Thursday, February 26, 2015

This is not a conspiracy theory it is simply how the world as it stands works


Sam Harris: Atheists have no ‘blood on their hands’ for Chapel Hill murders Richard Dawkins Foundation Feb 24, 2015

Arabs: Why is Obama Siding with Supporters of Terrorism? by Khaled Abu Toameh February 26, 2015 at 5:00 am

"In the first place, ideologies provide a perspective, or 'lens', through which the world is understood and explained. People do not see the world as it is, but only as they expect it to be: in other words, they see it through a veil of ingrained beliefs, opinions and assumptions. Whether consciously or subconsciously everyone subscribes to a set of political beliefs and values that guide their behaviour and influence their conduct. Political ideas and ideologies thus set goals that inspire political activism. .... a, unifying set of political ideas and values can develop naturally within society, or it can be enforced from above in an attempt to manufacture obedience and exercise control. The clearest examples of such 'official' ideas have been found in fascist, communist and religious fundamentalist regimes."

Source: Political Ideologies Andrew Heywood 2012

States based upon a multiculturalism paradigm having values diametrically opposed to liberty and equality being "enforced from above in an attempt to manufacture obedience and exercise control" can now be added to those ideological entities of oppression yet the perpetrators of such a value construct as multiculturalism as the World Health Organisation (WHO) and those following the WHO script of cultural derived terror and ideological political schism being a 'health' issue see themselves as anything other than 'evil' which is not surprising given neither did or do their colleagues "in fascist, communist and religious fundamentalist regimes." .

"Political ideas and ideologies thus set goals that inspire political activism." - the nature of the "political activism" is defined by the cultural codex and such cultural codex can and clearly does in some cultures justify and authorise terror, the culture is therefore responsible for the 'few' they will always in time and space produce and the methods utilised to realise their own cultural "goals" which is a political space which reflects their "political beliefs and values" not Others. 


ISIS, Boko Haram, Iran, Islamic political party Hizb ut-Tahrir ... are reflecting the actual Islamic codex desired cultural political space which are able to be analogised into reality, each have exactly the same core beliefs and values which they must for they are variants made possible only because such political constructs exist within the Islamic/Muslim codex and in fact have to exist there for these political variant constructs to exist.

To then label those opposed to such Islamic/Muslim beliefs and values 
to be analogised, even partially, being allowed into a space of Liberty and Equality as having a mental illness, unreasonable bigots against a culture of peace and harmony when it is clear "political activism" terror in fact 'fear' is the only way Other could in anyway be forced to accept such an Islamic/Muslim construct is from a Liberty and Equality rational model simply madness. Unless the definition of Liberty and Equality along with Feminism are altered which in fact they have been under multiculturalism to allow those who impose such a construct to determine they have not changed their belief system at all to include tyranny.

Why is Obama Siding with Supporters of Terrorism? Why are atheist and non-atheists being accused of 'provoking' not only Muslim terror but counter-terror rising to meet it? This is Why.

It is irrational under a cultural 'rational' model which you would expect to contain codex to protect your own culture but the Western Democracies are not operating under such a model the political elite have decided (note there is no master plan there is only ever belief, ethics values and these become analogised within the world.) to for political pragmatic reasons as they perceive them to operate under a belief system which they call Multiculturalism. In fact they are hiding behind the label of what appears on the surface to be a noble aim for all cultures to be able to be in the same space. The trouble is the 
Multiculturalism definition as defined by the elite enables diametrically opposed beliefs, ethics, values into the same space.

Lincoln was clear why this could not work as is history as well as mere human psychology yet the elite persist in enabling terror and major inter-cultural schism and blame everyone else for their failure as they must.


This is not a conspiracy theory it is simply how the world as it stands works – you are being sacrificed to political pragmatism so the political elite can wash their hands and be ‘seen’ to be doing something and can blame anyone for their failure to stem the major schism with the Islamic/Muslim culture. 

What does such hand washing enabling the elite to publicly deny culpability of terrorists being increasingly derived from their own political space and the terror they inform within and without that space require under a Western Construct – it requires ‘experts’ to provide the bowl and the appropriate amount of water.

Anyone who has worked in a Western Government Public Service or simply observed behavior thereof within whatever nation will understand the political imperative of the ‘expert’-‘expert body’ to provide the necessary justification, authority and blame shifting methodology inherent in any public policy decision.

I want you to understand why you are being regarded and determined as racists, bigots, suffering from a mental illness/ irrational fear Islamophobia and worse are being accused of actually ‘provoking’ not only Islam/Muslim terror but the counter-terror rising to match it.

Why you are not and never have been as described above for coming out and determining Islam is a genocide and misogynistic construct and for humanities sake the Islamic cultural codex must be removed from the Public Square.

Why it is important for the elite to have you not them defined as having a mental illness so they can reduce the severe cognitive dissonance they must necessarily suffer derived from continuing to follow a clearly failing policy paradigm.

And importantly what you have to do to at least to start to force the elite to change their current policy paradigm driven by their pathological altruism (yes it is the elite not you suffering from a mental illness).

Let us begin by reflecting:

It could have been the killer of the three Muslims crossed the line by justifying, in part a reaction against Muslims as a culture because of the terror and challenge to Western values the Muslim culture informs, it may not have been the main reason but given the potential complexity of human ‘reason’ for human behavior and the statements at the time by the murderer of the Muslims it clearly cannot be ruled out as a contributory factor altogether.

