Klevius CV

Some basic facts to consider about Klevius* (except that he is both "extremely normal" and extremely intelligent - which fact, of course, would not put you off if you're really interested in these questions):

* Mentored by G. H. von Wright, Wittgenstein's successor at Cambridge.

1 Klevius' analysis of consciousness is the only one that fits what we know - after having eliminated our "pride" bias of being humans (which non-human would we impress, anyway?). Its starting point is described and exemplified in a commentary to Jurgen Habermas in Klevius book Demand for Resources (1992:30-33, ISBN 9173288411, based on an article by Klevius from 1981), and is further explained in a commentary to Francis Crick's book The Astonishing Hypothesis under the title The Even More Astonishing Hypothesis (EMAH), which can be found in Stalk's archive and which has been on line since 2003 for anyone to access/assess.

2 Klevius out of island/mainland fluctuating Southeast Asia Denisovans up to big skulled Siberians as the birth of much more intelligent modern humans who then spread all over the world, is the only analysis that fits both genetic reality as well as tool and art sophistication seen in e.g. the Denisova cave (no dude, Blombos etc. don’t come even close).

3 Klevius criticism of Human Rights violating sharia islamofascism (e.g. OIC) which is called "islamophobia" by islamofascists and their supporters who don't care about the most basic of Human Rights (e.g. re. women). Klevius' "islamophobia" has two roots: 1) UN's 1948 Universal Human Rights declaration, which, contrary to any form of muslim sharia, doesn't, for example, allow sex to be an excuse for robbing females of their full Human Rights equality, and 2) the history of the origin of islam ( e.g. Hugh Kennedy, Robert G. Hoyland, K. S. Lal etc.) which reveals a murderous, pillaging, robbing, enslaving and raping racist/sexist supremacist ideology that exactly follows precisely those basic islamic tenets which are now called "unislamic" but still survive today (as sharia approved sex slavery, sharia approved "liberation” jihad, academic jihad etc.) behind the sharia cover which is made even more impenetrable via the spread of islamic finance, mainly steered from the islamofascist Saudi dictator family.

4 Klevius analysis of sex segregation/apartheid (now deceptively called “gender segregation”) and heterosexual attraction - see e.g. Demand for Resources (1981/1992), Daughters of the Social State (1993), Angels of Antichrist (1996), Pathological Symbiosis (2003), or Klevius PhD research on heterosexual attraction/sex segregation and opposition to female footballers (published in book form soon).

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

TheresaMay's racist robbing of EU citizens' Human Rights

The Saudi Fuhrer of Saudi based islamofascist OIC

BBC's compulsory fee funded propaganda for Saudi sharia islam

Support Klevius' Atheist anti-fascism against islamofascism

This is what BBC's muslim sharia presenter Mishal Husain "forgot" to report. Mishal grew up in the very same theocratic medieval dictatorship which now harbors and rules all muslims world organization OIC and its Human Rights violating sharia. While also spreading islamic hatred over the world through a variety of channels.

Klevius to dumb (or just evil) alt-left "antifa" people who support the worst of Human Rights violating evil:

True anti-fascism in its purest form is laid down in the Universal Human Rights declaration of 1948. Islam (OIC) has in UN decided to abandon the most basic of these rights (the so called negative Human Rights).

Fascism is, according to Google's top hit, "a political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation*, and forcible suppression of opposition." 23 Aug 2017

So let's face islam with this definition.

A political philosophy, movement, or regime (islam) that exalts nation (Umma) and often race (muslims) above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government (Koran text/Mohammad's example) headed by a dictatorial leader (the caliph - e.g. the Saudi based OIC's Saudi leader), severe economic and social regimentation* (sharia), and forcible suppression of opposition (apostasy ban against muslims wanting to leave islam, and demonizing defenders of Human Rights by calling them "islamophobes").

And islamofascism gets away with it by calling itself a religion and thereby being protected by those very Human Rights it opposes.

* According to Cambridge dictionary, "extreme organization and control of people".

Sayeeda Warsi like all sharia muslims is against basic Human Rights

Theresa May is for sharia and EU - but against EU's Human Rights Court which condemns sharia

Klevius is probably now the world's foremost expert on sex segregation (sad isn't it), and islam (the worst cime ever) is the foremost expression of sex segregation. By 'islam' Klevius means the same as true sharia supporting (and therefore against the most basic of Human Rights) muslims.

British muslim jihadists: Samantha Lewthwaite, Mishal Husain and Michael Adebolajo (who murdered Le

Saturday, March 10, 2018

Klevius question: Isn't sexism "multicultural" and "diverse" more than "white"?

