Catalonia, the land of the Goths (Gothlandia) - again under attacks from extremist muslims

Islamic hate spreading from the Arabian peninsula via Salafi mosques etc.

Catalonia or Catalunya derives from the name Gothia (or Gauthia) Launia ("Land of the Goths"), since the origins of the Catalan counts, lords and people were found in the March of Gothia, known as Gothia, whence Gothland > Gothlandia > Gothalania > Cathalaunia > Catalonia theoretically derived.

By 719, through a combination of conquest and pacts with local Christian nobles, main part of the Iberian peninsula was under muslim sharia tyranny.

721 at Toulouse. Odo of Aquitaine defeated the Umayyad muslims after a siege of the city.

732 the muslim jihadi attackers had reached Poitiers where they were thoroughly defeated by Charles Martel (grandfather of Charlemagne).

759, after the Battle of Narbonne, Pepin the Short drove the muslims out of his realm into Hispania.

From 760 onwards, Pepin and then his son, Charlemagne, who ruled the Carolingian Empire from 768, began creating a buffer zone between Frankish territories and muslim Hispania. Known as the Marca Hispanica or Spanish March, this buffer territory eventually stretched along the whole length of what is now the Spanish-French border. The only exception was a small western section, which was controlled by the Basques.

The Frankish forces moved south taking Roussillon with Vallespir both in modern France in around 760. By 785, the Franks were expanding into Hispania and took the county of Girona with Besalú followed by Ribagorza and Pallars in 790. Urgell and Cerdanya were conquered in 798, probably along with county of Empúries with Perelada. The first region to be consolidated was the passage between the Pyrenees and the Mediterranean that straddles the modern French-Catalan border.

After a series of struggles, the County of Barcelona with Osona was taken by Frankish forces in 801 so the rump of what was to become Catalonia was now under Frankish control. The River Llobregat just south of Barcelona formed a natural border between the Marca Hispanica and muslim territory.

Catalonia under muslim threats today

Abdelwahab Houzi, Salafist preacher, Lleida: "We will all vote for the Islamic parties because we do not believe in left and right. This will make us win local councils, and as we begin to accumulate power in the Catalan autonomous region, Islam will begin to be implemented."

Soeren Kern:  A successful push for independence in the Spanish autonomous region of Catalonia would lead to the establishment of a country with the third-largest percentage of Muslims in Western Europe, just behind France and Belgium, and far ahead of Britain and Germany.

An independent Catalonia, with its capital in Barcelona, would also be home to the largest concentration of radical Islamists in Europe; it would emerge as ground-zero for Salafi-Jihadism on the continent and become one of the top incubators for Islamist terrorism in the West.

Catalonia, historically one of the wealthiest and most industrialized regions of Spain, has harbored a strong streak toward independence since medieval times, when Barcelona was a Mediterranean trade center with its own parliament. But the ongoing economic crisis in Spain has redoubled calls for Catalonian secession from Spain and the establishment of an independent state.



Klevius wrote:

Wednesday, August 5, 2015

The Jewish origin of islam

Islam is a sect grown out of Judaism via Christianity.

According to Human Rights there are no "chosen people". Meaning that you may believe whatever you like as long as you follow legislation guided by the principle of Universal equality.

 Here's an approximate map of Judaism just before the origin of islam.

And below an approximate map of the violent muslim colonization in the foot steps of the Jewish slave trade routes.

 The above maps could be almost identical if produced with same techniques. This is no coincident but due to the "mysterious" code (the Jews) that made Arab imperialism possible and historical analysis impossible ("mysterious") if not included.  

Except for Khazaria, Jews were more business orientated than eager to waive swords compared to their copycats the Arab Bedouins. However, without wealthy and influential Jews leading the bloodthirsty and illiterate Bedouins (compare Ibn-Khaldun's description) and paving the way for the Arab looters (compare how the Jews used Turkic people in Khazaria in pretty much the same manner) the "Arab conquest" would have quickly dried out in the Arabian sand.

Dear reader. When reading Klevius analysis of the origin of islam, do always keep in mind the following important facts:

1 There was no Koran - only some Jewish/Christian text manipulations.

2  There was no Muhammad - only the old Jewish Messias (the rescuer/saver/leader) myth. Muhammad as described by muslims is a later invention snd doesn't appear in any official documents whatsoever before Malik.

3  Conventional "descriptions" of the "Arab conquest" are impossible and leave historians "amazed". Instead looting, booty, and sex slaves were the main incentives for the Bedouins. What was new was a more tight racist system of "we-and-the-other" which hindered (for a time) hindered internal divisions. On top of this was the Dhimmitude taxation system under the sword.

4 Understanding these points is also understanding that islam originated as a parasite and therefore never functioned as inspiration in itself for innovations etc. This is why every islamic colony has ended in bachwardness. Africa is an example of how a parasitic ideology was able to drain a whole continent.

The Robot, the Quren and the Saudi woman - in that order

A robot made in Hong Kong has been awarded Saudi citizenship. Klevius says 'good' but wonders when Saudi women will get full citizenship?

Do they have to wait until there is no islamofascist Saudi dictatorship anymore? Of couse, because their situation is equally tied to islam as is their male masters situation. Without islam the islamofascist Saudi dictator family is just a dirty leaking oil tank.

England, the former Finland/Swedish colony which became the world's biggest colonizer.

The English* Queen ('Kven' as in the Finland/Swedish Kvenland, 'kvinnoland/women land' and 'kvinna' in modern Swedish - see Klevius etymology) lacks citizenship in England but has multiple other citizenships from the colonial commonwealth realm which now consists of completely and utterly separate entities. Those aren't "subjects" anymore. This leaves the queen in a rather odd legal position, holding a status reliant on the old feudal system in a world where that is considered both obsolete and disgusting. In this respect the system has something in common with England's, to quote May, "close and important ally" (an "ally" that keeps attacking the English people all over the world incl. on the streets of London) the islamofascist Saudi dictator family whose medieval "monarchy" has no other correspondence in the civilized world of today.

* "British" is an obsolete and meaningless (other than for racist nationalist propaganda purpose) word that originally meant Bretagne (in France) and the "islands of Bretagne"). The original name of the so called British islands was the "land of the Picts" (the 'painted ones') and Pictish was a North European language allied to Old Nordic and therefore to Old English, the predecessor to the Scots language.

Her Saudi sister, however, still hasn7t the right to drive and possesses a passport that is useless unless approved by someone with a Penis.

"We can do it - we can drive - almost"


Here's what Klevius wrote about Japanese high tech and islamic low moral 2005 when a Japanese robot visited the islamofascist "custodians of islam":

Thursday, December 22, 2005

Shinto meets Islam - Civilization vs "killing & raping fields"

Update January 9, 2006 (American Daily): "Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Shintoism, and Confucianism are all religions of the world. Islam says it is a religion among world religions. It is not. It is a killing cult, nothing more. Islam demands that those who do not convert to Islam be slain or taken as slaves. There is no third option. With the genuine world religions, they tolerate those who do not agree with their tenets. They do not declare that those who do not agree with their dogmas be slain or taken as slaves."

HDTV-video of Honda's Asimo robot running etc.
How come that Honda is so much superior compared to BMW?
Out of Africa as "Pygmies" and back as global "Mongoloids"
Linda 13, sexually abused to death by a "school gang" & Swedish school policy & sex segregation.





Klevius comment: Look at those pathetic males (pathetic if they are racist/sexist pan-Arabic Islamist mosque-building oil-billionaires who trade in Islamic darkness in mosques, schools, universities, youth organizations etc?)! Too busy spending oil-money on technical wonders their own slave & oil-fuelled pan-Arabic/Islamic culture is uncapable of producing? Whereas Shinto (the world's oldest* religion) created the world's best high tech, Islam (the world's youngest "religion") created terror and Koran-brainwashed suicide-killers in the service of fascist and sexist pan-Arabism (i.e. true Islam)! For a better world in Darfur and elsewhere - bury Islam! Islam has caused more suffering than any other ideology (incl. Hitler's & Stalin's socialism/communism), yet it has always been excused (and surprisingly often by its own victims, i.e. the opposite compared to the "black"/"white" situation)!

Arabic racism in Africa: "They (Arabs) are the most racist people on earth" Klevius' comment: Isn't it logical then that their "religion" not only share the same feature, but also makes it essential?

While hypocritical Saudi Arabia, Egypt etc Arab Islamist nations dislike Islamic terrorism at home they continue to support it abroad. The further away the better! After all Islam is, from scratch, deliberatedly construed for limitless violent conquest and submission!

* i.e. ancestor warship - compare P. Klevius' Vagina gate in the atom of kinship.

Swedish white collar fascists want to stop external criticism against totalitarian Islam (i.e. against an ideology that forbids internal criticism)! Also see Klevius' Definition of Religion (usually top-rated on MSN)!

Update: When Göran Lambertz, chancellor of justice in Sweden who has been very busy working even outside his job profile, e.g. by protecting a famous individual against (non-socialist) media accusations of drug problems etc (a man who previously had been charged for DUI), was asked why no one, incl. himself, had done anything against Radio Islam (a Swedish web site from the 1990's and still on, denying the Holocaust and preaching utmost hatred against Jews and applauded by Iranian Islamofascists) his revealing answer was: "I don't really know"! Also see the horryfying WMD-link between Sweden and Iran and the statement by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: "Islam must prepare to rule the world"!

Violent Islam paves the way for "moderate" Islam when Arabic language and Islamic education are naively supported in the vain hope of combating Islam's combatants:

The Spain Herald: Gavilan referred to a study by the European Social Fund warning of the risk that the second generation of Muslim immigrants doesn't integrate in Europe "because of its lack of a labor impulse. That is, they're lazy and don't want to work. They have high expectations, they want brand-name clothing, luxury cars, to go to discos, but they don't have any income and they can't satisfy these expectations, so they get frustrated and look for radical religious options established in Europe."

For those preaching that Islam's radicals are so few: According to British YouGov's survey 2005 one in four (abt half a million) British Muslims sympathises with motives of Islamic terrorists- more than 100.000 British Muslims are ready to actually support Islamic terrorists- about 16,000 British Muslims declare themselves willing, possibly even eager, to embrace Islamic violence (For the worldwide spreading of Islam, and to conquer the non-Islamic world?!).

By the way - why on earth are Islam's historcal and contemporary "raping & killing fields" sometimes called "a civilization"?! An ideology based on force, submission and rape (direct or institutionalized in Koran and Sharia) for the ultimate purpose of conquest!