It is from my perspective an action which based upon the value schism between the West and Muslim culture and the failure of current Western policy paradigm to confront the real cause of terror the Islamic/Muslim cultural codex (textual and exemplar (messianic) template) which from generation to generation creates the ‘Few’ from the ranks of the ‘Many’ will increasingly inform counter-terror against Muslims and the State. The State will be subject to counter-terror because the State is the reason the terror exists, the State has not only clearly failed in its duty to protect its citizenry it is actually enabling terror and major schism to intensify.

Twiddling with matrices of data, weighting with the numerous variables from across different correlations, investing in increased institutions physical security systems, diminishing relative independence in a vain attempt to avoid 'provoking', changing food types preparation, increasing secret service and terror tactical units in the military and police 2 ,3 10, 100 fold will not stop what is going to happen only possibly slow it possibly because in fact it will more than likely have the reverse effect as it fits directly into the Islamic victim paradigm - it does not therefore matter what you do unless the Islamic codex which is the cause not a correlation, a cause is removed from the Public Square.
As we ‘possibly’ saw in this murder of three Muslims as action against the Muslim culture, the actions of arson against Mosques, abuse of Muslims in the streets and importantly action as in Norway against the political constructs within the West supporting Muslims access to the Public Square, which are enabling terror and pressure on the Western politic to align to Islamic norms so as to avoid ‘provoking’ Islamic/Muslim cultural violence. 

‘Fear works’ as social psychological studies have found and a Danish newspaper stated as a reason for refusing to publish Charlie Hebdo after the Muslim terrorist attack in Paris, although they had previously done so.

The blaming of Other be they atheists, or anyone along the counter-Islamic/Muslim culture codex behavioral variance is if you have not noticed a part of the ‘Official program’ ‘they’ have even determined you have a mental illness – a phobia irrational fear – Islamophobia – along with being determined ‘Hate preachers’ and vile bigots. You are determined the actual cause of not only ‘provoking’ the Muslim terror itself but the counter-terror as well.

How could such an insane paradigm exist which determines the very persons opposed to genocide misogynistic constructs and what they inform as well as opposed to the counter-terror rising in an attempt to fill the void of State inaction against such constructs, are now to be regarded as the ‘cause’ of all of it?


Simple but insane yes even Kafka may have difficulty with this one.

An ‘expert body’ had to be found and a policy paradigm able to shift political blame for continuing failed outcomes. Such a political construct was required because confronting the actual cause of major schism between the West and the Islamic/Muslim culture diametrically opposed values personal, family, gender, construct of Other, differing desired political constructs was/is seen as simply not a politically wise thing to do, something to do with energy, Muslims states with possible nuclear capability or the means to quickly develop it, in situ large populations of Muslims within Western nations if justifiably held to account would, initially at least, cause a destructive uprising.

All worthy issues to considered the trouble is avoiding the ‘truth’ of diametrically opposed values existing in the same space as Lincoln rightly observed one or the other would in time take the space you would either have slaves in every State of the Union or there would be none.

So humanity in this case Western political elite needed to have firstly an ideological basis for justifying and authorizing diametrically opposed values in the same space and be able to define it as a ‘good’.

Let view the political process of development of the logic utilizing two diametrically opposed values in the US in the past of Slave and Free - of arriving at Half-Slave-Half-Free being a ‘good’ in the Public Square and by necessity having to create a cultural concept IS-Slave-Not-Slave to explain the terrible iniquitous outcomes derived from allowing the whole of the culture of ‘Slave’ within the Public Square.

The culture of Slave therefore no longer informs terrible outcomes these outcomes are slavery adherents taking the codex of slavery out of context informing Not-Slave behaviors, and as we saw in the US as well at the time opponents of slavery Abolitionists were ‘provocateur extremists’ in fact terrorists with a mental illness. Is-Slave was simply unfairly targeted by vile bigots. And any way those exhibiting Not-Slave behavior were the ‘Few’ – the ‘Few’ utilizing terrorism to promote slavery in new and existing US States. And what happened counter-terror arose to match it.

What was the ideology the Western political elite sought to utilize – it was Multiculturalism. Who can argue against such a decent construct a space where all cultures are accepted for who and what they are, each according to their codex. It is the same from the Western perspective of going against Liberty and Equality (in some areas) the sting is in the definition.

The definition of what Multiculturalism means in reality for those who support such a construct and their view of those who do not is as follows, a definition kindly donated by DrPhil.

"It is possible to have values diametrically and philosophically against yours and still not be your enemy. The point about multiculturalism is the concept of acceptance and tolerance. Most people from all cultural backgrounds want a happy and prosperous society. That is a fundamental that unites us. The difference is how to get there. We don't need a society of people who think just like you to be a happy society." DrPhil

The above is the multicultural construct we must accept or be regarded as out-group ‘not needed’ to achieve the ‘happy society’ such a construct promises.

This Multiculturalism definition statement above was stated after the two Australians died in a café Sydney Australia, after Charlie Hebdo, after Denmark, after setting persons alight (not the first time since the seventh century, crucifixions, beheading, increasing calls for an Islamic politic to replace democracies from Muslim adherents residing in Democratic space, after we are told all matrix's on the Muslim terror situation are informing a worsening situation.