Feminist asks: How important should we allow it to be for men to to have the "right" to get sex? Klevius answers: Not important at all. Because of heterosexual attraction ("male gaze"*) women with informed and free consent should always decide - incl. within marriage (women should not be doomed to whoring**).

The folk use of "feminism" fits Klevius. However, real feminists using "feminist theory" is quite a different horse. A horse that runs backwards towards the beginning of feminism itself where feminists opposed the vote, denied women playing football etc.

* The reason Klevius isn't a feminist but instead suggests Human Rights no matter of sex (as expressly noted in the 1948 Human Rights declaration - which islam vehemently opposes) is that feminist theories exclude women's role in their own oppression - as well as excluding women who want to leave the "feminine" without cutting or drugging themselves. Although feminist theorists talk about "women's own experience", they always exclude women who transgress feminists' beloved sex segregation border between "masculine" and "feminine". This is also why Klevius had a problem using feminist "research" in his PhD thesis. The most important of women's experience are excluded. So Klevius had to do in depth interviews with such women - and with remarkable result.

Not only extremist feminists but also mainstream feminists function as "guardians" of the cultural borders of sex segregation, i.e. the pressure on girls/women to look/behave in an ever changing (both locally and temporally) confused "feminine" way.

** This of course also means that women have no automatic right to sex from men either.
Btw, Klevius, the world's foremost expert on sex segregation (sad isn't it) thinks he's is qualified for talking about sex and sexual harassment. Why? Well, firstly, Klevius has way more sex hormones than feminists. In fact so much so no woman has seen him failing sexually. Secondly, no woman has been pushed, or even "seduced" to sex by Klevius. Thirdly, Klevius has a history of several marriages (with equally many daughters and sons plus grandchildren) and other longterm  and shortterm relationships incl. five years as a quite popular bachelor between going steady. Fourthly, Klevius still feels as a horny but non-sexist teenager. 

So why is Klevius talking in this ridiculous way? Well, just to show that there has been enough possibilities for Klevius to be sexist - but he hasn't. And because Klevius doesn't think he's a superman, the inevitable conclusion is that most other men can perform similarly if released from sex segregation. And to be "released from sex segregation" simply means "loosing" one's "manhood" - as Klevius did when he was 17 and the cutest girl on the disco he had managed to get interested told him later on that "it felt so relaxing when you didn't try to get me in bed all the time". 

And of course Klevius understands that less cute girls/women might fall into the trap of using their asses as confirmation that they are attractive. In fact, many of Klevius early girlfriends begged for sex, not because they were necessarily so horny but because they wanted to tell their friends about it.
And finally, although Klevius is so much more sexually potent than any feminist out there, he has never felt any need for sex gadgets of any sort. Nor has he ever thrown white pepper just for getting a sneezing "orgasm". And to be honest, Klevius doubts that they can develop a female sex robot that could interest him. Wonder why? Cyber sex, yes, but not a robot. The human consent is what turns Klevius on.

RFSU is a Swedish state sponsored organization for sex education. Klevius thought RFSU's pic looked strange so he added a more normal view. However, feminists theorists would have condemned both pics as "objectification", i.e. what Klevius calls heterosexual attraction.

Klevius wrote about Linda and her friend 14 years ago. Nothing has changed since.

Scandinavian new paper Aftonbladet uses a picture of a half fat white man with Viagra pills to illustrate sexual harassment etc. Klevius isn't fat nor has he ever needed Viagra. However, to make the pic more "multicultural" Klevius added some skin tones from Oprah Winfrey's cheek. Sorry about that Oprah...

We aren't supposed to "stereotype" sharia muslims  as racist and sexist Human Rights violators because "not all muslims are". Despite the fact that sharia - e.g. Saudi based and steered OIC via UN - overrides and even criminalizes the most basic of Human Rights

However, Klevius is all the time associated with "white men" in negative context, although Klevius in every aspect is outside that realm. If Klevius would try to be better than the offered caricatures of "white men" he would end up as a god. And nothing could be more offensive for a true Atheist as Klevius.

Klevius wrote (do note that www.klevius.info is a web museum not touched upon for more than a decade):

Sunday, December 05, 2004

Tarik Ramadan's Islamic hypocrisy

Tarik Ramadan (the ultimate sexist - see From Klevius without love): "I think that God blesses -- and should bless -- all the countries and all the way."

Klevius' translation: "I think that the Islamic Allah should bless the whole world in all ways"! Klevius comment: This is, per definition, pure totalitarianism as far as possible from the Holy 1948 (negative) Human Rights Declaration (explained on Klevius' definition of negative human rights)!