Does BBC classify as an extremist organization? At the least BBC is the biggest spreader of fake or faked "news" while suppressing uncomfortable news.

Is Oxford's Tariq Ramadan a criminal rapist? Well, that doesn't really matter because he is already guilty of an extremist islamist agenda that has caused more rapes than he could ever have time to commit himself.

Tariq Ramadan is tightly connected to Muslim Brotherhood (see below) and therefore completely at odds with the most basic of Human Rights. What snakes like this do is wreathe around words for the only purpose of hiding the real agenda.

A Jewish woman* described Tariq Ramadan as "the silver-tongued muslim snake."

However, BBC seems again to cover him up by not even mentioning that he is accused of horrifying rape(s?). Is this cover up because he's a muslim?

A Google News search 'tariq ramadan bbc' didn't produce anything,

although other media reported it.

Al Arabiya: A complaint was filed Friday in France against the Islamist philosopher and theologian Tariq Ramadan, for rape and sexual assault, following accusations of raping Salafist-turned secular liberal activist Henda Ayari.

This complaint was filed with the public prosecutor's office in Rouen, north-west of France for "criminal acts of rape, sexual assault, violence, harassment, threats", according to AFP.

Ramadan is the grandson of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood Hassan al-Banna and currently a professor of contemporary Islamic studies at Oxford University in the United Kingdom.

Henda Ayari, 40, president of the association Libératrices, said Friday on her Facebook page that she has been a victim of something very serious which took place several years ago, but did not want to reveal the name of her attacker because of "threats on his part".

Ayari accused Ramadan of multiple counts of Rape, sexual assault, violence and intimidation. (Photo courtesy: C à vous)

In her book “I chose to be free” about her escape from Salafism in France, Ayari mentions an Islamic intellectual who raped her and referred to him as “Zubair”.

It turns out that the mentioned - according to her - is Tariq Ramadan, as per explosive claims she made on her Facebook page in recent days.

Ayari has published the book to tell her story of how she decided to abandon the Salafi approach and take off her hijab to live as a “free” Muslim more than a year ago.

Hind said that she followed the 55-year-old Oxford university professor of Contemporary Islamic Studies and listened to his religious and social advice on social media.

In her memoir, Ayari details how her alleged assailant invited her to meet him at a hotel in Paris in 2012, where he was taking part in a conference.

Ramadan gave a lecture aside of the Federation of Islamic Organizations conference in Paris, then invited Ayari to his room in the hotel, she said that he took advantage of her weakness to hug and kiss her. When she refused – as per her story – he slapped her violently.

Her book reads: ‘When I resisted, when I told him to stop, he insulted and humiliated me. He slapped me and was outright violent. I saw someone who was no longer in control of himself. I was scared he would kill me. I wanted to escape but at the same time I couldn’t believe what was happening.

“I started to cry and he said to me: ‘So honey, you’re whining are you? Stop pretending you don’t like it. You didn’t know what a real man was like before. Well, now you do.”


Klevius suggests everyone who still listens to BBC to balance it out with some RT - you know, the channel BBC wants to shut up. 

And then add some "islamophobia", i.e. Human Rights criticism against islam - and you get the picture.

Klevius wrote five years ago:

Tuesday, September 11, 2012

Tariq Ramadan: "There's no unity in islam". Peter Klevius: Yes, there is, islamofascism!

Islamic double discourse  personified

Tariq Ramadan (“professor”* at Oxford University): “In islam there's no unity”.

* in Klevius vocabulary a professor needs to be an expert in science (i.e. logic). Tariq Ramadan has effectively eliminated that possibility by running in a circle between an unknown supernatural being called "Allah" and "islamic fairy tale studies" based on this bedrock of absolute ignorance.

Klevius comment: Really! You can't be unaware of OIC, the muslim Ummah led by its Fuhrer Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu and its unity in violating Human Rights by replacing them with Sharia! Wanna eat the cake while still keep it, i.e. explaining away with 1400 years of muslims terrorizing muslims and others while somehow covering up the root cause of it, namely islam itself!

Islamofascist Tariq Ramadan's islamofascist grandpa, Hasan al-Banna, the founder of islamofascist Muslim Brotherhood, said: "Following are the principal goals of reform grounded on the spirit of genuine Islam...Treatment of the problem of women in a way which combines the progressive and the protective, in accordance with Islamic teaching, so that this problem - one of the most important social problems - a campaign against ostentation in dress and loose behavior; the instruction of women in what is proper, with particular strictness as regards female instructors, pupils, physicians, and students, and all those in similar categories...a review of the curricula offered to girls and the necessity of making them distinct from the boys' curricula in many stages of education...segregation of male and female students; private meetings between men and women, unless within the permitted degrees of relationship, to be counted as a crime for which both will be censured...the encouragement of marriage and procreation, by all possible means; ...the closure of morally undesirable ballrooms and dance-halls, and the prohibition of dancing and other such pastimes..."

Klevius comment: Sounds Talibanic enough to me. What about you?

Tariq Ramadan: "I have often been accused of this 'double discourse', and to those who say it, I say – bring the evidence. I am quite clear in what I say.

Klevius comment: Well, that statement really proved his double discourse, didn't it. However, and more importantly, this double discourse is also the very soul of islamic illogic. And quite understandable when considering the enormous moral deficiency islam has built up due to its origin as an ideology for violent parasitism, be it in the form of direct looting or Sharia.

Some other voices about Tariq Ramadan

In a book published by Encounter Books, Caroline Fourest analysed Tariq Ramadan's 15 books, 1,500 pages of interviews, and approximately 100 recordings, and concludes "Ramadan is a war leader," and the "political heir of his grandfather," Hassan al-Banna, stating that his discourse is, "often just a repetition of the discourse that Banna had at the beginning of the 20th century in Egypt," and that he "presents [al-Banna] as a model to be followed." She argues that "Tariq Ramadan is slippery. He says one thing to his faithful Muslim followers and something else entirely to his Western audience. His choice of words, the formulations he uses – even his tone of voice – vary, chameleon-like, according to his audience." Tariq Ramadan responded that Caroline Fourest's book was filled with inaccuracies and untruths, a few of which she later acknowledged on her blog. Olivier Guitta, writing in The Weekly Standard, welcomed the U.S. decision to refuse Ramadan a visa, based on Ramadan's supposed links to terrorist organizations and claiming that his father was the likely author of "'The Project'... a roadmap for installing Islamic regimes in the West by propaganda, preaching, and if necessary war." He further claimed that the former head of the French antiracism organization SOS Racisme, "Malek Boutih told Ramadan after talking with him at length: ‘Mr. Ramadan, you are a fascist.’" In an interview with Europe 1 Boutih likened him to "a small Le Pen[disambiguation needed]"; in another interview he accused him of having crossed the line of racism and anti-Semitism, thus not genuinely belonging to the alter-globalization movement. Similarly, self-described conservative Daniel Pipes concurred with the revocation of Ramadan's visa on grounds of Ramadan's alleged ties with Islamic extremism. After the lifting of the visa revocation, an article in the National Review criticized the double standard of lifting the visa restriction on Ramadan, but not for Issam Abu Issa who was banned by the Bush Administration for being a whistleblower against the Palestinian Authority's corruption. Bertrand Delanoë, Socialist mayor of Paris, declared Ramadan unfit to participate at the European Social Forum, as not even "a slight suspicion of anti-Semitism" would be tolerable. Talking to the Paris weekly Marianne, Fadela Amara, president of Ni Putes Ni Soumises (Neither Whores Nor Submissive, a French feminist movement), Aurélie Filippetti, municipal counsellor for The Greens in Paris, Patrick Klugman, leading member of the Conseil Représentatif des Institutions juives de France and Dominique Sopo, head of SOS-Racisme accuse Ramadan of having misused the alter-globalization movement's ingenuousness to advance his "radicalism and anti-Semitism." Similarly, an article in the online publication of Alliance for Workers' Liberty published 40 reasons why Ramadan was a reactionary, criticizing views on Islamic extremism, women's rights and anti-Semitism. Egyptian intellectual Tarek Heggy has also charged Ramadan with saying different things to different audiences. Other criticisms have included claims that that an essay attacking French intellectuals was anti-semitic and that he has shown excessive generosity in his rationalization of the motives behind acts of terrorism, such as in the case of [Mohammed Merah] .

Islamic evilness fertilized by state induced ignorance and misleading education

Klevius concluding remark: The evilness in the islamic unity against Universal Human Rights may be compared with the cumulative ignorance about this evilness that is produced in our schools etc under the title "muslim sensitivities".


Klevius wrote 12 years ago:

Tuesday, July 26, 2005

What's true Islam/Arab? A "blind", sexist Swedish "Leif Larsson-imam" who calls himself a Sunni "Abd al Haqq"?!

TRUE ROOTS OF "TRUE" ISLAM

Who's the real terrorist (totalitarian fascist) and who's the real Islamic Muslim? If you oppose totalitarian movements you have to oppose Islam, the ultimate submission under arbitrary human totalitarianism! Islam cannot be "reformed" in a non-totalitarian/non-fascist way without loosing its "infidel" essence, i.e. the truly racist idea that a Muslim is a better person than a non-Muslim/non-believer. Islamic terror hence is three-dimensional: 1) Conventional terror, 2) daily global street terror, and 3) the "moderate" totalitarian "white-collar" racist/sexist Sharia-terror spreading through Mosques and sponsored organizations (See Negative Human Rights)!

Also see Black US Bimbos & Rambos turn to sexist Islam while Afro-girls in Sudan and elsewhere suffer under it!

"Islam is not just a religion. It is a way of life," insists a young and zealous black American convert initially drawn to Islam by admiration for Malcolm X. "It's specific in the Koran that jihad is about fighting. Kelly: There is no such thing as innocents. The idea of the Islamic state is terror against anyone who doesn't support Islamic ideology."

Klevius' comment: These are the Islamic voices Swedish state Islamist* Leif Larsson/"Abd al Haqq" doesn't consider as belonging to Islam, according to a statement today on the Swedish (Islamic?) state radio. He also denies having noticed these kind of people in the Swedish mosques etc, although these are probably some of the most common visitors! This can only be interpreted as that he is still tied to the "true Islam" although he acts "blind". And by the way, although Hitler used to shout, a low, timid voice is no guaranteee against dangerous, totalitarian and sexist thoughts...!

* Sayyid Qutb (Muslim Brotherhood) who is considered the main Sunni Islamist, was so shocked by the freedom given to women he saw during his studies in the US, that he made this fight his conservative framework. Just as Leif Larsson who has openly rejected freedom for women (see link below)! Sayyid Qutb's brother Mohammad, by the way, educated Osama bin Laden!

