pamela Geller and others got it all wrong when accusing Human Rights because the very opposite is true, i.e. that ECHR doesn't rule within 'the margin of appreciation' which fact is clearly stated in this case. In this respect it resembles ECHR's reluctance to deal with cases of the state abducting children on questionable grounds, as Klevius pointed out in Angels of Antichrist (1992) after ECHR dismissed a couple of Klevius cases on the grounds that they were 'within the margin of appreciation'. Klevius still remembers the hopelessness he saw in the eyes of his clients.
ECHR: The Court bore in mind the considerable room for manoeuvre (“wide margin of appreciation”) left to the authorities in the sphere concerning access to experimental medication for the terminally ill and in cases raising sensitive moral and ethical issues, reiterating that it was not for the Court to substitute itself for the competent domestic authorities.
A further proposal was made to make it easier for the authorities to isolate pregnant women suspected of living in a way that could be harmful to the unborn child (the formulation does not say ’her’ child - the child is the property of the state). I think this can hardly be in accordance with the spirit and intention of the European Convention or of the UN Human Rights Convention.
Professor in jurisprudence Jacob Sundberg, who has defended human rights against the Swedish system for decades, became a serious dissident on the University of Stockholm in the late eighties (the ius docendi affair). His efforts and the incorporating of Sweden in EU have forced the Swedish juridical system to pay, at least some attention to what earlier was called "strange thoughts of catholic reactionaries from the south". The Swedish strategy seems, however to avoid these "strange thoughts" by lobbying their own.
Today the social state, more or less, runs its own race with little dependence on political parties and the legal actions against children are largely subjective; there are, in other words relatively few drug abusers, alcoholics and clearly mentally disturbed persons among the parents. This trading of children has expanded beyond all imaginable limits and today makes up one of the heaviest costs of the municipalities in Sweden. Thus, the proportion of foster children in Sweden is 6-12 times higher than in Japan, a welfare state where, according to UN statistics, the quality of children's lives are valued most highly in the world. It hardly needs mentioning that Japan is the oldest and most family centred developed country in the World. In fact, the interventions made by the social authorities have been roughly proportional to juvenile delinquency of non-economic types. In Japan, child-criminality is still on a very low level whereas the Swedish figures might well be among the highest in the world. We are hampered in realistic assessment about this, however, since such cases are transferred to the social authorities, out of reach for statistics and international police-agreements.
If I were a stockbroker and if the social state was on the list I would probably invest in it. Which stocks could be safer? However, I’m not sure I like the business idea.
We might ask: After such a clean sweep, what is left on the dining table to eat? There is not really very much that presents itself in the way of alternatives to a rigid, biological, fundamentalist society. Some sort of protection, however is needed for the free, atomized souls inhabiting society, mother- and fatherless and with limited or, in practice, often superficial or non-existing kin- or friendship ties.
The totalitarian enemy grows at approximately the same rate as the individual weakens. Kinship, friendship and family values are needed but without being strangled by religion and sex segregation. A rule of law based on human rights, but these rights must be formulated so that they provide a bulwark against the very real enemy threat: the social state. Individuals have to be protected by the negative rights of the individual, in sharp contrast to the collective (society’s) positive rights of the socialistic ideology. Pluralism versus centralized state power.
In conclusion I would like to quote a hesitant Swedish feminist Maud Eduards; "But can women trust the state to take care of their interests? And will a society ruled and regulated by the state, with mean possibilities of private life, benefit women?"
This I will argue is a relevant question for women, men and children around the world. Although it is a rare one, the book I dearly would like to read is part two of Selma Lagerlöf’s "The Miracles of Antichrist". This is even rarer because she never came to write it. My guess is that its name might have been "Angels of Antichrist".
Shouldn't social state people be sentenced for manslaughter, child abuse etc.?
The most serious charge of manslaughter in England is gross negligence manslaughter which carries a maximum life sentence on conviction.
Gross negligence manslaughter is a form of involuntary manslaughter where the offender did not intend to kill or cause really serious harm. Instead the death resulted from gross negligence.
The complex law was clarified in a House of Lords ruling in 1994 in the case of R v Adomako. The test for gross negligence manslaughter is now known as the Adomako Test. It has four stages.
To secure a conviction, the Crown Prosecution Service must show firstly the existence of a duty of care to the deceased.
Then, it must prove that duty of care was breached,
and thirdly that the breach of duty caused or else significantly contributed to the deaths.
Finally, prosecutors would have to convince a jury that the breach should be characterized as gross negligence, and therefore a crime.
Gross negligence manslaughter is used to prosecute people who fail in a duty of care, causing someone's death.