In fact all data is pointing to the failure of the current Western policy paradigm to deal with Islamic diametrically opposed values to those of the West within the same space. Yet those opposing such a policy which is clearly failing are determined as getting in the way of ‘Societal happiness’ are bigots 'not needed.

The only way for multiculturalism as defined above to work (to prevent the physical being and physical property from being subject to violence) is for tyranny greater than the tyranny informed by any culture within to pervade the space. 'work' in a multicultural sense only enables survival not a flourishing life.

Multiculturalism is where liberty is redefined to the align to the highest restrictive cultural definition, as not to do so informs terror as the 'restrictive' culture seeks to survive in a space were its relatively iniquitous constructs of women in particular and of Other come face to face with a diametrically opposed 'rational' model which offers relatively greater liberty and opportunity for a flourishing life.


The point about multiculturalism is not the concept of "acceptance and tolerance" it is an acceptance of cultural intolerance the complete opposite. The rules of such a society accepting multiculturalism as a value will as we see become more restrictive to align in time with the 'restrictive' culture so as not to 'provoke' cultural violence to force acceptance of iniquity as a norm.

The fundamental which unites a society having multiculturalism as a value is not the pursuit of 'happiness' for each culture has a different 'rational' 'happiness' model which inform differing constructs political, family, community, institutions which if Other cultures were subject to would make them extremely unhappy.


The fundamental which unites a society having multiculturalism as a value is a delusion 'happiness' is possible when diametrically opposed values, behaviors, political desired constructs exist in the same space. Humans are united by what they have in common - not by diametrically opposed ethics and politic.

Multiculturalism therefore leads to the enabling or diminishing of liberty relative to the level of cultural inequity allowed into its space. You have not noticed the cultural terror and laws diminishing liberty which rise to ameliorate the terror as well as behavioral change to diminish ‘criticism’ as a method of holding each other to account in democracies? Is multiculturalism informing liberty or tyranny?

Please note:

My view is it really adds to a society when cultures meld together and clearly this is possible because most cultures have ethics, values beliefs that are compatible and more importantly do not contain a genocide construct of Other and misogyny as the Islamic codex does.

My view is any culture be it secular or religious have the propensity if gaining sufficient power to do quite nasty things so I believe we have to actually re-look at our constitution to make sure to the best we can, we set definitions of Liberty and Equality which become the benchmark by which we determine if a culture can enter the Public Square or can remain in it. Because currently we have a constitutions which has allowed a culture in which enables our fellow citizens to be shot in the back of the head something needs to be changed, in my view.


Well the political elite now have the ideology and the creation of the Is-Islam Not-Islam to deflect criticism but now they needed one last political ingredient an ‘expert body’ which could attempt to justify the Not-Islam and the logic of adherents to Not-Islam being inextricably delinked from Is-Islam even though these adherents determined as radical-extremists have been and continue to be consistently since the seventh century derived from the Is-Islam space (which is really a subjective individual undefined segment of the Muslim behavioral variance reflecting back diminishingly Others own ethics and beliefs). This ‘expert body’ is the World Health Organistation WHO.

WHO are responsible for enabling terror to remain and worsen in Western streets as a direct result of their ill-conceived ‘’Harm Minimisation Violence Program.” The very citizen body claiming to be the protector of our physical and mental health.

It is another ‘Gold Standard’ WHO product that never solves a problem simply perpetuates it and has the State become the sponsor to provide the ‘necessary’ funding, drugs and programs which are never enough as the situation worsens. It is run on correlation being falsely represented as cause and the perpetrator of violence simply took too much alcohol, drug addicts and their pushers marginalized victims not responsible really for their own actions, terrorists or the radicalize extremists of cultures simply have too much time on their hands isolated individuals due to Others prejudice and understandably lash out after having been subject to ‘Hate Preacher derived from the exact same cultural codex they have whispering in their ear ‘Society/Other is to blame’ go off and justifiably murder them.

WHO along with supplying the bowls and sufficient water for the political elite - justifies and authorizes 'management' of the terror allowing even those identified by 'authority' to present a high risk of perpetrating terror to roam the streets because they are 'victims' of radicalisation process by 'hate preachers' and just need a range of tailored services such as mentoring, counselling, education and employment services to counter the Other prejudice –Isamophobia which has caused them to feel ‘isolated’ and therefore ‘understandably’ lash out against Other by murdering them in cafes, burning them in cages, committing atrocities upon women, ….

The trouble is the WHO definitions of the ‘risky’ individuals has been utilized by security services for their matrix's (not lists so they tell us) of terror risk of individuals ignoring the fact any Muslim becomes a risk once they pick up the Quran as the mental schema for carrying out atrocities against Other is in the Quran apart form the exemplar behavior of previous Muslims inclusive of Mohammed. This is why none of the Muslims involved in Sydney, Boston, Denmark, France made it to the not very nice end of the matrix or were not there at all.

AS each political entity in the hierarchy are required to justify and authorize its behavior in all political constructs. What did WHO base its policy approach upon and utilize as an excuse for its behavior – it is the following.