For more on the "moderate" Swedish state Islamist Leif "Abd al Haqq" Larsson and his confused "Islam" (but clear and pronounced misogyny/sexism) see May 24, 2005, posting.


Background info on religion and sex segregation

The Vagina Gate in the Atom of Kinship

Klevius' definition of religion

The holy (negative) human rights + Fundamentalist test

What is sex segregation - the main pillar of Islam?


A pagan moongod made "monolitheistic" (Monolitheism is a new word proposed by Klevius 2005), "connected" to Abraham (inspired by what was learned from educated Jews in Medina), and made popular by robbing caravans!

Certainly it wasn't the timid hanifiyya tradition that was so successful in killing, raping and subjugating neighbours, hence spreading the "true Islam". Islam's birth (with the help of a woman who got her fortune in pre-Islamic time!) was a very late (and purhaps therefore especially evil) instance of the usual transition from kinship to kingship (compare Buddha, Confutse etc more than 1000 years earlier). And, later, it was precisely during the "peaceful" so called "Golden Age" that Islam lost its potency and eventually had to retrieat from Europe. Today Islam's main weapon has been oil-money serving Pan-Arabism. Without that money that the West dug up from the sand the Saudis' nomadic ancestors deserted, Islam would hardly be noticed anymore (especially not by American youth who got Islam via oil-sponsored youth- etc organizations)! Arabs have, through the times, been remarcably incompetent in technology and technics (compare (Shinto vs. Islam).


The long and stuttering birth of Islam - and its explosive and violent spreading

By the way, doesn't Medina belong to the Jews as much as Jerusalem belongs to the Palestinians - the "world's youngest people"? The creation of the Koran is historically very pragmatic, and deeply influenced by the Jews who inhabited Medina at the time before they were eventually expelled/killed when the Islamists became powerful enough.

The creation of Islam wasn't a sudden revelation but, on the contrary, an endless development from the moment (610) Mohammad (Islam's penultimate messenger before Bahaullah) realized that his tribe was about to die, to his own death in 632. He was educated by Jews, which led him to the ridicilous idea to "connect" Arabs with Abraham. Furthermore the Koran wasn't anything new but on the contrary mostly repetitions of already established traditions, spiced with alleged connections to Jewish ancestors, and the above purpose (jihad), which, due to its violent and aggressive totalitarian nature, became successful in conquest and subjugation (Islam has never really lived in real peace with anyone weaker than itself. Sometimes in commercial/political terror-balance, but that's about all. Islam is like a net with the spider waiting for the big meal).


A book, "thought" about for some 23 years, and written down, long after its (oral) "author's" death, by the help of a Khalif hwo was eventually murdered by Islamists!

It's easy to imagine a tribal leader who, for the last 23 years of his life, exercises and experiences negative and positive outcomes of different strategies, and little by little (aided by the educated Jews) writes them down in what could be described a primitive "supreme court" diary dictated by the dictator himself. This also explains the scattered and inconsistent content of the Koran. And just like the Nazi (National Socialist) party program it also contained some good things (National Socialism is a branch of Socialdemoocracy, and its program is, in fact, hard to distinguish from a socialdemocratic party program, given Jews and racism are excluded). But that has hardly been used as a defense for Hitler, has it?

The real strength of Islam was its violence (and now also its racist and sexist message distributed by Saudi oil-money fueling Pan-Arabism. The "true" Islam is Arabic!). Without the rapid and bloody militaristic spreading/conquest in the second half of the 7th century (and early 8th) Islam should never have become a religious issue worth even mentioning! Not to admit this simple fact (which the American youth above clearly understood) is pure hypocrisy and suspicious stealthy acting!

Everyone who knows the essentials of Islam without critisizing it, is either a sexist/racist totalitarian fascist, or just a creepy, hypocritical coward. And it's certainly not about robbing someone's ethnicity, but, on the contrary, to disconnect true ethnicity from true evilness by openly condemning the basic teaching of Islam ("infidels" and non-Muslims as less worthy non-humans - see Klevius' Fundamentalist test) and Klevius' Definition of religion!


The deceptive illusion/projection of "a nice Islam"

In Karen Armstrong's The History of God (1993 - the same year World Trade Center got its first Islamic terror attack!) nothing at all is said about the violent spreading and nature of Islam (see battle/conquest timeline), although she spends 40 pages praising Mohammad and the Koran! This continuing tunnel vision is very typical for our time! Especially many women seem to appreciate the in-built sexism in Islam, perhaps because it offers a convenient excuse for not daring to really step outside (allow others to step outside)a limiting sex segregation. But perhaps the most dangerous deception is how Islam/Islamists, with clear or sometimes less clearly pronounced totalitarian objectives, now abuse naive Christian confidingness.

"...the kind of folly we now see in Iraq, which is based entirely on the premise that the problem is not Islam, but only "Wahhabi" Islam..."

"...there is an intensive effort by American Muslims to recruit in public schools, which is going pretty much unchecked in the name of tolerance..."

Grave Islamic indoctrination in Californian schools


Who's a "true" Arab?

Yesterday the Swedish (Islamic?) state radio invited Hans Rosling (allegedly "professor in international health"). He served the listeners with senseless and less than poorly informed pseudo-anthropology (hopefully he is better off in medicine). But what really struck me was that he called the first humans out of Africa "Arabs" just because they (the "Pygmies" belonging to the M130 lineage?!) happened to cross the levant and/or the southernnmost part of what we now call the Arabian peninsula, i.e. outside Saudi Arabia. And because of Arab-Islamic religious restrictions we don't know almost anything about the human remains on the peninsula from this period.

I do know many Arabs who aren't neither "Pygmies" nor Muslims. Or aren't they Arabs anymore? Just happened to be born there! Or maybe we all should become "Islamarabs" just like Leif Larsson & Co! Reminds me of what I have read about "infidels" in Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Sovjet Union, not tp mention Pol Pot and others.

Arabs and Arabic are very late phenomenons and the latter, in its written form, contemporary with the birth of Islam (a variant of the Arabs' original religion, Muruwa (i.e. extreme machismo and brutal manliness, even for its time). Arabic is a late branch of Hebrew and the Aramaic language of Jesus.

There are also some speculations about a possible connection between arab, erebu (also connected to the death myth of Hades) and Europe (Assyrian darkness).

Unfortunately Islamic revisionism has replaced scientific truth about the "Arabs".
(Also compare the Indonesian case of "Muslim crypto-creationist "scientist" who stole (and possibly also destroyed vital parts of Flores 'Hobbit' WoMan").

"The crux of the problem with the Arabs which is mostly due to Islam, is that they haven't grown up"

You may also be interested in: Intelligent design may not be that intelligent after all!

Thursday, July 21, 2005

Creeping Islam uses Mideast "monolitheism" and vanishing Christianity for global fascism

Islamic terrorism is just the tiny tip of a giant Arabic/Islamic iceberg fueled by oil-money and extending deeply into Western institutions. Asking Muslims for help against Muslims makes little sense. A strong re-evaluation of their "religion" is the only possible future

The problem isn't about immigrants, Arabs or Jews etc but solely about Islam as a facist/sexist totalitarian idea - and those detached lost souls (often in need of immediate care) who pick it up in Koran schools, Mosques, youth organizations etc. Another problem constitutes of all those millions who call themselves Muslims without, in most cases, having even a remote sense of what it really stands for as an idea. For these "Muslims" Islam is instead a synonyme (most often historically forced upon them) for their real ethnicity, not the Koran.

Just as Christianity was stimulated by the New Testament's replacement theology (or supersessionism), which taught that with the coming of Jesus a new covenant has rendered obsolete and has superseded the religion of Judaism, Islam is stimulated by Koran and the "last prophet" whose words should not be critisized or questioned (although Muslims do it all the time through a variety of interpretations).

Furthermore A number of Christian preachers, particularly in the Middle Ages and Renaissance, additionally taught that religious Jews choose to follow a faith that they actually know is false out of a desire to offend God Although this pattern is now repeated by "radical" (interesting word) Islamists, "moderate" Islamists have long since figured out a much more effective strategy. By equalizing Arabic Islam from the 7th century A.D. (neither Arabic nor Islam was around before that time) with the fate of Abraham some 1.900 B.C., "moderate" Islamists now try to convince other religious groups belonging to the same Mideastern "monolitheism" (new word by Peter Klevius) that they have a common interest. But this "interest" is, in fact, a catalyst for
replacing rapidly vanishing Christianity with a racist ("infidel"), sexist (sex segregation) totalitarian (anti-human rights) jihadist world-Islam that always supports "radical" interpretations no matter how many timid "Muslims" might be around.


Today's Hitler, bin Laden, and his meek and lost followers, and blind supporters.

In this light the difference between so called "radical" and "moderate" Islamists is less than thin Also compare posting on Saudi Islamist and Muslim feminist Mai Yamani and her opposite, Condoleezza Rice. The London bombs can be traced back to that very same Sudan which now rapes and kills women in Darfur, in front of Mai Yamani's shut eyes.

Klevius' definition of religion.


What do the terrorists want?

They want precisely the same as Islamists in general, i.e. to boost Islam!


So what should Muslims and "Muslims" do?

Start with the Fundamentalist test and then openly state that non-Muslims, "infidels", unbelievers, Atheists etc are exactly equally good and worthy humans as are Muslims, and that they don't need an Allah or other specified God to remain so! Very simple, isn't it?

Islam, not Bush, was responsible for 9/11! Islam, not Bush, is responsible for Islamic suicide-killers/terrorists around the globe! Islam (and an Islamist government), not Bush (or the "West"), is responsible for the rapes and killings in Sudan! And Islam, not Bush, is responsible for the continuing mess in Iraq!

The solution for Iraq: 1) The whole world should now send troops there to protect non-violent Iraqis against Islamic terrorists. 2) Avoid Islam in the constitution!

or, quote:

"The American people, and the world do not yet realize that this is why they are fighting.


