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