"There Are Two Causes of Terrorism

All terrorist acts are motivated by two things:

Social and political injustice: People choose terrorism when they are trying to right what they perceive to be a social or political or historical wrong—when they have been stripped of their land or rights, or denied these.

The belief that violence or its threat will be effective, and usher in change. Another way of saying this is: the belief that violent means justify the ends. Many terrorists in history said sincerely that they chose violence after long deliberation, because they felt they had no choice."

Source: The Causes of Terrorism Two Causes of Terrorism By Amy Zalman, Ph.D. Global Terrorism Expert

Let us analogize this WHO/Western political elite policy paradigm as at times situated within a social context you do not fully, even at all, realise how totally dangerous and insane such a policy paradigm in fact is.

John Brown and Lincoln need to be subject to therapy and given a job in high finance to ameliorate the cognitive dissonance they were experiencing with the culture of Is-Slavery and even accept its existence as a ‘good’.

US State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf and the World Health Organisation (WHO) determine university educated and member of a billionaire family Bin Laden simply needed education, employment opportunities and therapy to lead him away from Islamic/Muslim cultural derived terror against Other.

'To fight extremism, Franklin D. Roosevelt calls on US to embrace its Nazis.'

The Nazi SS returning to Britain, Australia, the US, ... through WWII back from throwing gas canisters into concrete bunkers, or fully intending to participate in such atrocities at home and abroad, and doing so being regarded as only needing 'understanding' and a good therapy session.

“In fact, if the extremist’s elements had prevailed. I have not the least doubt that disruption would have been more drastic and that we should have real reason by now to fear German aggression from both a military as well as political point of view.” Norman Hillson “I speak of Germany”, London 1937

“This programme identifies radicalised and at risk people and delivers a range of tailored services such as mentoring, counselling, education and employment services, that will help them turn away from ideologies of violence and hate,” King Louis XVI said”. France 1785

Nazi returning to Britain, Australia, the US, ... before WWII and the throwing of canisters into concrete bunkers and only took part in Kristallnacht were really not as much of a problem as those other terrorists.

Father of Sydney terror suspect Omar Al-Kutobi says he was lonely in Australia February 12, 2015 - by SMH Rachel Olding and Paul Bibby

Now WHO/Western Political elite will have loneliness, boredom as a prerequisite correlated cause for terror given clearly education, employment are no longer supportable assumptions and never were.

Correlation does not mean cause. Maybe a game of Monopoly a true Western construct will change their Islamic/Muslim cultural ways and show what a ‘happy life’ they can lead in a Multiculturalist society if only they would agree to abide by Others ethics errr Is-Islam ethics.

WHO IS RESPONSIBLE? The World Health Organisation thats WHO.

Sunday, February 22, 2015

Tim Wilson, Human Rights Commissioner goes beyond the facts to reveal a scourge of falsehoods – so as to justify the existence of an iniquitous and violent religious construct within our midst and call it good. - What a surprise in this climate.

Tim Wilson, Human Rights Commissioner goes beyond the facts to reveal a scourge of falsehoods – so as to justify the existence of an iniquitous and violent religious construct within our midst and call it good. - What a surprise in this climate. Beyond human rights to exercising freedoms 
Tim Wilson, Human Rights Commissioner National Press Club Wednesday, 18th February 2015

“Socrates was accused of corrupting the young and ‘inventing new gods’, in other words of causing young people to critique the customs and institutions of the state and of undermining the core values of the Athenian society.


Socrates argues at his trial that a democracy such as Athens is particularly in need of someone critical and controversial: “And so, men of Athens, I am now making my defence not for my own sake, as one might imagine, but far more for yours, that you may not by condemning me err in your treatment of the gift the gods gave you. For if you put me to death, you will not easily find another, who, to use a rather absurd figure, attaches himself to the city as a gadfly to a horse, which, though large and well bred, is sluggish on account of his size and needs to be aroused by stinging.” Who is on trial here, Socrates or Athenian democracy itself?”

Source: The Ship of Fools, Anja Steinbauer explains why Plato had problems with democracy. Philosophy Now March/April 2014

I am back metaphorically speaking to remind you of what was communicated long before the Magna Carta came into being and the exemplar behavior of those who demanded the right to question, amend or remove cultural codex (textual and exemplar (messianic) templates) deemed however sacred which are culturally imposed upon them and in doing so set the corner stone of Democracies keep.

What did these actions inclusive of those regards the Magna Carta seek to establish first before anything else: “The freedom to offend is an integral component of freedom of speech. There is no right not to be offended.” Why? Because humanity deprived of this construct cannot question cultural authority without the real possibility of ‘provoking’ culturally sanctioned coercion violent or otherwise to be realigned, to be silent, to be compliant or cease to exist no matter how justified the challenge given the iniquitous or irrational nature of cultural constructs imposed or to be imposed.

This is the moral lesson we in the West took from Socrates action and the reaction of his culture to Socrates belief it was in the best interests of a cultural whole for a human to be able to question the veracity of cultural beliefs, ethics values and informed behavior, nothing even the Gods are outside the bounds of question. Why? My perception is it was simply found the degree of certainty as the basis for a cultures existence informed a correlated degree of tyranny, violence and relative independence a human experienced.