* "In reality Islam is a revolutionary ideology and programme which seeks to alter the social order of the whole world and rebiuld it in conformity with its own tenets and ideals... ...Islam wishes to destroy all States and Governments anywhere on the face of the earth which are opposed to the ideology and programme of Islam..." -- From Sayeed Abdul A'la Maududi, Jihad in Islam

* "What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you? (1) The first thing that we are calling you to is Islam. (a) The religion of the Unification of God; of freedom from associating partners with Him, and rejection of this; of complete love of Him, the Exalted; of complete submission to His Laws; " -- From Osama Bin Laden "Letter to America" Nov. 24, 2002


From the Quran Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): "I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instil terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them." -- Sura 8:12


"Jihad and the rifle alone. NO negotiations, NO conferences and NO dialogue" -- From Sheikh Abdullah Azzam, Join The Caravan"

The Myth of Islamic Tolerance

Monday, July 18, 2005

Constitutionalized Islam in any form is fascist poison for free democracies and human rights

Islam denies negative human rights (i.e. the most important ones)!

The Islamic constitution of Afganistan was a disaster and will be deeply regretted by friends of the free world, but appreciated by Talibans and other lunatic Islamists. Iraq poses the same risk.

Although Islam isn't a religion but a totalitarian racist(the explicit statement that "infidels"/unbelievers are no real humans) and sexist movement it has succeeded in gaining minority protection in many democracies etc. The irony hence is that when Islam is no longer a minority, that very democracy which protected it is doomed (compulsory sex segregation, Sharia etc)!

Muslim crypto-creationism. We don't even need to exemplify by terrorism or Sharia. In Indonesia, state sponsored Islamic crypto-creationism has had dramatic effects on the discovery of the so called Homo Floresiensis (The "Hobbit" from Flores), when a state anthropologist stole and partly destroyed the important remains!

In Sweden young Islamic wannabe terrorists and pronounced Western haters in schools are now excused as "frustrated". Never heard abt that when it comes to neo-Nazis in Sweden. And what abt non-Muslim youth with at least the same reason for "frustration"? They certainly don't have the same amount of state supported organizations (like "Young Muslims" etc spreaders of totalitarian Islam) backing them!

If you feel you have a case against this posting you may benefit by first checking out Klevius' Definition of Religion (+ a fundamentalist test)!

Sunday, July 03, 2005

Pandora's box opened in 1933: Hitler & California midwives for totalitarian Arabic/Islamic fascism, now supported by naive "greens" & "anti-fascists"!

How come that we let ourselves be deceived by Arabic oil fueled propaganda and now again pave the way for totalitarian fascism as we did in the 1930s? Sweden was one of the worst back then, as it is even today!

Arabic Islam fulfills all criteria for sexism (sex segregation), racism ("infidels") and totalitarianism (everyone counted as a human should be a Muslim).

"SS chief Heinrich Himmler was known to remark that he regretted that Germany had adopted Christianity, rather than "warlike" Islam, as its religion"


Nazi-Muslim "cream of Islam"

On Feb. 10, 1943, Hitler ordered the creation of the Nazi SS Division Hanzar and approximately 100,000 Bosnian Muslims volunteered. The Mufti, serving as chief administrator, referred to these Nazi-Muslim brigades as “the cream of Islam.”

In 1933, February 25, Arabs demand the British to restrict Jewish immigration. Demand rejected.

Arab-Islamists massacre of Assyrians in August, 1933, "Girls were raped and women violated and made to march naked before the Arab army commanders. Holy books were used as fuel for burning girls. Children were run over by military cars. Pregnant women were bayoneted. Children were flung in the air and pierced on to the points of bayonets. In Dohuk 600 Assyrians were killed." (The Assyrian Tragedy, pp. 53-54)


Nazis and Californians cooperated with the Arabic Islamists in the Nazi-summer of 1933

In April 1933 Jews were allowed by the Nazis to take all their possessions and move to Palestine.

Due to the aftermath of the Ottoman regime and the 1921 Cairo treaty and some other circumstances which I don't have the time to explain further right now, the Saudi king didn't like the Brits who had ruled most of Mideast. As a consequence he turned to Hitler for power and California for finding the oil that had to be there but which was out of reach for the Arabic camel drivers (Note that oil was already flooding on other locations on the peninsula!).

In May 29, 1933 Saudi Arabia gave Standard Oil of California exclusive rights to explore for oil. This opened up for a much more lavish oil consumption and due low tech technology than would otherwise have been the case(see Shinto high tech vs. Islamic Jihad).

Most Arabs cheered Hitler when he came to power:

"Young Egypt," was founded in October 1933. They had storm troopers, torch processions, and literal translations of Nazi slogans – like "One folk, One party, One leader."

"No more monsieur,

No more mister.

In heaven Allah,

On earth Hitler."

"Al Husseini found the Nazis to be a strong ideological match with his anti-Jewish brand of Islam, and schemed with Hitler and the Nazi hierarchy to create a pro-Nazi pan-Arabic form of government in the Middle East"

Most Palestinian activists at a later time became rather involved in pan-Arab populist movements.

Along with these changes, the old myths of Arabism and Palestinian militarism were replaced by new and uncompromising myths of radical Islamism


Blurring the lines

First call it all Islam, so you get the bag as full as possible. Then propose the “true” Arabic Islam into all the mosques and organizations that are there already waiting for it.

Oceans are now turning acid due to over consumption of oil at about the same pace as Arab-Islamists inject totalitarian racist/sexist Islam in our youth aided by the abundance of money they’ve got for that very same oil that the "infidels" discovered and made technically available (remember that this was a country that had been recently captured by an "army" of 80 camel drivers!).

Hitler's socialist Nazi (NSDAP Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei) party program compared to Islam.

Hanna Arendt in The Origins of Totalitarianism: Hitler: "I laid the foundations for a world concept in general and a way of political thinking in particular…Stalin:“…to declare Russian its language of general communication and the official language of all Slav countries…a moral necessity“.

Does it sound familiar? So when Saudis kill Al Qaeda on their home turf it doesn't necessarily mean that they can't quitely applaud them abroad! But the Koran brainwashed Al Qaeda lunatics (in need of immediate psychiatric care) haven't (like theri moron leader bin Ladin) really got it right.


Arabic Islam is indeed a strange "religion"

1) The "last words" (sic) of a 4000 year old Jewish kinship tradition (see Klevius' Atom of Kinship and Angels of Antichrist - kinship vs. social state and From Freud to bin Ladin) by an unrelated anti-jewish camel driver from the Middle Ages some 600 years after Jesus!

2) Everyone who doesn't believe this camel driver on his words is an "infidel" and no real human!

3) If you by own will or by pressure are converted to this "religion" you cannot re-convert!

4) No one is allowed to critisize this "religion" (which of course indicates its deep vulnerability)!

5) The only "true" language for this "religion" is (according to Arabs) Arabic (a branch of Hebrew/Aramaic that appeared some 600 years after Jesus, whose mother tongue was Aramaic)!

6) Islam rests on its own Achilles heal, sex segregation!

7) bin Ladin (once teached by a Saudi professor and brother of Muslim Brotherhood) and the Arabic wahhadists are right when they consider "moderate Muslims" no real Muslims. So stop calling yourself Muslims if you want to avoid the evil Arabic soul of real Islam!

A seductively speaking confidence trickster and history faking charlatan on the loose in an English museum and on BBC

The muslim Haji to the most intolerant place on Earth, celebrating racism and sexism, ought not to be uncritically accepted in a civilized society based on Human Rights. Shame on you, Neil MacGregor!

Klevius suggests boycotting "British" Museum until it stops its islamofascist propaganda and suppression of criticism against the worst islmofascist hate spreading dictator state on Earth.

BBC and the English government spare nothing in their effort to smooth the way for the evil islamofascist Saudi dictator family, the "custodians" of Human Rights violating sharia islam.

Nick Cohen: The British Museum's current Hajj exhibition charts the history of Mecca as a destination for pilgrims with the wariness of a conscript crossing a minefield. The exhibition sticks to the authorised version of "religious scholars". It allows no discussion of the findings of historians of Islam – "true scholars who have read more than one book", as Richard Dawkins puts it – that the traditional account is as much a fairy story as the traditional accounts of Christianity and Judaism. Fear of bombs in the building or of staff receiving the same treatment as Salman Rushdie and Ayaan Hirsi Ali have kept evidence about the Muhammad of history far from public view.

The exhibition goes further than the standard tongue-biting editor or panicked publisher, however. It not only fails to question Islam's foundation myths but augments the myth-making by excluding evidence that might embarrass the Saudi royal family. In a piece for the American arts magazine Guernica, Joy Lo Dico embarrasses other critics by pointing out what was in front of their noses. Saudi Arabia provided exhibits. The Saudi royal family's King Abdulaziz Public Library partnered the museum. HSBC Amanah, a bank that issues sharia-compliant loans, sponsored the show. By negligence or design, nothing in the exhibition offends the Saudi state, which derives legitimacy from its control of sacred sites and income from pilgrims.

You might have thought that of all people the museum's director, Neil MacGregor, would deplore cultural vandalism. The author of A History of the World in 100 Objects would surely deprecate the destruction of buildings of historical significance. He must know that Saudi's monarchical dictatorship has wrecked Mecca with an abandon worthy of the Taliban. It has destroyed the remnants of the 7th-century city, most notably the houses of the prophet, his first wife and Abu Bakr, father of Aisha, one of Muhammad's other wives.

According to the Wahhabi monarchy's puritanical and iconoclastic version of Islam, anything that generates idolatry – images of the prophet, homes associated with him – is dangerous. So medieval Mecca had to go.

The British Museum does not mention the hooliganism. Nor does it mention the occupation by 400 jihadists of the Grand Mosque during the 1979 Hajj and the deaths of hundreds in the gunfights that followed. Saudi Arabia has excised all reference to a battle that prefigured the rise of jihadist terrorism from public discourse and school textbooks. The British Museum can't find space for it, either. It also fails to show pictures of the stampedes, bridge collapses and fires that have claimed the lives of thousands of pilgrims. They might have provided a sombre comment on the Saudi authorities' incompetence.

Klevius comment: Not a word about thre real da nger of Saudi Arabia as the custodians of OIC and Human Rights violating sharia islam and its spread of religious division and hate all over the world.

Hajj pilgrimage to the pagan idol of islam in the world's most racist, sexist and intolerant city and state may involve some additional evil

Throwing stones against non-believers, i.e. against the"evil" it is not to be a "true" muslim.

The word Hajj may be traced to the Swedish 'haj' which now means shark but used to refer to a pole and which originally is an old Finno-Ugric word that later on entered Mideast and semitic languages such as Hebrew and its later derivative Arabic (much like the Finnish 'koti' and Sami 'khode'home are reflected in the Persian Khoda).