Saturday, December 04, 2004

When Islamic fundamentalists and "their" women move West

Women risk lives criticizing Muslim extremists
In Somalia, says Allas, "If you are a girl, you always are in fear of your parents, your older brothers, your male neighbors. It is always the man ... It is always fear and fear and fear.

"When I came to Holland, for me it was, Whew! What freedom! What a country! It was love, immediately," she recalls.

"But Holland is not the same."

Award for anti-fascist work and death threat from Islam

Tuesday, November 30, 2004

Feminism and Islam both share sex segregation

Klevius' comments to an Islamist's view on women.

According to:

Muslim Response to Feminism: Holistic Approach

" Holistic approach does not isolate woman from absolute society , they see womans rights and position within the whole structure of the society and avoid the segragation of society in terms for feminism or masculinism or any sort of monocentric approach as opposed to feminism."

Klevius' comment: On the contrary, "women's rights and position within the whole" is segregation in precisely the same way as feminism!

"According to holistic approach, society as a whole including men and women are addressed to their individual and social responsibility without any monosex inclination. The feminist perspective is monosexim perspective, neglecting the valueable place of men and woman side-by-side as a unifying force in family and in society. Holitsic approach looks at one comprehensive position of woman and man in public, private, in society and in politics."

Klevius' comment: "individual and social responsibility" (for men and women respectively) again is segregation! And the idea that feminism is a monosexism is ridicilous having in mind that the ultimate political aim of most feminisms is to underline the difference between men and women! See Why do you call yourself a feminist, Judith Butler?

"One of the distinguished scholars who offered the holistic approach was Shaheed Mutahhari. He explained the reason and the necesaty of different treatment of woman in Islam according to biological and pychological differences between man and woman. while the apologists try to reread the Holy text in line with change - changed codition of the current society."

Klevius' comment: This non-problem (i.e. the lunatic idea that a man can't handle his attraction towards women without burkas etc - in fact real rapists, no matter if they rape because of Islamic "infidel" contempt or some other bad cultural reasoning, aren't biologically but culturally determined to do so) is out-lined and "solved" on From Klevius without love (+ additional links offered on the page). The pages also explain why feminists contrary to Islamists deny HSA (heterosexual attraction).

Peter Klevius

Klevius wrote:

Saturday, December 31, 2005

Swedish sex segregation 2005 - In memory of Linda 13, sex slave* & abused to death by "a gang" in her school

Background: Strange Swedish attitudes in the public debate! Swedish white collar fascists /former defender of Pol Pot etc?) now 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)!

Also note that 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?!).

Official Sweden talks child abuse at home while kids are abused to death at schools (Swedish readers may compare this with the analyses presented in Ekot om incest )!
* Linda said she felt like a slave (compare the girls in Darfur raped by Islamic paramilitaries) on the school's toilet when she had to give sex services to the boy with "many dangerous relatives" (also see Nov 30 posting below abt Gangs of Arabs & dogs terrorizing Sweden). This is in line with e.g. "street Islam" (see Brief history of true Islam) which states (compare Koran's "infidel" and marriage/rape practices) that "white" girls/women are whores and should be abused and intimidated! Which is exactly what is taught in many Muslim (or Islam influenced) homes, before the kids show up as evil gangs in schools and on the streets! This racism is the real power of Islam, from Mohammed to the irresponsible parents of the kids chasing Linda. And equally irresponsible Swedish political correctness! Compare the Swedish chancellor of justice, Göran Lambertz, who isn't at all interested in the Swedish Radio Islam's continuing denial of Holocaust and extreme hatred propaganda against Jews! Today Islam is the world's most powerful violent ideology. Is that why not only Saudi-Arabic oil-billionaires but also the Swedish state and Swedish white collar fascists so eagerly support and defend it?! Also see the horryfying WMD-link Sweden-Iran!
and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: "Islam must prepare to rule the world".

Also compare the Rissne gang rape case where the boys were fiercly defended against the Swedsh whore (age 14) etc. by a huge gang of parents and relatives. Their ultimate "penalty" then was to visit an Islamist imam (sic)! I.e. the representative for what actually might have boosted their and their parents' racist/sexist attitudes! "The informal censorship in stories related to immigration in Sweden. Similar incidents are reported with shocking frequency, to the point where some observers fear that law and order is completely breaking down in the country."