Integral to ‘no right not to be offended’ is ‘no right to be ‘provoked’’ for no human relational construct stands alone in one word, one phrase such as ‘Freedom of Speech’ for there is no such thing until it is defined. Freedom for instance has never existed nor ever will it is as infinity you may approach it but never achieve its state. There is only ever relativity. For humans will be offended and will necessarily in turn be provoked to have others accept their view of themselves or their view of the world or both.

Our cultural codex informs how cognitively, behaviorally offence-provocation will be managed. Managed because they inherently exist we cannot wish them away. Different cultures utilize differing ‘rational’ model management approaches from my perception based upon the relative independence they enable for their adherents particularly women and for Other. For in my view the iniquitous nature of any cultural codex will set the degree one may take offence and thereby the degree they may be via codex justifiably be ‘provoked’. For where reason to accept cultural dictates cannot be based upon persuasive coherent non-violent communication to justify iniquity rising levels of sanctioned cultural violent coercion will.

For even if we claim to have cultural permission for such a ‘freedom’ informed by ‘no right not to be offended’ and ‘no right to be ‘provoked’’ the fact is when push comes to shove we know questioning existing cultural constructs as the two circumstances above inform will most likely lead to cultural punishment, demise, the loss of our liberty or even our life and put those dear to us in peril resource wise or their lives as well. Why?

“You cannot change what a cultural adherent believes to be ‘Truth’ but you can change how they get to believe what is truth.” So it takes time to achieve change in a cultural ‘rational’ model, change at times requiring the threat of or actual extreme violence to enable such change to occur. For to achieve ‘real’ change you need to take control of the cultural codex amend or delete it (permanently as circumstance allows and eternal vigilance to make sure what has been will not return), you cannot leave the King in the field if you wish to survive. Believing change will occur in time when the exact same codex construct is allowed to remain as is on the basis the cultural gatekeeper(s) promises they will in time align to your beliefs, ethics, values and informed behavior is a recipe for abject failure.

It appears genetically humans have externalized creation of how we act behaviorally with each other in and with out-groups and as with evolution humans have not been provided with the ability to change overnight even the most iniquitous of behavioral cultural constructs nor avoid preemptively the most perilous of circumstance for in or outgroups even if proof of such a state exists and are placed unequivocally before us.

‘‘No right not to be offended’ and ‘no right to be ‘provoked’’ are a buffer only to the reality citizens face turn against the nature of the informed cultural behavioral variance in whole or in part you will be censured. The US constitutional creators understood intrinsically via personal experience of opposites which appears to be to be the only way to achieve cultural codex change ‘No right not to be offended’ and ‘no right to be ‘provoked’’ was required for their Democracy to survive in the long run as they understood tyrannies first duty was Duty to Certainty, Be Certain, Be Compliant, Be Silent, they by determining Freedom Speech intrinsic to Democracy Duty to Doubt, Be Doubtful, Be Skeptical, be Critical set a ameliorating factor between question and the level of censure which could be applied for invariably there would be censure but set a shield which in time would though taking a battering would at least provide some time however short for consideration of a differing view,. This is the precious gift the framers of the US constitution provided time and in doing so societal constructs which had to defend that time of only 'possible' cultural gatekeeper reflection.

Cultural derived fear as we see now works to achieve the required level of silence and compliance, this cultural derived fear would not exist if the method of coercion for achieving such as state had not already been justified and authorised by the adherent’s own codex. The adherent in fear is therefore as much responsible for his state of fear by continuance of observance of such a cultural codex as those applying the culturally authorized method. For inherent in adherence is an acknowledgement such a method can be utilized.

“Sheglabo's parents are well aware of the atrocities the group has become synonymous with, including beheadings, public burnings and the rape and enslavement of their enemies.

“.. he wanted to make it clear that he in no way supported what his son had done. …the father was also careful not to condemn his son too strongly, fearing that speaking out against the Islamic State could result in reprisals against his family from the group's supporters here in Perth.”

Father fears for son who joined Islamic State By Grant Taylor February 21, 2015

But what is ‘no right not to be offended’ and ‘no right to be ‘provoked’’ for, is it to inform ‘Freedom’? Freedom of Religion for instance. No it is not, Integral to ‘no right not to be offended’ and ‘no right to be ‘provoked’’ is the “right to change perceived iniquitous and irrational cultural constructs” in the cultural codex. It is not the right to request but to change cultural codex where it is determined iniquitous or irrational exist.

To claim the Magna Carta informed the notion of protection of religious freedom is a lie it was to protect a singular Christian religion from the dictates of the King that is all. ‘Religious Freedom’ is the permission for differing religions allowed into the same space this was never the intention of those who framed the Magna Carta and to claim so is terribly dishonest. It is to assume the framers of the Magna Carta intended to allow Islam into their space. Really are you sure this was the intent.


There was no separation of Church and state it was simply a demand an entity as the Barons themselves were asking for themselves a right to have control of their own internal affairs. It did not mean Caesar had no rights regards the interaction of the Church and State as even the Christian codex determines this was a given. Also subsequent events clearly showed religious organisations as a part of any society were necessarily subject to the constraints set down by the State, the dominant culture within which they resided unless the State was the religious institution as the codex stipulated State-Religion were one as the Islamic codex clearly does and when allowed enough power will enforce such a political construct over Other. So far from being separate from the State religious organisations are either subject to or integral to State function.