When Klevius (who masters all Finnish and most Estonian dialects as well as all Scandinavian languages incl. all dialects - )  decades ago first pointed out

The biggest idolatry religion on Earth is the very opposite to the most basic Human Rights equality and tolerance. And no one should be "offended" by reading the bloody history of islam. Quite the opposite, the worst possible offense is to try to hide it by demonizing Human Rights defenders. In Saudi Arabia is Human Rights are criminalized. Ask Theresa May and Amber Rudd if they know it, and if, then why are they such hypocrites?

Pure religious fascism protected by those very Human Rights it wants to criminalize when it can.

And no, it's not evil but also laughable Wahhabism/Salafism that is the worst threat to the free world - it's Saudi based and steered OIC and its world sharia via UN. And the Saudi status as "custodians" of islam and the world's muslims.

The islamofascist Saudi dictator family again praised for its war crimes, spread of islamic hate and terror, intolerance, and violent and repeated mass attacks against innocent people worldwide.

Today BBC started its long evening news hour by hailing the islamofascist Saudi dictatorship - immediately followed by a long sequence of the "mysterious" fate of a dissident in Hong Kong - clearly meant to smear China.

Klevius wonders why? China has never attacked or spread hate against the English people. Moreover, China lacks a religious world jihad. However, the islamofascist Saudi dictator family is the "custodians" of not only islam's "holy places"* but also all the world's muslims' sharia organization OIC which has rejected UN's Human Rights and replaced them with islamofascist** sharia.

* The islamofascist Saudi dictator family has buried everything under concrete that could reveal that it doesn't contain anything. Or in a few instances contain the "wrong" things. Islam is now the biggest example of fake history - all the way from the Muhammad myth to the myth if the Andalucian "paradise". Just face it through all the smokescreens - islam is the worst enslaver, genocider and raper of any known ideology throughout 1,400 years. And now it's occupying and threatening the very bullwork that was created after World War 2 to protect the free world from a repetition of totalitarian fascism - incl. religious fascism, i.e. violations against the most basic of Human Rights.

** OIC says sharia should always dismiss Human Rights when they clash with islamic sharia.
Contrary to what Neil MacGregor says, it's only when religion has been put aside that real progress has emerged. Atheists are in majority in most well developed European countries, whereas religion accompanies misery and suffering around the world.

In his new BBC Radio 4 series, Living With The Gods, Neil MacGregor traces “40,000 years of believing and belonging”.

He exemplifies this period with the same Lion Man that Klevius has used for over a decade on his web maps about human evolution.

Religion provides a “narrative” that explains our place in the world, MacGregor said, and it is the rituals that bind people together.

No dude, it's exactly the opposite. It's religious segregation that paves the way for racism and sexism. The only "religion" that can truly "bind people together" is Human Rights - not sharia. Universal Human Rights equality as stated in the 1948 UN declaration, constitutes an inevitably agreable narrative of our communal place in the cosmos and in time. And what unifies all of humanity is our shared knowledge about our individual existencecentrism (Klevius 1992).

Evolution out of nothing/God proposition countered by the question: What would be "nothing"?, hence revealing the total meaninglessness of the question: Why are we here? The equally meaningless counter question would be: Why would we be nowhere?


Klevius is a non-socialist Atheist, not because he has chosen to be so but because there's no alternative to negative Human Rights. Religion is always a lesser good in comparison - in fact, that's the very definition of a "monotheist" religion. And now someone less bright or just evil person might try to dismiss this by talking about "what we don't know about", i.e. what they think is "God" (and which is called the 'unreachable' in Klevius 1992 book Demand for Resources) but which in fact is they themselves (see chapter Existencecentrism in Klevius 1992 book).

The meaning of life is its own definition i.e. uncertainty (Klevius 1981) just like the meaning of football (no dude, I'm not talking about American handball) is its maximization of uncertainty by being the only sport where no tools or hands are allowed when the ball is in play inside the pitch.

Klevius moral formula is a bedrock you can't beat - so why not follow it:

1 There's no absolute and fixed moral.

2 Therefor we have to repeatedly agree on a minimum moral.

3 In doing so we are logically forced to approve of negative Human Rights, i.e. not to impose restricrions other than neccessary in a democracy based on as much freedom as possible for all - no matter of sex, race etc. And, for the truly dumb ones, do note that this definition excludes the freedom to restrict freedom.

Moreover, Human Rights leave no room for varying and dangerous religious "interpretations". The latter actually being the real evil allure of religion (private beliefs have no bearing in this discussion as long as they are private and don't interfer with Human Rights of others).

Neil MacGregor: As a country, we no longer have an agreed narrative.

Peter Klevius: Rights, Cameron and May dismissed the shared narrative of Human Rights. Why? Because London was planned to be the world's sharia center.

At the time of the Brexit vote EU was about to open up for visa free entry from Turkey. The potential "flood of muslim refugees" through EU to England was what most Brexit voters were afraid of. However, Theresa May and her pals turned this to the very opposite, i.e. a racist campaign against EU citizens while opening the gates to the muslimworld.

Who, except Klevius, is defending Human Rights? Not Theresa May and Amber Rudd, that's for sure, cause they* praise Human Rights violating sharia.

 * Klevius hasn't heard Amber Rudd's view on sharia but assumes she shares her boss' extremist view. In Klevius world openly encouraging deliberate violations of the most basic of Human Rights ought to be classified as extremism.

Sex segregation drawing (1979) and photo by P. Klevius.

Klevius question: Is the English government the most extremist in the West when it comes to counteracting Human Rights via its association with the world's most intolerant regime which has exchanged (and still does) petrodollars to islamist hate, violence, racism and sexism at home and around the world, leading to endless suffering? 

The origins of England's dangerous and immoral relations with the islamofascist hate and intolerance spreading Saudi dictator family date back to the time of the First World War, when Ibn Saud signed the 1915 Treaty of Darin, thereby accepting the status of an English "protectorate".

The treaty made the lands (sic) of the "House of Saud" an English protectorate/colony and attempted (sic) to define its boundaries. The English aim of the treaty was to guarantee the sovereignty of Kuwait, Qatar and the Trucial States. Abdul-Aziz agreed not to attack British protectorates, but gave no undertaking that he would not attack the Sharif of Mecca, i.e. the "custodian of islam". The Sharif of Mecca was the title of the leader of the Sharifate of Mecca, traditional steward of the holy cities of Mecca and Medina and the surrounding (sic) Hejaz (i.e. the whole western part of what is now the so called Saudi Arabia). In 1925 the Ibn Saud (supported by England) attacked the Hejaz and expelled the Hashemites.

There are now more than 200 joint ventures between UK and the islamofascist Saudi dictator family's companies, worth $17.5 billion, and some 30,000 UK nationals are living and working in this land of evil on Earth.

Islamic sharia "justic" is injustice.

"Justice" in islam means following sharia. And when a muslim says islamic "justice" is "equal" to everyone, it simply means that sharia affects muslims and non-muslims equally in the sense e.g. that you are equally penalized for not being a proper - muslim. In other words, "justice" means totalitarian islamofascism - no matter that there could never be a real totalitarian islam because of islam's inbuilt contradictions and dependency on "interpretations", only quarrels about which muslim "totalitarianism" is the "best".  And the "best" is the one that fits the leaders interpretation.

The only form of justice for all non-muslims is one where they are all condemned to jahannam due to their failure to follow Muhammad as a prophet of Allah. This interpretation is based on the Koran which states that islam is the only true religion. Consequently all other beliefs (or Atheism) are evil in islamic theology.

In the West some idiots try to cling to the "people of the book" argument that some "monotheists" might be excluded from being labeled evil. However, this would be a contradiction in the islamic teaching, and what about non-"monotheists" and Atheists? Just ask a Saudi cleric and you'd know.

Do you really think the 'freedom of religion' clause in Human Rights and the US Constitution means that this is ok?!

Human Rights equality, on the other hand, doesn't give any room for quarreling or "interpretations".

And Klevius does understand that there are many ignorant ranters out there who really don't understand Human Rights equality. Nor do they understand why Saudi based and steered muslim world sharia organization OIC decided to abandon UN's Human Rights declaration.

So here's a simplified picture tutorial for you. Try hard - it will pay off.

Basic Human Rights freedom and equality is not affected by sex, ethnicity or any other characteristics. It's the space that protects the individual from impositions not necessary in a free democratic society. It's like in traffic where everyone has the right to move - within rules necessary to keep the traffic working for all. In this respect Human Rights is the very opposite to islamic sharia which imposes restrictions and "obligations/duties" depending on your sex and belief. And the ultimate proof for sharia islam's incompatibility with the most basic of Human Rights is the undeniable fact that Saudi based and steered muslim world organization OIC decided to openly violate UN's Human Rights and replace them with sharia. So today there are two parallel systems working inside UN: Human Rights and islamic "human rights". And even calling Human Rights violating sharia "human rights" is not only an offense against non-muslims, it's a deliberate effort to obscure the fact that Human Rights are  violated under the flag of religion.
 

Why is England supporting theocracies instead of Human Rights?

The European Court of Human Rights agreed with Klevius already 2002 when it declared sharia nor compatible with Human Rights. 

This is why David Cameron and Theresa May so eagerly have tried to dismiss and smear Human Rights so to keep the gate open to the islamofascist Saudi dictator family. It was never really about prisoners right to vote or about sending back muslim extremists to their muslim homelands where they could face torture, it was all about the relations with the Saudis and their associates.

The islamofascist Brexit disaster. Do note the combined Empire/Commonwealth sign. Klevius takes all credit for it.

 The only time the English government and BBC emphasize Human Rights is when they want to smear them or defend muslim extremism and demonize China or Buddhists - or a very few (compared to muslim extremists) neo-nationalsocialists who usually belong to the lowest of classes in society and many of them mentally ill.

Brexit has become the ultimate full gate opening for an already existing stream of paving in for religious extremism so common in the Commonwealth and other previous English colonies/"protectorates" such as e.g. Saudi Arabia.

But the price paid for the islamofascist oil money is totally unacceptaböe from a Human Rights perspective.

In Klevius series about rapetivism/sex extortion: "Suck me off first, otherwise..."

Acknowledgement: For a background it's suggested that you read Klevius sex and gender tutorial.

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

An average* Swedish woman today in Scandinavia's biggest newspaper: "Women, you blink and dig your own grave."

"How can you not see the problem with the norms of today?"

* A mother of four who studies to become a teacher.

Sofia Ivemalm a Swedish woman writing today in Aftonbladet (translated by Klevius from Swedish to the weird Old Nordic dialect now called English):

I know how it feels to be wrestled down with two hands around one's neck, how it feels to be locked out on the balcony in the middle of the night in cold winter, and how it feels to hear "suck me off first, otherwise your pals won't be let in here", said by a person who says he loves you.