Klevius scientific follow up analysis of Angels of Antichrist is a thesis called Pathological Symbiosis, which is the hereto most thorough one in its field. It not only the first to trace this hoax psychodynamic "diagnosis" to all its sources, but it also meticulously investigates legislation about it as well as its practical usage in social work and in the judicial process. And as an extra bonus it offers an appendix containing email correspondence with the author of the text that was used in the preparatory works for the Swedish Parliament - which, btw, mostly wasn't aware of it because it was cleverly hidden within a few lines in a many hundred pages work. Not even Klevius professor Henrik Tham believed it to be true before Klevius put the book in front of him.
When Klevius lectured about this he was contacted by the Swedish Government's muslim advisor who got so scared so he proposed that muslims should be exempted from the child care act (LVU).
Tuesday, May 05, 2015
Why didn't you resque these girls from muslim predators? UK police: We thought they were child prostitutes (sic)!
The social state is much more devastating to children than any private company - and waste much more money!
A UK mother who found 125 names of potential (most/all muslims?) sex abusers on her daughter’s mobile phone claims she was told by police in Rotherham it would be a "breach of the girl’s human rights" if they investigated.
Klevius translation: Note that we are talking about underage girls who would have no Human Rights protection against social state interventions (aided by the police) whatsoever (to understand this and the tiltle see Angels of Antichrist and Pathological Symbiosis). What they really meant was that it would be a breach of the muslims' human rights (read "diversity policy") if they investigated. And this is the dilemma - Human Rights cover all, including muslims, whereas sharia opposes Human Rights - which fact doesn't hinder muslims (and their supporters) from abusing Human Rights when it serves themselves.!
The parasitic social state that feeds itself on behalf of the taxpayers and children while giving a s--t to non-muslim girls abused by muslims. Don't approve a penny before getting rid of the parasites residing in the social state! And one thing is definitive: Ed Milliband will continue supporting these parasites.
Rotherham has been totally dominated by Labour since World War 2. Compare the total dominance of the Swedish social democrats who created the disastrous Swedish social state all the way from Gunnar and Alva Myral's "social hygiene" in the 1930s and due eugenics to the explosive tax injection in the 1970s and due birth of the modern social state. Some results: The Swedish "girl problem" (which Klevius has written about since 1993), high child/youth criminality, and a school system that 2015 is classified among the worst within OECD and heavily criticized in a recent OECD report. Yet Sweden has compulsory school attendance and doesn't admit homeschooling at all for normal children (alone in Europe together with Germany whose Hitler imposed law is still in power).
Learn more on Angels of Antichrist and Pathological Symbiosis
Joyce Thacker has been a central figure in the responsibility for letting children be abused and even murdered. How much does she get from your tax money, and will she be rewarded in the usual way for defending islam while not defending children.
Politicians in bed with islamofascism is a disaster for Human Rights
Ed Miliband is the son of Polish immigrant parents. His mother, Marion Kozak, is a Polish Jew who survived the Holocaust thanks to being protected by Poles. His father, Ralph Miliband, was a Belgian-born Polish Jewish Marxist academic who fled with his father to England during World War II.
Rochdale is notorious for its muslim sex predators abusing white British girls taken into "care" by the social state.
Rochdale Labour councillor Shakil Ahmed is the dad of now freed(?!) terrorist suspect Waheed Ahmed who was arrested and accused of trying to go to Syria with eight of his relatives.
'Extreme islam' and 'extremist muslims' vs. ?No, there is nothing to counter evil islam. Extreme islam has no alternative simply because islam is extreme in itself. Islam can never comply with the basic universal equality principle of Human Rights. That's because islam is based on racism and sexism, i.e. supremacy! Klevius therefore fully agrees with Erdogan's statement that there are no moderate muslims because there is no moderate islam.
And they are all around us ready to squeeze in more of islam whenever opportunities arise - and always ready to excuse islam from whatever that can be seen as unfavorable to islam.
BBC behaves precisely as those who let muslims continue their sex slavery (aka "grooming") in Rochdale, Rotherham and elsewhere!
Chief Crown Prosecutor for the north-west of England, Nazir Afzal was "removed" due to 'on-going drive for efficiency' after being investigated for allegation he sent a text message to a (muslim?) defendant in a court case.
Nazir Afzal to BBC's (deliberately?) toothless (and therefore useless) presenter Edward Stourton: It has nothing to do with islam. I know that the vast majority of offenders are British white male.
However, although white British men (because most Brits are "white" - "colored" muslims constitute below 3-5% and Pakistani/Bangladesh muslims even less) are the majority of abusers in the British population as a whole, the specific type of grooming offence and especially the very highly organised sex abuse such as we’ve seen in Rotherham and elsewhere, is dominated by muslims and follows Koranic principles from the origin of islam.