It’s the right to achieve change of cultural codex. It is not for enabling ‘Freedom’ as there is no such thing. It is about changing the boundaries cultural codex justifies and authorizes. Socrates and the Magna Carta have informed the Western cultural construct of the right to challenge cultural authority and redress grievance given the current or impending condition of existence. From the child to adult, the wife to husband, differing gender relationships, nation state against nation state their is a right to seek redress of power which can only be achieved by change of cultural codex under the auspices of  ‘no right not to be offended’ and ‘no right to be ‘provoked’’.  Reintroducing the Islamic 'right to be provoked' does what? Is limited to what?

Both Socrates and the Magna Carta still provides a warning the action of questioning is not without risk and simply presenting a cogent case and requesting change may not be enough. Democracy was set up in a hope to ameliorate the latter but alas it will never stop the former from happening to some degree. This process in not about ‘Freedom’ but resetting cultural boundaries internal and/or external be they loosening or hardening the chains or simply moving them around predicated upon an individuals right to question and obtain redress and change of iniquitous and irrational cultural derived circumstance.

Saturday, February 21, 2015

"NO SILVER BULLET"- There has always been A SILVER BULLET, Plato told us years ago 'What you teach upon Mothers knee derived from flawed poets (cultural codex (textual and exemplar (messianic) templates) will be reflected in subsequent behavior.' You change or delete this cultural codex or the behavior continues.

“NO SILVER BULLET”

And so is the Humera Khan's World Health Organisation (WHO) 'Approach'.

"NO SILVER BULLET"- There has always been A SILVER BULLET, Plato told us years ago 'What you teach upon Mothers knee derived from flawed poets (cultural codex (textual and exemplar (messianic) templates) will be reflected in subsequent behavior.' You change or delete this cultural codex or the behavior continues.

The biggest problem is there will never be enough funding for the "programs that focus on prevention and intervention." utilising the World Health Organisations (WHO) 'Harm minimization violence program' because you leave the 'flawed poets' text and exemplar (messianic) behavior of the real or imagined in the Public Square. The actual cause of terror in the Public Square.

It is the same logic as WHO deciding cancer causes deaths and therefore funding for curing cancer after it has started needs to increase and the cause smoking cigarettes is ignored because it might ‘provoke’ the cigarette companies to legal action and the growers of tobacco to violence or even terrorism in  the streets.

There are as shown by the Obama’s 'Enabling' Extremist Cultural Terror Conference reasons why the Muslim terror will not stop because the following are not accepted as the basis for the Muslim ‘problem’.

1.            Cultures justify and authorise terror the individual adherent 'Few', as individuals or in groups deliver it.

2.            Religious as Secular ideologies (cultures) kill people.
Given "every culture constantly, although tacitly, reinforces the impression that words are simply automatic labels that come naturally to mind and that belong intrinsically to things and entities" who provides the "basis on which to take any action." the culture or the individual. The reason utilized by an individual’s actions are sourced from where?
SURFACES AND ESSENCES, ANALOGY AS THE FUEL AND FIRE OF THINKING, Douglass Hofstadter, Emmanuel Sander, 2013

"Culture uses artifacts, rituals and text to develop and reinforce a shared sense of identity among members. It is the filter through which we see and understand our current reality (Edgar, 1980). These are the structures of identity that help people organise and make sense of everyday life (Wark, 1997). They also establish boundaries between groups (Oyserman & Lee, 2007)"
Psychology Burton, Western, Kowalski, 2012

3.            There is no ‘True’ culture there is only ‘The’ culture.
A person’s behavioral variance is informed by their genetic propensity, psychological experience and cultural beliefs, ethics and values, with psychological experience in the main determined by the nature of the culture within which the person exists. Culture is the ‘genetic’ coding which therefore informs a cultural behavioral variance based upon the behaviors the codex enables justifies and authorizes and restricts punishes. The cultural codex also determines how the boundaries between itself and Other are managed. Whatever is in the codex is ‘rational’ from the culture model perspective – inclusive of utilizing terror if it exists within. Leave such codex justifying and authorizing terror no matter the view of those within the culture or without as to within a cultural codex it remains a potential or actually realized valid part of the cultures behavioral variance. It “Is culture.”

4.            Flawed and unflawed cultural codex words and sentence are not strung together for no purpose such codex have been developed to address particular political they inform action.

Where a cultural codex states ‘all’ the codex remains valid and is unalterable even where there are clear contradictions, qualification and/or authorization exists when politically dominated by Other to align to Others ethics just so long as you strive to control the political space in time to reflect the true nature of your codex (As we see is occurring in Turkey at this very moment), determining you as an individual adherent do not follow the dictates of a particular construct contained within your cultural codex and then go on to state you are following the ‘True’ ideology be in informing ill or good

"In his essay, The 'Ideograph:' A Link Between Rhetoric and Ideology, Michael Calvin McGee proposes that our system of beliefs is shaped through and expressed by words. We are consciously and unconsciously conditioned and controlled by the words we hear and use. Words carry ideology and convey and create meaning. Like Chinese characters, words are "ideographs" that "signify and 'contain' a unique ideological commitment," that is frequently unquestioned.' McGee also suggests that by understanding that a single word can carry ideology and that ideology can be expressed in a single word, we are better able to expose and evaluate ideology and choose to accept or reject such ideology. However, if we fail to recognize the ideographic nature of words, we risk creating and promoting a reality that is removed from our system of beliefs." - HOW WORDS CREATE REALITY ANN SINSHEIMER