I know all of this but still don't hate men. On the contrary, I have a father, a husband and sons whom I love more than anything else. I don't feel myself oppressed in my daily life.

What frightens me are all those women who don't see the problems of today's norms.

Consensual sex - or extortion?

Here's what Harvey Weinstein has been accused of, based on recent reports.

Thursday, October 5

An Oct. 5 expose from The New York Times detailed Weinstein's alleged misconduct -- and said that the Hollywood titan has made eight settlements with women.

“Scream” actress Rose McGowan was paid a $100,000 settlement from Weinstein in 1997 following a hotel room incident, The Times reported. The settlement wasn't an admission of guilt, the paper described a legal document as saying.

The Times report also detailed how Weinstein, while in a bathrobe in his hotel room, had asked if he could give actress Ashley Judd a massage or if the star could watch him take a shower.

"How do I get out of the room as fast as possible without alienating Harvey Weinstein?" Judd told the newspaper she recalled thinking.

Former employees told The Times that an unnamed Miramax employee left the company not long after an alleged incident involving the producer. The employees said that the woman received a settlement.

In 1998, Zelda Perkins, a former production assistant with Miramax, allegedly confronted Weinstein, and told him to stop his “inappropriate requests or comments in hotel rooms,” The New York Times reported.

Perkins, now working as a theater producer in London, was reportedly concerned for other women working in the office, and threatened Weinstein’s behavior with legal action, according to former coworkers.
FILE - In this March 18, 2014, file photo, Ashley Judd arrives at the world premiere of "Divergent" at the Westwood Regency Village Theater in Los Angeles. Harvey Weinstein has been fired from The Weinstein Co., effective immediately, following new information revealed regarding his conduct, the company's board of directors announced Sunday, Oct. 8, 2017. The New York Times article chronicled allegations against Weinstein from film star Ashley Judd and former employees at both The Weinstein Co. and Weinstein's former company, Miramax. (Photo by Jordan Strauss/Invision/AP, File)

Actress Ashley Judd is one of the multiple women who came forward and detailed the alleged sexual harassment she experienced from movie mogul Harvey Weinstein.  (AP Photo/Jordan Strauss)

The Times reported that Miramax negotiated a settlement with Perkins and her lawyer, and Perkins declined to discuss what happened with the newspaper.

Emily Nestor, a temporary employee of Weinstein’s, said he’d made sexual advances to her as well, promising he’d help with her career, according to the report.

Additionally, The Times reported an incident with Weinstein and an unnamed assistant, who he reportedly tried to convince to give him a massage while he stood naked in front of her at a hotel, which left her “crying and very distraught,” according to a memo by Lauren O’Connor.

In O’Connor’s 2015 memo, in which she penned several accounts of women in the company and the atmosphere Weinstein’s advances created, she recalled how Weinstein would ask her to meet with aspiring actresses after they’d have meetings with him in his hotel room.

She wrote how she felt that she was being used to build relationships with “vulnerable women who hope he will get them work.” O'Connor reportedly settled with Weinstein.

Laura Madden detailed to The Times how Weinstein had asked her more than once for massages at hotels and how he would constantly make her re-evaluate herself after rejecting him.

“It was so manipulative,” Madden said. “You constantly question yourself – am I the one who is the problem?”

Ambra Battilana Gutierrez, an Italian model and actress, met with Weinstein at his office in New York’s SoHo neighborhood in 2015, The Times reported. But Gutierrez reportedly called the police hours later saying Weinstein had grabbed her breasts, while asking if they were real, and put his hand up her skirt.

Charges were ultimately not filed against Weinstein, and he and Gutierrez reportedly agreed to a settlement, according to anonymous sources who spoke with The Times.

Overall, eight women detailed their alleged inappropriate interactions with Weinstein to The New York Times. The report alleges that various employees were asked to perform "turndown duty" for Weinstein, which included getting him ready for bed at night and also waking him up in the morning.

“I appreciate the way I’ve behaved with colleagues in the past has caused a lot of pain, and I sincerely apologize for it," Weinstein told The Times in a statement. "Though I’m trying to do better, I know I have a long way to go."

Rebecca Traister, a reporter for The Cut, discussed in an essay about how she encountered Weinstein while covering one of his book parties in early 2000. She claimed he screamed at her for a question she asked, calling her an obscene name.

    I cannot believe I'm actually reading the story I've been expecting to read for 17 years: https://t.co/bH7b9o3mdE
    — Rebecca Traister (@rtraister) October 5, 2017

When her boyfriend and colleague intervened and tried to get Weinstein to apologize to her, she said “Weinstein went nuclear.” He reportedly pushed her boyfriend down a set of stairs and dragged him out to the street in a headlock.

Traister said the altercation was later described as “a case of an aggressive reporter barging into a party she wasn’t invited to and asking impertinent questions.”
Friday, October 6

Fox 11’s Lauren Sivan detailed an alleged 2007 encounter with Weinstein in a HuffPost report. Sivan said that while working for local station News 12 Long Island, Weinstein cornered her in the hallway of a Manhattan restaurant closed to the public and masturbated in front of her.

Sivan said she had rejected an attempt by Weinstein to kiss her and told him she had a boyfriend. “Well, can you just stand there and shut up,” she claims he responded prior to allegedly masturbating.

“Luckily I didn't need a job or favor from him + didn't have to be polite,” Sivan tweeted Friday. “Others did. Keep that in mind.”

    Yeah. This happened👇🏽luckily I didn't need a job or favor from him + didn't have to be polite. Others did. Keep that in mind. https://t.co/mXs2RIU5kU
    — Lauren Sivan (@LaurenSivan) October 7, 2017

In another tweet, she said, “For those asking why I waited? YOU try telling that story 10yrs ago. Only possible now because of women with bigger names far braver than me.”

    For those asking why I waited?
    YOU try telling that story 10yrs ago. Only possible now because of women with bigger names far braver than me
    — Lauren Sivan (@LaurenSivan) October 7, 2017

She later spoke about the alleged incident on Megyn Kelly’s NBC show Monday.

In a tweet which has since been deleted, “Shaun of the Dead” actress Jessica Hynes recounted an alleged incident involving Weinstein, People reported.

“I was offered a film role at 19,” the 44-year-old reportedly wrote on Twitter. She alleged that Weinstein “came on board and wanted me to screen test in a bikini. I refused & lost the job.”

    My @HarveyWeinstein was Harvey Weinstein! Tricked back to his hotel room where he appeared naked and asked for a massage. https://t.co/v3NIWZlxAP
    — zoe brock (@missbandit) October 6, 2017

Saturday, October 7

Former model Zoe Brock wrote in a blog post for Medium that in 1997, when she was 23, she was "Harveyed." Brock said she "had no intention of leading" Weinstein on, and "felt safe in his company to be" herself.

Weinstein allegedly tricked her into going to his hotel room, where she found herself with no phone and no cash. He appeared naked and asked her for a massage, she said, adding that she felt "uncomfortable."

Brock eventually, according to her blog post, got Weinstein to let her leave.
Sunday, October 8
The Wrap Editor in Chief Sharon Waxman arrives at The Wrap Pre-Oscar party in Los Angeles, California February 22, 2012. REUTERS/Gus Ruelas (UNITED STATES - Tags: ENTERTAINMENT) - GM1E82N140W01

The Wrap founder Sharon Waxman said she was working on a story about allegations of sexual misconduct by Harvey Weinstein but the article was eventually "gutted" after "intense pressure" from the movie mogul.  (Reuters/Gus Ruelas)

The Wrap founder Sharon Waxman claimed in an article that while working for The New York Times in 2004, she “got the green light to look into oft-repeated allegations of sexual misconduct by Weinstein.”

Waxman said she was able to find the man in charge of Miramax Italy. Citing “multiple accounts,” she alleged that “his real job was to take care of Weinstein’s women needs, among other things.”

Waxman claimed she was able to find “a woman in London who had been paid off after an unwanted sexual encounter with Weinstein,” she recalled in her piece.

    .@sharonwaxman on Weinstein: Might any [recent incidents] have been avoided had @nytimes published what I had in my notebooks 13 years ago? pic.twitter.com/CLRrtHWsNq
    — Fox News (@FoxNews) October 10, 2017

However, Waxman alleged that there had been “intense pressure from Weinstein,” with the article “gutted.”

“The story was stripped of any reference to sexual favors or coercion and buried on the inside of the Culture section, an obscure story about Miramax firing an Italian executive,” she wrote.

“Our former colleague Sharon Waxman wrote about a story that was published in The Times in 2004,” a Times spokesperson told Fox News. “No one currently at The Times has knowledge of editorial decisions made on that story. But in general the only reason a story or specific information would be held is if it did not meet our standards for publication.”

British writer Liza Campbell alleged in an essay published in The Sunday Times of London that Weinstein suggested she take a bath with him at a hotel. Weinstein had earlier "offered me freelance script-reading for Miramax," she wrote.

"Soon I was sent the script of Shakespeare in Love to summarise and critique, followed by The Usual Suspects," she wrote. "And then the scripts stopped coming. I rang the Miramax offices, but nothing happened."

She says that in a phone call with Weinstein, she told the producer that "everything had stuttered to a halt. He said: "You better come to my hotel and we’ll sort this out.""

When she met him at his suite, there were initially several assistants present, but "suddenly all the assistants vanished," Campbell claimed. She said they talked for several minutes before Weinstein left the room, and that she thought he'd gone to the restroom.

"I could hear him moving around and suddenly the sound of bath taps running. 'What do you say we both jump in the bath?' he hollered," she wrote.

Weinstein also allegedly told her, “Come on, it’ll be fun. We can drink champagne. You can soap me — whaddaya say?”

Campbell claimed to tell the producer loudly, “If you come back into this room with no clothes on I’m going to f****** lose my temper.”

She says she got out using one door, after she found that two others were locked.

A Weinstein representative told the newspaper that the producer "will not respond to allegations about private matters in a public forum."
Monday, October 9

Louise Godbold alleged in an essay published online Monday that "in the early ‘90s, I too was one of the young women he preyed upon." Godbold is an executive director for a Los Angeles nonprofit, Variety reports.

"The details of what I have learned was not unique to me are out there now – the office tour that became an occasion to trap me in an empty meeting room, the begging for a massage, his hands on my shoulders as I attempted to beat a retreat… all while not wanting to alienate the most powerful man in Hollywood," she wrote.