True Islam has a bad influence on both Muslim and non-Muslim cultures

Islam is an evil ideology of rapetivism, exploitation & conquest ultimately based on pure racism - not to be confused with cultural ethnicity of the people that have happened to live under this evil ideology! One might even say that most of the disadvantages may be traced to how Islam has affected people's behavior, not to the people! No matter which changes are made to it, true Islam (i.e. attraction of Islam) is based on infidel racism and sex segregation. Islam's jihad-"paramilitaries" in the West are youngsters brainwashed by parents and Koranic agitation at home, in youth organizations, mosques, on the street etc) If this attraction is removed, Islam becomes an empty eunuch just like Chistianity. And that's OK to me. In the long run both racism and sex segregation are doomed anyway - just like true Islam!

Islam at work today: 20,000 Egyptian riot police kill at least 25 unarmed Sudanese refugees in Cairo outside UN!!!

But Sweden now praises and rewards misled and brainwashed children who at school write naive and glorifying nonsense abt Islam (uncritically gathered from Islamist sources). These writings and Linda's death represent the two extremes of the Swedish hypocrisy (also see Hypocritical Swedish misogynist imam Leif Karlsson).

For a background see From Klevius without love - freedom from sex segregation
Klevius' definition of religion
Klevius' definition of (the holy) negative human rights

"We feel every effort is made to silence the real circumstances abt Linda's death" (i.e. political correctness of the social state may not be disturbed? Also note that Sweden has a compulsory school, unlike in other Nordic countries were it's only the fulfilling of a child's education that is compulsory - not the attendance in one of the world's worst school system!).

Linda, 13, was a Swedish girl who, together with her best friend, used not to follow the stereotypical, stupid ("sexy") girlish style (often incl. being sex servants to certain boys) so common now in Sweden (see the Swedish girl problem and Angels of Antichrist and Sex segregation in LVU). She was sporty, climbing etc "Tomboy".
But a certain "gang" (plus, of course, the ordinary confused Swedish school attitude: glorifying Islam, pro-sex segregation, pro-child sex, etc) forced her (after severe bullying) to wear make up etc. Then she was sexually abused on the school's toilet while 6-7 of his friends were outside (like many other helpless Swedish girls). The day she eventually hung herself by using her sister's jump rope, she had been called a whore and other namings by a boy who also physically abused her and threatened to send his relatives on her.

Status among girls is based on "drinking, smoking, giving boys sex services, and using lots of make up and sexy clothes." Sounds pretty pathetic to me. According to Linda's friend "they" who have power control the school - including the pathetic Swedish teachers (compare P. Klevius' Echo of Incest, an analysis of the strange fact that while Western bio-parents are the least likely to commit sexual abuse. they are the most targeted, and vice versa, while sexual abuse committed by other kids in a heavily depending/pressuring environments at school etc, are the most common, they are the least addressed!).

Also compare the weird psychoanalytic idea abt the necessity of sex etc stupidities (From Freud to bin Laden). And it seems the younger the better. Compare the Swedish state funded institute that sexually abused 6 year old children by forcing them to listen to stories abt oral sex etc (see e g Swedish state pedophilia rewarded) !

Linda was described as secure and happy at home and outside the school.


Nature Shinto meets the raping fields of monolitheist** Islam - i.e. the world's oldest family religion with the world's best high tech vs. the world's youngest state "religion" with brainwashing Koran schools, physical & cultural desertation & low-tech totalitarianism
** Klevius' naming

Klevius' sites & blogs so far the only ones clearly addressing the horrors, abuse and confinement of sex segregation!

Update: Georgetown’s Capitulation to Radical Islam

Rape stats: 44% of women who were date raped have considered suicide!

Klevius wrote:

Saturday, June 10, 2006

A dedication to Edith Södergran from Peter Klevius without love

Link to Klevius love letter to Edith Södergran

The foremost Nordic modernist poet, Edith Södergran, was a Finland-Swedish like Peter Klevius (meaning she belonged to a small Swedish language/cultural tradition in Finland). This minority group has lived in a special niche between the east and the west (compare e.g. Johannes Salminen). Although this may have contributed to some disturbed creativity (see Inside Klevius' mind) the main point here is a formula for analyzing sex segregation in regard to human existence.

Also see how Edith Södergran was abandoned by her sex

Edith Södergran symbolizes the modern human being trapped between loneliness in search for salvation (see Was Jesus Religious and Angels of Antichrist and World Values Survey) and fascist gang belonging (compare Islamofascism)


To destroy Islamofascism you need to destroy Islam, i.e. its connection to Koran (as hinted by the pope and others)! And yes, Islamofascism may continue even after this, BUT, without the indirect support of "moderate" Islamists and their supporters, the pure evilness will be more easily recognized and hence less attractive for sexist lunatics!