5.            Statements of ‘I am Free to choose.’ ignores two pertinent facts such a statement can only be made to the degree the political space within which you currently exist allows such a perception to exist, secondly in whatever space you exist there is no such thing a ‘Freedom’ of anything only the relative independence your political space. Your own cultures relative power to enforce its codex upon your and the extent Others political power enable’s or restricts your culture to enforce the full weight of its belief, ethics and values construct upon you, thirdly the notion of ‘choice’-‘Freedom’ is cultural defined – ‘bounded’ from within such confines lies ‘Freedom’. Looking out from under the cultural construct of Islamic/Muslim ‘purity’, being subject to Mans ‘leadership’ and the method of enforcement ‘provoked’ violence to determine yourself to be ‘Free’ is ‘true’ under one rational models boundaries but is it under another? How does one measure ‘Freedom’ when one is conditioned to believe the most horrendous state from Others perspective is anything but?

6.            The reason terror exists is because either you have stolen someone space and they want it back or there are diametrically opposed values within the same space or the absolutely worse scenario both causes exist. Either way it is conflict to enable the ownership and therefore political control of space.

7              "No religion responsible for terrorism: Obama".
This is a false statement. Why?
Social psychology has proved cultures (ideology -religious or secular) justify and authorise terror the individual adherent 'Few' (cultural ultraistic enforcers) deliver it either as individuals or in groups. Individual persons do not invent their own cultural beliefs ethic values and informed behavioral variance. Cultures set the boundaries between groups and ho these will be managed.

If the first statement following is true then the second must also be true:

"We are at war with people who have perverted Islam,” Mr. Obama said (2015)
"We are at war with people who have perverted Nazism,” Mr. Roosevelt said (1941)

Are they true statements?

There is no such thing as the 'true' culture there is only 'the' culture.


The argument is two genocide constructs excuses the other. The fact in time the Christian culture when allowed to take up sufficient political space acts in the same way as Islam is of no comfort for Other it should send a message of justified fear rather than comfort.

The statement intimates where one culture can be ‘converted’ to accepting secularism to a sufficient degree to exclude genocide from its informed behavior and enable Democracy to exists so in time can other cultures. It is an argument which denies the existence of differing cultural ‘rational’ models. Also in Islam’s case completely ignores what happens in time and space to Other when the Islamic/Muslim politic gains increasing power. Turkey is simply one example of current time.

Those who propose if Christianity can be brought into a harmonious, although bloody fought for secular religious agreement of sorts that such a thing is possible in time with Islam for me ignores the fact inherent in Christian doctrine were factors which enabled the notion of human liberty and the secular religious divide to exist in such a way Democracy came into being, whereas these same factors do not exist as far as I can tell in the Islamic codex construct. The individual Muslim is not able on their own to determine what the Islamic codex means and live apart from the Muslim community, there is no give to Caesar, the State what is due to the State and to God what is due to God, the template for the secular religious divide.

The current logic and validly of your argument Humera Khan is reflected in the following.

“This programme identifies radicalised and at risk people and delivers a range of tailored services such as mentoring, counselling, education and employment services, that will help them turn away from ideologies of violence and hate,” the Attorney Generals’ office said.” Australia 2015
Brandis launches online terror tip-off service by Julian Bajkowski on February 10, 2015

The absurdity of such a statement reveals itself in the following analogies:

“This programme identifies radicalised and at risk people and delivers a range of tailored services such as mentoring, counselling, education and employment services, that will help them turn away from ideologies of violence and hate,” Abraham Lincoln said”. USA 1861

“This programme identifies radicalised and at risk people and delivers a range of tailored services such as mentoring, counselling, education and employment services, that will help them turn away from ideologies of violence and hate,” King Louis XVI said”. France 1785

US State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf and the World Health Organisation (WHO) determine university educated and member of a billionaire family Bin Laden simply needed education, employment opportunities and therapy to lead him away from Islamic/Muslim cultural derived terror against Other.

The SILVER BULLET: Identify the flawed poets (text and exemplar (messianic) behavior) that is the genocide construct of Other and other iniquitous constructs and remove them from the cultural codex and from influencing new generations of Muslims to inform terror and oppression against Other and women and as a consequence set up the same parameters for Other cultures to abide by.

No victim the Price of a Cultures acceptance into the Public Square.

This is The Silver Bullet as Plato told us so very clearly how many years ago?

How do you go about it. One Child Lost is One Child Too Many. One Child Lost is One Child Too Many. One Child Lost is One Child Too Many. One Child...

Thursday, February 19, 2015

US State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf and the World Health Organisation (WHO) determine university educated and member of a billionaire family Bin Laden simply needed education, employment opportunities and therapy to lead him away from Islamic/Muslim cultural derived terror against Other.


US State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf and the World Health Organisation (WHO) determine university educated and member of a billionaire family Bin Laden simply needed education, employment opportunities and therapy to lead him away from Islamic/Muslim cultural derived terror against Other.