Godbold recalled "the girlfriend who had introduced me to Harvey and was angry with me after he called her wanting to make sure I wasn’t going to make a complaint about his behavior."
Tuesday, October 10

    From aggressive overtures to sexual assault: Harvey Weinstein’s accusers end their silence: https://t.co/zSQbK5NV0c pic.twitter.com/e7vS28hckt
    — The New Yorker (@NewYorker) October 10, 2017

Ronan Farrow published a piece in The New Yorker which reported that 13 women alleged they were sexually harassed or assaulted by Weinstein.

Former aspiring actress Lucia Evans went on the record to allege Weinstein forced her to perform oral sex during a meeting.

"I tried to get away, but maybe I didn’t try hard enough," she told The New Yorker. "I didn’t want to kick him or fight him."

Actress-director Asia Argento, the daughter of famed horror filmmaker Dario Argento, claimed that when she was 21 in 1997, she was invited to what she believed was a Miramax party, but ended up in a hotel room with just Weinstein in it, the report said.

Weinstein left the room, but came back in a bathrobe and asked her for a massage, the report claimed. She "reluctantly" said she would before Weinstein went on to forcibly perform oral sex, the report alleged.

Argento claimed that Weinstein would contact her after the alleged assault, and that she would later have consensual relations with the movie mogul.

“I felt I had to,” Argento explained to The New Yorker regarding the initial such time. “Because I had the movie coming out and I didn’t want to anger him.”

An unnamed woman claimed to The New Yorker that Weinstein brought her to a hotel room before he changed into a bathrobe and “forced himself” on her. She reportedly thought about going to authorities, but decided not to.

She later maintained professional relations with the producer, the report said. “I was in a vulnerable position and I needed my job,” she explained.

Actress Mira Sorvino described an alleged 1995 hotel room incident with Weinstein to the publication.

"He started massaging my shoulders, which made me very uncomfortable, and then tried to get more physical, sort of chasing me around," Sorvino said. She reportedly left after saying it went against her faith to date married men.

An unnamed actress locked herself in a bathroom at a hotel so as to avoid the producer, she told The New Yorker. The actress also reportedly alleged that Weinstein masturbated in front of her.

The article also cited a 2015 audio recording made by the New York Police Department wherein Weinstein admits to groping Battilana Gutierrez, mentioned earlier in the Times piece.

The New Yorker article also described a meeting at a Beverly Hills hotel between Weinstein and Weinstein Company temp Emily Nestor, who was also mentioned in the Times report. Nestor, it said, refused his offer to be placed in his London office and be his girlfriend, and she also refused to hold his hand.

Weinstein, she alleged, told her, "Oh, the girls always say ‘no.’ You know, ‘No, no.’ And then they have a beer or two and then they’re throwing themselves at me."

The producer, she claimed, also allegedly said "that he’d never had to do anything like Bill Cosby."

"Nestor had a conversation with company officials about the matter but didn’t pursue it further: the officials said that Weinstein would be informed of anything she told them, a practice not uncommon in smaller businesses," Farrow wrote.

The report also described how French actress Emma de Caunes had a lunch meeting with Weinstein at a Paris hotel, and that he mentioned he had a movie adaptation of a book in the works.

Weinstein, according to the report, allegedly asked her to go with him to his room to get the book, and de Caunes answered her phone while Weinstein went into the bathroom. de Caunes recalled Weinstein later allegedly emerging from the bathroom nude with an erection.

The producer, she claims, told her to lay down on the bed. de Caunes ultimately fled the room.

Actress Rosanna Arquette and the producer were to have a dinner meeting during which she'd get a script at a hotel in Beverly Hills, and Arquette was told to go to his room, The New Yorker report said. Weinstein allegedly was wearing a bathrobe when he opened the door and claimed to need a massage.

Arquette, according to the report, said that she could give him a masseuse recommendation. During the encounter, she alleges that Weinstein tried to lead her hand to his erect penis. She turned him down.

Both Arquette and Sorvino allege that refusing Weinstein impacted their careers.

"There may have been other factors, but I definitely felt iced out and that my rejection of Harvey had something to do with it," Sorvino told The New Yorker.

The New Yorker article recounted an alleged incident between Weinstein and actress Jessica Barth at a Beverly Hills hotel. At his hotel room, the report described how Weinstein allegedly "alternated between offering to cast her in a film and demanding a naked massage in bed."

Barth refused to give him a massage and while she was leaving Weinstein offered a meeting with a female executive, according to the article.

“Any allegations of non-consensual sex are unequivocally denied by Mr. Weinstein," Weinstein spokeswoman Sallie Hofmeister told The New Yorker. "Mr. Weinstein has further confirmed that there were never any acts of retaliation against any women for refusing his advances. Mr. Weinstein obviously can’t speak to anonymous allegations, but with respect to any women who have made allegations on the record, Mr. Weinstein believes that all of these relationships were consensual. Mr. Weinstein has begun counseling, has listened to the community and is pursuing a better path. Mr. Weinstein is hoping that, if he makes enough progress, he will be given a second chance.”

Actresses Gwyneth Paltrow and Angelina Jolie were among the women in a follow-up New York Times piece published Tuesday who allege Weinstein harassed them. Arquette also spoke to the newspaper.

Paltrow described Weinstein's attempt to lure her, as a then-22-year-old aspiring actress, into giving him a massage in a hotel room. The incident prompted her then-boyfriend Brad Pitt to confront Weinstein at a film premiere. The producer, according to the report, allegedly ordered Paltrow not to tell people about what happened.
Actor Gwyneth Paltrow poses at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA) Art+Film Gala in Los Angeles, October 29, 2016. REUTERS/Danny Moloshok - S1BEUJWQOSAC

Gwyneth Paltrow was allegedly sexually harassed by Weinstein, according to a New York Times report.  (REUTERS/Danny Moloshok)

Jolie also turned down Weinstein, who allegedly hit on her in a hotel room in the 1990s, the report said.

"I had a bad experience with Harvey Weinstein in my youth, and as a result, chose never to work with him again and warn others when they did,” Jolie, now 42, told the Times in email. “This behavior towards women in any field, any country is unacceptable.”

The Times report also recounted a meeting between Tomi-Ann Roberts and Weinstein. Weinstein was naked in a bathrobe when she showed up, Roberts alleges. He also allegedly said her audition would be better if she got naked.  She turned him down and left, according to the Times report. 

Actress Katherine Kendall told the Times that she was at Weinstein's apartment when he came back from the bathroom in a bathrobe and requested a massage. Weinstein exited the room and came back naked after she said no, Kendall alleged.

Kendall claims that Weinstein chased her around the room and that he also asked her to show him her breasts, which she declined.

While in a hotel suite with Weinstein in 1996, French actress Judith Godrèche turned down his alleged request for a massage, the Times reported. She claimed Weinstein later tried "pressing against me and pulling off my sweater." She left the room.

Actress Dawn Dunning claims that Weinstein offered her contracts for his next three movies as long as she would have three-way sex with him, according to the Times report. She took off.

“Any allegations of non-consensual sex are unequivocally denied by Mr. Weinstein," Hofmeister told the Times in a statement. "Mr. Weinstein has further confirmed that there were never any acts of retaliation against any women for refusing his advances. He will not be available for further comments, as he is taking the time to focus on his family, on getting counseling and rebuilding his life.”

A report published early Tuesday by The Guardian described how Weinstein allegedly wore just a robe during a hotel room meeting with British actress Romola Garai.

“Like every other woman in the industry, I’ve had an ‘audition’ with Harvey Weinstein, where I’d actually already had the audition but you had to be personally approved by him,” Garai told the publication. “So I had to go to his hotel room in the Savoy, and he answered the door in his bathrobe. I was only 18. I felt violated by it, it has stayed very clearly in my memory.”

“The point was that he could get a young woman to do that, that I didn’t have a choice, that it was humiliating for me and that he had the power,” the 35-year-old "Atonement" actress said.

Also Tuesday, former actress and screenwriter Louisette Geiss alleged that Weinstein appeared in an open bathrobe with no clothes on during a meeting at the 2008 Sundance Film Festival. She claims that Weinstein asked several times that she watch him masturbate during the 2008 encounter.

Geiss made the allegations during a news conference with attorney Gloria Allred, who invited Weinstein to meet with his alleged victims in a mediation or arbitration process.

Geiss said in a statement that she is coming forward to help give voice to other alleged victims of sexual harassment. She said her experience with Weinstein led to her departure from the entertainment industry. She now works in real estate.

Actress Heather Graham said Weinstein implied she would have to sleep with him for a role in a Tuesday column for Variety.

She described a meeting with Weinstein in the early 2000s "in which he mentioned that he had an agreement with his wife. He could sleep with whomever he wanted when he was out of town."

"There was no explicit mention that to star in one of those films I had to sleep with him, but the subtext was there," she alleged.

Graham says she later skipped a meeting with Weinstein at a hotel because her actress friend who was supposed to come along said she was unable to attend.

"That was the end of that encounter — I was never hired for one of his films, and I didn’t speak up about my experience," she wrote. "It wasn’t until Ashley Judd heroically shared her story a few days ago that I felt ashamed."
Wednesday, October 11

Actress and supermodel Cara Delevingne took to Instagram to describe her encounters with Weinstein.

"When I first started to work as an actress, I was working on a film and I received a call from Harvey Weinstein asking if I had slept with any of the women I was seen out in the middle with," the statement said. The model said she didn't answer his questions and "hurried off the phone."

She also described a later incident where Weinstein asked her to come his hotel room.

"I quickly declined and asked his assistant if my car was outside," the statement said. "She said it wasn't and wouldn't be for a bit and I should go to his room."

The model said she felt "powerless" and that in the room, there was a second woman.

"He asked us to kiss and she began some sort of advances upon his direction," she alleged. "I swiftly got up and asked him if he knew that I could sing. And I began to sing....i thought it would make the situation better....more professional....like an audition....i was so nervous. After singing I said again that I had to leave. He walked me to the door and stood in front of it and tried to kiss me on the lips. I stopped him and managed to get out of the room."

Actress Léa Seydoux told The Guardian that at the beginning of her career, during a conversation with Weinstein, he jumped toward her and attempted to kiss her.

“We were talking on the sofa when he suddenly jumped on me and tried to kiss me,” Seydoux said. “I had to defend myself. He’s big and fat, so I had to be forceful to resist him."

The "Spectre" actress added: “He tried more than once,” and described Weinstein as “very domineering” and “losing control.” Seydoux told the news outlet that she "pushed him physically. I think he respected me because I resisted him.”