It's not only that Islam (according to Koran) clearly supports slavery (and Koran is the final word of god according to Islam), but that the whole concept of Islam is based on slavery and rapetivism. It's the main idea and Islam is the manual for organizing it! Islam is the refined system of sponging on slavery/rapetivism, and this "ideology" was born pragmatically in the already existing slave trade routes through Mecca etc. (pilgrimage was originally simply a slave merchant's trip to the slave market in Mecca - see e.g. M. Gordon: Slavery in the Arab World) . This is also the reason why the racist contempt expressed under the title "infidels" is so essential in Islam. However, unlike Gordon (1987) above, Klevius offers an updated analysis of slavery and sex segregated rapetivism in historical Islam.

What is essential here is to understand that this feature of Islam cannot be eliminated without changing the whole concept. And this is impossible precisely because those violent etc. lunatics who represent Islam in accordance with its original message (Pope: "Islam's stuck with Koran" - see posting below) will always claim and benefit from every "dialogue" or "support" of Islam per se (i.e. Islam disguised as some "ethnicity" or "private faith" which it is clearly not)! This is how/why(?) "moderate" Islamists support evilness. This is also why Islam is giving incentives for trafficking in girls on night clubs in Sweden, and why Islam gives incentives for raping "infidels" and to sterilize them if they can't be converted to Islam (Girls, don't drink from glasses in public places!). And finally, this is perfectly in line with Islam's incentives for making money on the selling of drugs to the "infidels" while at the same time destroying these "infidels'" lives. Islamoterror in different forms is going on at schools, on streets etc. often boosted by Islamic contempt learnt from parents etc. Surprisingly little has changed during 1400 years when it comes to Islam!


Finland and Sweden are the only ones using the term "Foster-land" to describe their nationality. There lies a huge irony/tragedy in this very fact
Klevius page Fosterlandet Sverige tops Google before the Swedish PM Göran Persson


Tuesday, February 6, 2018

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

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

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

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

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

Drawing (1979) and photo by Peter Klevius.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

England (under UK*) got full sufftage 1928.

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

Sunday, February 4, 2018

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

EU rescued UK but what about the future?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Through the unconstitutional Britisharia Brexit gate towards Human Rights violating islamofascism

England voted Brexit - UK did not.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Tuesday, January 30, 2018

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Friday, January 26, 2018

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

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

Pic text furthest down on this posting.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The anti-fascist 1948 Universal Human Rights Declaration

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

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

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

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

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

There's no equality between men and Women in islam

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

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

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

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

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

Pic text

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

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

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

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

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

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

Wednesday, January 17, 2018

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thursday, December 21, 2017

God Jul (in Swedish) and Good Yule in the strange Swedish dialect called English

Today is the real winter Yule day - and summer Yule day for you in the south.

Monotheisms are all about locking in girls/women, one way or another. So why would you support "monotheisms" rather than Human Rights equality?

Klevius Yule greeting to metoo people: Klevius has always had at least equally much sex testosterone as any of the males you've met. However, Klevius has never left a track of sexism or sexual harassment behind him in his sexual relations with a couple of wives, many girlfriends, and some other female persons. So why is Klevius bragging about it? Simply because Klevius knows that one can be a testosterone filled man without causing the slightest problem for any woman. Moreover, Klevius has proved to himself and the women he has met that it hasn't needed any kind of effort from Klevius side not to be sexist (yet Klevius erotic starting time is close to zero when OKed by women - unless of course he doesn't like them or finds it inappropriate). 

But here comes the punch line: If Klevius has had no "metoo" problems whatsoever and if he really is the "extremely normal", that would mean that no other normal men would have a problem either.

However, if Klevius had been a believing Koran reading sharia muslim he might have acted differently, who knows.

Klevius wrote before metoo:

Tuesday, December 20, 2016

In Peter Klevius Yule* sex tutorial Geri Jewell reveals that "the denial was that the passion David had sexually I couldn't equal", and Michelle Thomson that when her friend raped her "it wasn't sexual".

* Yule is old Swedish (spelled 'jul') meaning wheel (which comes from the same word 'hjul') of the year, i.e. Vinter solstice around 21 December, and in modern times "Christmas" celebration although it has nothing to do with religion.

Klevius: All women are gay*. However, not every woman has realized it as yet...

Women, from a male point of view, have wonderful assess - just like feamale dogs from a male dog's perspective. And not only that, women have the potential to reproduce. And when women are receptive there are usually no lack of providers. So women should really not have anything to complain about in this respect. Other than, of course sex segregation/apartheid.

The sperm has to be attracted to the egg in some way. That's biological 'heterosexual attraction'. Testosterone is an important hormone in this task. However, the measurements are not easily compared between men and women because labs tend to (why?!) state the percentage of free testosterone for men, but give a measurement in pg/ml for women. Or the male measurements will be in ng/dl requiring a mathematical conversion for direct comparison to the "normal" range of the opposite sex. The level readings between men and women are so vastly different because the number represents a percentage of the TOTAL testosterone. Women naturally start with a much lower total amount, so 2.5% of 40ng/dl is going to be much less than 2.5% of 800ng/dl in a man.

However, even 20 times more Testosterone doesn't mean a man is necessitated to sex - merely that he is always potentially ready for sex (at least Klevius - the "extremely normal" - is and has always been since his adolescence). In other words, Klevius proposes that we lay to rest the old imposing "dog sex" culture and instead all treat each other as humans, not as sexual beings. However, to achieve this we need to teach young girls (and boys) about the only real difference between the sexes, namely heterosexual attraction, so it won't be confused with sexual acts (which people should of course be allowed to perform without any other restrictions than what the law says added with full and informed consent - just like most other civilized behavior. Moreover, and perhaps most importantly, we need to end the mostly male "push for sex" culture, i.e. dog behavior. Asexuality should be the default state of interaction.

And to avoid unnecessary confusion re. Klevius sex analysis, do understand that unlike physical reproduction in the female body (which is completely independent from the male one), heterosexual attraction needs both sexes although the female one is in this respect the passive one. At this point someone (especially women) might have problem reconciling this with the fact that many women do enjoy sexual acts without possessing the male type gaze for HSA. Klevius then repeats that although all women are gay, not all women do or enjoy sex, which fact should be respected equally as respecting that Klevius has never needed drugs or alcohol for being happy or having good sex, nor has he ever deliberately thrown white pepper around just for the pleasure of sneezing (rest calm, Klevius won't ever criticize you if you do).

And you, if you think this analysis is just Klevius opinion then you haven't understood it at all - read and think again. It's the same logic as 2+2=4.

1 HSA isn't sexual acts per se but a biologically inplanted interest for being attracted to having sex with females. Whereas dogs seem to be more excited by the smell of a female dog's pheromones, human males seem to be more interested in the shape of the female body. In fact, analytically there's no difference between gay sex and hetero sex if HSA isn't a factor (however, it would be enough to term it HSA sex if the male at least think about a physical woman - compare e.g. heterosexual men unknowingly being attracted to males disguised as women).

2 Males have way more potential urge for sex than women because of some 20 times more testosterone. And please, don't confuse this with what Klevius calls "rubbing sex", i.e. just stimulation of the genitals without HSA (compare the case of white pepper and sneezing).  

3  Being pregnant and having a baby has nothing to do with sex segregation at all because it's entirely a woman affair.

4 This means that all women, incl. asexual and achild ones ought to be treated equal with males. And as a consequence, this analysis also benefits men who want to get rid of their macho masculinity label as well as those who unnecessarily feel they're lacking one.

Peter Klevius drawing 'Woman' from 1979:

 Drawing (1979) and photo (2012) by Peter Klevius. For those Humanrightsophobes with really limited understanding (i.e. PC), do note that the DNA "ladder" has steel rivets (i.e. strong both for trapping as well as escaping).

Whereas classic sex segregation (read more Klevius to better understand the concept) is imposed by circumstances, religious/cultural sex segregation is what is imposed on girls/women even when it's no longer necessary. In the latter case women have been held back by men to an extent where incompetency outside "women's sphere" increasingly became obvious. As a consequence grown up women started internalizing this incompetency as "femininity" although the only true femininity is defined by heterosexual attraction (read Klevius because you'll find nothing anywhere else so far - sad isn't it).

Peter Klevius 1979 poem 'My Friend':

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

A rough translation for those poor uneducated individuals lacking Swedish, the origin of the English language (oh, perhaps you were unaware of English being a Scandinavian* language - my deepest condolences):

* The oldest Swedish is Old Nordic. To call it "old Norse" wrongly associates it with Norway and Norwegian, both of which weren't around as entities until after the Viking age. As Klevius has always said: North Germanic, and probably Germanic per se, was a late IE outcome between proto-Uralic and PIE (i.e. what Klevius use to call "old Finland-Swedish").