Actress Sarah Ann Masse described to Variety how Weinstein allegedly was in just his undergarments during her 2008 interview for a nanny position at his house in Connecticut.

“Harvey Weinstein opened the door in his boxer shorts and an undershirt. My first thought was, ‘Oh, this is weird. Maybe he forgot this interview is happening. Maybe he thought I was the mailman. I’m sure he’ll be embarrassed and excuse himself and get changed.’ But he didn’t,” she told the publication.

She claims he asked in the job interview, “You would never flirt with my friends or anyone to get ahead?” and that she told him no.

Masse claimed at the end he "gave me this really tight, close hug that lasted for quite a long period of time. He was still in his underwear. Then he told me he loved me. I left right after that."
Thursday, October 12

Actress Kate Beckinsale said in an Instagram post that when she was 17 years old, she was invited to meet Weinstein at a hotel.

She says she thought the meeting would happen in a conference room, but she was directed to Weinstein's room instead.

“He opened the door in his bathrobe. I was incredibly naive and young and it did not cross my mind that this older, unattractive man would expect me to have any sexual interest in him," she alleged. "After declining alcohol and announcing that I had school in the morning I left, uneasy but unscathed.”

Weinstein, she claims, asked her a few years down the line "if he had tried anything with me in that first meeting."

The actress said she "realized he couldn't remember if he had assaulted me or not."

"I said no to him professionally many times over the years-some of which ended up with him screaming at me calling me a c*** and making threats, some of which made him laughingly tell people oh "Kate lives to say no to me," she wrote.

British actress Claire Forlani also posted a statement on Twitter in which she claimed that she “escaped 5 times.”

She said there had been two night meetings at a hotel with Weinstein “and all I remember was I ducked , dived and ultimately got out of there without getting slobbered over, well just a bit. Yes massage was suggested.”

    #HarveyWeinstein #ClaireForlani #MyStory pic.twitter.com/gEVDkbP5ec
    — Claire Forlani (@ClaireAForlani) October 12, 2017

Forlani alleged there were three dinners and she recalled him listing “all the actresses who had slept with him and what he had done for them.”

Earlier in her statement, Forlani revealed Ronan Farrow had contacted her, but that she didn’t take part in The New Yorker expose.

“Today I sit here feeling some shame,” she confided.

French actress Florence Darel alleged to Le Parisien in a French-language interview that Weinstein hit on her in a hotel room in 1995 -- with his wife in the next room.

“He started to tell me that he found me very attractive and wanted to have relations with me,” Darel, now 49, said. “I told him I was very in love with my companion. He replied that didn’t bother him at all and offered to have me be his mistress a few days a year. That way we could continue to work together. Basically, it was ‘If you want to continue in America, you have to go through me.’”

Darel says she left.

English actor Sophie Dix, who was 22 in the 1990s when she met Weinstein, said her possible career path was "massively cut down" after an experience with the producer, according to The Guardian.

Dix said she found herself in a hotel room with Weinstein, and "all the alarm bells starting ringing." She was in bed with Weinstein "tugging at her clothes," before she hid in the bathroom. Once she opened the door, she saw him "standing there masturbating."

It was then she decided not to pursue acting. "I decided if this is what being an actress is like, I don't want it," Dix said.
Friday, October 13

Actress and former model Angie Everhart claimed Weinstein masturbated in front of her on a yacht more than 10 years ago, according to an interview she did with TMZ.

The incident allegedly occurred after Everhart had arrived in France for the Cannes Film Festival, she said. Feeling jetlagged, she reportedly fell asleep in one of the cabins. She later woke up to the sight of Weinstein in her room, blocking the door and masturbating, she said.

Despite him telling her not to, Everhart said she "told everyone" about what happened, including producers and other actors. But everyone reportedly shrugged off the situation saying, "oh that's just Harvey."

She said everybody knew what he was doing to women but no one said anything about it until the Times article was published on Oct. 5.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Harvey Weinstein, BBC's Jimmy Savile and Bill Cosby - but what about younger sex abusers?

Klevius question: What's the difference between the thinking in this Rolling Stones lyrics from 1965 and BBC's sex predator Jimmy Saville?

The Last Time by The Rolling Stones 1965

Klevius comment: A wonderful hit - except for the appalling words which Klevius has never understood. Jimmy Savile used his power as a gatekeeper for young girls eager to participate in BBC's pop programs etc. How many male pop artists did the same to girls eager to show their pals they had been noticed by famous guys?


The Last Time (1965).

Well I told you once and I told you twice
But ya never listen to my advice
You don't try very hard to please me
With what you know it should be easy
Well this could be the last time
This could be the last time
Maybe the last time
I don't know, oh no, oh no

Well, I'm sorry girl but I can't stay
Feelin' like I do today
It's too much pain and too much sorrow
Guess I'll feel the same tomorrow
Well this could be the last time
This could be the last time
Maybe the last time
I don't know, oh no, oh no
Well this could be the last time
This could be the last time
Maybe the last time
I don't know, oh no, oh no

Well I told you once and I told you twice
That someone will have to pay the price
But here's a chance to change your mind
'Cause I'll…
Well this could be the last time
This could be the last time
Maybe the last time
I don't know, oh no, oh no
Last time baby
To say no more
Baby I don't know
Well I don't know
Well, I don't know
I don't know
Well, I don't know...

Songwriters: Keith Richards / Mick Jagger


Klevius wrote:

Saturday, November 28, 2015

Klevius recipe against Human Rights violating sharia (OIC/Salafi/Wahhabi etc) islam: First Focus on the Saudi dictator family! It's not our "ally" but our worst enemy!

 Acknowledgement: You who call yourself a muslim but don't support sharia but instead Human Rights equality, you are not the target of Klevius writings - although Klevius likes to remind you of the possible support to anti-.Human Rights muslims your naming of yourself may imply.

All sharia* muslims ought to be classified as criminals (as Human Rights defenders are classified in islam's "homeland" Saudi Arabia) because of their membership of a terrorist organization, the so called** islam. Adhering to Saudi based and steered OIC's Human Rights violating sharia declaration means accepting Wahhabism/Salafism (i.e. the origin of islam) 

* Sharia is here defined in accordance with Saudi based and steered OIC's sharia declaration in UN and how this clashes with the most basic rights of equality in UN's 1948 Human Rights Declaration.

** Islam was in its very beginning a Jewish/Christian sect using Jewish-Christian texts for what later became the so called Koran. This is why earlier parts of the so called Koran are less violent than later parts which were added to fit the "conquest" of the "infidels" because a parasitic robber ideology can only survive by sponging on others.

Ben Weingarten: Invariably you will hear the argument that while parts of the Koran are violent, others are peaceful. Such a view evinces further ignorance however, as it fails to address two essential Islamic concepts: (a) Abrogation and (b) taqiyya.

Abrogation refers to the fact that as the Koran reflects Allah’s divine revealed word, where there are textual contradictions, those passages revealed later must supplant those that preceded it. These later passages are frequently more violent than the earlier peaceful ones.

Taqiyya refers to strategic lying and deception – covering up one’s true intentions so as to defeat one’s enemies. This manifests itself in acts of sabotage, subversion and the propagation of strategic disinformation, not unlike what the Communists did during and after the Cold War.

Others will argue that just as the Koran has violent verses, so too do the Old and New Testaments. But Jews and Christians do not go out and slaughter in the name of their G-d in a modern-day global Crusade like the jihadists are waging. Moreover, the values and principles that flow from these two religious systems have led to the miracle that is Western civilization. The Muslim world on the other hand, especially where Islamic doctrine is followed in its purest form, resembles the seventh century one that preceded it.

Lest you think those who have studied Islam in schools are better off, in America’s universities taqiyya has become an art form. Many of the Middle Eastern departments at our country’s most prestigious academic institutions have been found to put on a “moderate” public face while serving as Trojan horses for anti-Semitism, anti-Zionism and anti-Westernism — all consistent with Islamic doctrine.

This should come as no surprise, as these departments – and even K-12 schools — are often funded by Islamic nations who are the primary backers of Islamic supremacism themselves.

For those able to see past multiculturalism, moral relativism, materialism and actually study Islam in theory and practice, recognizing that the religion at the very least as understood by millions of Muslims is not only incompatible with, but hostile to our very existence, this is a staggering realization. It offends our pluralistic, tolerant sensitivities to think that such a massive, religiously-justified threat could exist. For while similarly savage enemies marched throughout the 20th century, none were tinged with theology, and Communism for its part was explicitly anti-religious.

Moreover, there are uncomfortable practical questions that such a threat raises. Who exactly are we fighting if there are millions of jihadists, aiders, abettors and enablers all over the world? How are we to fight them? What measures can we take to secure the homeland that are both sufficient and consonant with a free society?

Today, the West is clearly not even at the point of asking these questions, which reflects a lack of education on behalf of some, and denial on the part of others. That it is considered a bold act to utter phrases like “Radical Islam,” or “Islamic extremism” or “Islamism,” in the face of now over 25,000 jihadist attacks since Sept. 11, 2001 indicates as much. Imagine what kind of stones it would take to repeat after Turkey’s President Tayyip Erdoğan, that in effect there is no such thing as “moderate Islam” or “Islamism,” and such “descriptions are very ugly…offensive and an insult to our religion…Islam is Islam and that’s it.”

Rather than deal with reality, we figuratively bury our heads in the sand. Meanwhile, savage jihadists lop off and literally bury infidel heads in the sand.

If we are going to turn the tide in a war that we are currently not fighting, it is imperative that a sizable number of Americans wake up. It behooves all men and women of good conscience to educate their fellow citizens, and spark this awakening.

Klevius question: Who made these tragic girls so ignorant about islam?

Klevus answer: Everyone who uses the oxymoron "islamophobia" to cover up the evil of islam. However, sex segregation/apartheid* is the real issue behind all of islam. If you can't accept Human Rights equality for girls/women then you're an accomplice to evil islam - or a victim.

* Islam reproduces itself through its evil one way pillar, rapetivism, i.e. the biological and ideologicalreproduction of muslim men.

Did black (or why not Khoisan) South-Africans think their biological constitution made it ok to not have the same rights as others? Klevius thinks they didn't. However, Klevius knows for sure that many (possibly even most) women still think their biological constitution is a fair excuse for sex-apartheid. This self-imposed entrapment is not only limiting but also a crucial key to the "understanding" of general muslim/islamic/Koranic/sharia (call it what you like) sex apartheid (sex segregation).

Is the most basic Human Rights violating muslim sharia supremacism really "conducive to the public good" in Britain?

.