A perception             (see/se, track/tryck, i.e. see-in-track/synintryck)
a touch
words as diffuse messengers              (words/ord, bid-bearers/budbärare)
mirror a glimpse of your thought       (think/ing, tank/e)
in cipher form already distorted        (fore wronged/förvrängd/a)
before they've been said                     (sagda)
by me and your expectation               (fore waiting/förväntan)
my friend                                            (  min frände, min vän)

Women on sex and work

Geri Jewell (top left), Nicola Sturgeon and Michelle Thomson (below). Nicola Sturgeon says she would not have suffered her career for a child. Michelle Thomson says she didn't think her rapist (a teenage friend) had any sexual desire when he raped her a night when she was 14 and they walked home together. This she told in front of a tear filled UK Parliament (she has also recently been questioned in a pending mortgage fraud case). However, Klevius doesn't believe in rape without sexual desire - what was lacking was respect for basic Human Rights equality, i.e. that her friend had been brainwashed by sex segregation to an extent that he saw her only as an object for heterosexual attraction, not as an other human being on an equal footing.

Actress and comedian Geri Jewell, who has cerebral palsy (witch has not affected her intelligence - only motorics), reveals in a new memoir, I’m Walking As Straight As I Can (alluding to her a-heterosexuality as well as her motoric disability) how much she struggled growing up with a disability and how she wrestled with her "sexuality" (or rather lack of it), and reveals she is a "lesbian", which is a code word for not possessing male heterosexual attraction genes nor same level of testosterone.

Geri Jewell was the first disabled actor to take a lead role in a sitcom and she's gone on to challenge ideas about what is possible. She describes the pressures on her to go into a job suited to her disability and what made her rebel against such restricting expectations

Peter Klevius: Her rebellion against such restricting expectations as created by cultural sex segregation is just stunning - although her escape under an equally sex segregated cover ("lesbian", "gay" etc.) is not. Why didn't she claim her Human Rights as described in the 1948 Universal Human Rights Declaration against fascism, which gives her the right to lead her life as she wishes without having to "explain" it. Or is it because she is an American, and the US Constitution still doesn't give women full equality with men - hence necessitating labels?
US women fighting in vain for equality some 70 years after Finnish women got full equality.

Klevius wrote:

Sunday, September 20, 2015

Islam, OIC - and Eurabia

Europe's fascist past reborn via religion

As long as fascism is called good - how could we ever stop it? But Klevius, as a critical European ("islamophobe" if you like) feels extremely embarrassed in front of those true refugees escaping islam and hoping for protection under Western Human Rights. Sorry!

Tuesday, March 8, 2016

Klevius (the world's foremost authority on sex apartheid - sad isn't it) to all the world's women on women's day: Here's your main enemy exemplified as a timid "mosque mouse"!

Sharia islam is never good for your Human Rights if you are a woman. But willing whores and deceptive but off the point talks may well lure many women still.

 But the more important question is: Can you as a woman face your own sex apartheid history fully?

Drawing (1979) and photo (2012) by Peter Klevius. For those Humanrightsophobes with really limited understanding (i.e. PC), do note that the DNA "ladder" has steel rivets (i.e. strong both for trapping as well as escaping).

Update: Learn more about heterosexual attraction and sex segregation/apartheid here.

The origin of islam was plundering and raping booty jihad along Jewish slave trade routes. 

 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 point 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.

Klevius will tell you much more later. Keep tuned and excited!

A little, timidly nonsense speaking Swedish "reformist" Shia muslim "professor"* who rides on the non-muslim world's longing for "nice muslims".

* Klevius uses 'professor' only re. scientific researchers. Mixing in a "god" isn't science.

Whereas few women believe in the Islamic State, some morons still believe in the oxymoron "reformed islam". To understand the impossibility of a civilized islam one only has to go to its evil origin (as Klevius has done since 9/11). And if you for some strange reason don't want to listen to the world's foremost expert on sex apartheid - and therefore also islam -just take a closer lookj to what BBC and others don't want to talk about.

And you may laugh this Saudi billionaire hoodlum away as a Saudi joke but then you miss the very point, namely that:

1 OIC's sharia includes both the Saudi sharia as well as any other sharia that fulfills the lofty definition of the Cairo declaration.

2 The main reason (except for protecting the Saudi and other muslim nations medieval systems) for OIC's sharia declaration was that the 1948 Universal* Human Rights Declaration gives women full equality with men, which fact made it impossible for islam in whatever sharia form.

* There's a dumb view presented for even dumber people that the UN declaration was "Western made" and therefore biased. Nothing could be more wrong. The paper and the pen may have been "Western made" but the content is from scratch made deliberately "non-Western" i.e. universal. Educate yourself!

Unlike many other forms of sexism, muslim sexism is pure racism: Muslim women in every single variant of possible sharia islam are always treated as "the other".

A Shia muslim that is on the extreme fringe of Shia muslims and not even considered a muslim by the majority of the world's Sunni muslims, incl, most muslim so called "scholars".

A pathetic and disgusting Human Rights denier who "accuses" basic and universal Human Rights for being bad "because they came out of the West". Ok, cars etc. also came out of the West and yes, he could blame them for some pollution etc. and call it "post-colonialism". But how on earth could you possibly deny the logic of the negative (basic) Human Rights, or deny them because they "came out of the West". Well the reason "they came out of the West" is that the islam contaminated parts of the world didn't give them a chance to come out there.

So is he an outright lier trying to camouflage islam's incompatibility with the most basic of Human Rights- or is he, like so many muslims, incredibly dumb/ignorant/brainwashed?

Mohammad Fazlhashemi, professor in islamism (aka "islamic theology") and filosophy (sic)* at Uppsala University in Sweden: There are some essential norms in the Koran that can be used to protect human dignity in different ways depending on time and cisrumstances.

* As Wittgenstein already pointed out, philosophy is a difficult discipline even without trying to squeeze in a God scheme in it. And even more so when the "God" is totally out of reach and only exists as differing human "interpretations".

Klevius: "Protecting" women from having access to full Human Rights? And "human dignity" should be read "muslim male dignity" added by the important "who is interpreted as being a true muslim" which could, as we all know, vary quite a lot among muslims. Moreover, what about the dignity of non-muslims? Either you let muslims "interpret" it or you skip islam alltogether, because here lies the real difference between Human Rights that gives every Atheist or whatever person (even muslims) equal rights, and sharia islam which openly violates these rights, as can be seen, for example, in Saudi based and steered OIC's (all muslim's main world organization) official abandoning of Human Rights in UN. Mohammad Fazlhashemi, professor in islamism (aka "islamic theology") and racist/sexist "muslimn filosophy" can't possibly be unaware of OIC, the muslim world's biggest and most important institution, can he!

Mohammad Fazlhashemi: That islam is good can be proved by comparing it to the illiterate Arab speaking bedouins.

Klevius: Is that really a good enough standard as reference?

Mohammad Fazlhashemi: There's no logical connection between a muslim's belief and a muslim's rights.

Klevius: Apart from the fact that most muslims completely disagree with you, why do you then keep asking for muslim's rights? Why should muslim's have special rights because of their "beliefs"?

And here's this small minded muslim reformist's Shia source:

Mohammad Mojtahed Shabestari: I do not call for a separation of politics and religion. Of course there should be cooperation between them.

Klevius: Cooperation between Human Rights violating sharia and politicians representing Human Rights doesn't sound very reformist, does it.

From an interview with Mohammad Mojtahed Shabestari (spiced with Klevius comments): The way of life in Medina and Mecca was quite simple. But what took place then cannot be a model for today's world. Nowadays, Muslims live in intelligent social systems, in which there is a wide diversity of institutions. This requires us to develop a proper plan with the aid of reason. This is not something that can be derived from the Koran.

Klevius: At least he seems to admit that the slaughtering of all the Jews in Medina wasn't a good "model". Or did he mean something else? The muslim booty and sex jihad?

"During its Golden Age, Islam was known for highly controversial and pluralistic debates. Today, the reality in many Muslim countries is quite different. There is little freedom of thought.. What can be done to promote more freedom of thought in Muslim countries?"

Klevius: The "golden age" was just the same as today, i.e. muslims sponging on resources they haven't themselves created. Slaves back then - oil and Western welfare today. More than 90% of the economy in Andalus was based on slavery - fully in line with islam's original enslavement formula: "Infidels" (i.e. non-muslims and women) could be enslaved because Muhammad had heard Allah (via an angel though) saying so.

Shabestari: Freedom of expression all depends on whether a people has politically developed to such an extent that it understands what freedom is. Then it will demand freedom of expression. Even now there is a great tendency towards freedom in Islamic countries. Yet, why it hasn't truly developed is another question. This has to do with political hurdles and the system of government in these countries. It is more of a cultural difficulty than a difficulty related to Islam or religion in general. Unfortunately, this is a retrograde cultural reality.

Klevius: Admittedly Hillary Clinton's sharia campaign against freedom of expression represents "a retrograde cultural reality". However, how could it possibly not be directly connected to islam itself when she works for the world's biggest and most fundamental islam representing organization, the Saudi based and steered OIC?!

"The Arab protest movements are associated by many people, both within these countries and also abroad, with the hope for democracy. Others (muslims) say that Islam fundamentally forbids democracy."

Klevius: Yet it's all islam and muslims - no matter what it stands for. As a consequence it encompasses both the most evil of muslims as well as those "muslims" who can't be distinguished from non-muslims other than by name. And this state of affairs is of course most handy for the most evil of muslims.