The trouble is as the statement made by the Australian Attorney General detailed below proves the US State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf is not alone. In fact this is the policy of all Western nations at this very moment and are the words coming out of every Australian State premier and our own Australian Prime Ministers mouth so it is rather damn tragic for all of us particularly the victims past and to come.

State Department spokeswoman floats jobs as answer to ISIS

Why didn't I think of that, so obvious?

Because it is a totally insane paradigm it enables terror to escalate whilst blaming those who oppose such a dangerous construct as bigots and suffering from a mental illness Islamophobia. 

At the same time after each new inevitable Islamic/Muslim atrocity proponents of such a diabolical schema demand more money and resources be directed to their failed programs as happened in Australia with Muslim leaders claiming the reason for the terror attack in Sydney which resulted in two Australian citizens being murdered was because the very culture delivering the terror was not being given enough money and programs to stop the terror. 

The insane creators and instigators of such madness WHO and the US State Department determine terror is a 'health issue' accuse the sane rationally opposing it under a Western 'rational' model of liberty and equality of being insane Islamophobes, this is so the WHO creators of this madness can sleep quietly in their beds at night, such a world Kafka may not have even understood.

“This programme identifies radicalised and at risk people and delivers a range of tailored services such as mentoring, counselling, education and employment services, that will help them turn away from ideologies of violence and hate,” the Attorney Generals’ office said.” Australia 2015 

Bin Laden was born to the family of billionaire Mohammed bin Awad bin Laden in Saudi Arabia. He studied at university in the country until 1979.”

Did Bin Laden lack education and employment opportunities?

When a Nation of Muslim dominated countries have education, jobs and wealth does this stop the support of Islamic/Muslim terror.

"In a December 2009 cable, leaked by WikiLeaks in 2010, then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton confirmed that Saudi Arabia remained a "critical financial base" for terrorism and that Riyadh "has taken only limited action" to stop the flow of funds to the Taliban and other such groups."

"..the kingdom's immense oil wealth has been used to underwrite the export of an extreme, intolerant and violent version of Islam preached by its Wahhabi clerics.

Go anywhere in the world--from Germany to Indonesia--and you'll find Islamic centers flush with Saudi money, spouting intolerance and hate. In 2007, Stuart Levey, then a top Treasury official, told ABC News, "If I could snap my fingers and cut off the funding from one country, it would be Saudi Arabia."
Zakaria: The Saudis Are Mad? Tough! Why we shouldn't care that the world's most irresponsible country is displeased at the U.S. By Fareed Zakaria CNN Monday, Nov. 11, 2013

Iran and state-sponsored terrorism

If the Australian Government and the US .State Department are correct, all you need is to supply ISIS members with a job, a car and white picket fence and the terror will stop how is it the Governments/Citizenry of just Saudi Arabia and Iran as just two examples of many are comprised of fully employed educated persons yet they deliver finance for and their own citizens as cultural altruistic enforcers to commit terror?

Clearly the statement by the Australian Attorney Generals’ office 2015 means the US State Department is not alone in this absurd view employment is the answer.

The following is in no way a joke or attempted sarcasm it is why two people were killed in a Sydney café, why the killings in Denmark occurred, why the Charlie Hebdo killings occurred, why it is Governments in the West are allowing radicalised Muslims to be derived from so called liberal-moderate Muslim families so they end up committing atrocities either in our own streets or elsewhere.

What has happened is there has been an agreement between Governments worldwide that terrorism is to be treated under the paradigm of a “Harm minimisation program” where terror is to be treated as a ‘health issue’, the terrorists under such a scheme are victims not perpetrators –with a mental illness, oppressed, unable to obtain work or a ‘proper’ education.

The terrorist murders happening in our streets are as a direct consequence of determining terror as a ‘health issue’ rather than what it really is, cultural terror derived directly from a Islamic/Muslim cultural codex construct of Other required to exist within the Islamic/Muslim cultural codex because the codex contains diametrically opposed Islamic values to that of Western derived values, or in fact diametrically opposed to almost any culture with which it comes in contact.

It is the same as the ‘Gold Standard’ Harm minimisation” methadone program for heroin, the State becomes the drug pusher and it is justified on the basis the drug addicts are suffering a ‘health issue’ a drug addiction which is a medical condition. Deaths resulting from such schemes of drug addicts themselves or others they kill, by giving at times methadone to their own children are considered by WHO as acceptable collateral damage and if the scheme was not in place things could be worse. Whenever there is a series of deaths relating to the methadone programme invariably there are claims it is not being sufficiently funded and if only more money and services were provided to drug addicts all would be right with the world. Sound familiar?

What WHO is proposing is that where the drug addict simply needs a replacement therapy one addictive drug replaces another both lethal and mental health services the same applies to terrorists. Terrorists are simply suffering a mental dysfunction need therapy to convince them their Islamic/Muslim belief, ethics, value system is not the ‘real’ Islam and Western beliefs, ethics and values are, as well it is determined by WHO they just need to feel good about themselves have an education and or employment.

Murders, atrocities on whatever scale which occur are simply collateral damage the price we all pay for WHOs program and our gutless politicians who have agreed to it. When it fails as in Australia what happened Muslim leaders complained they were not given enough money and programs to stop the terror coming from their very own culture.

The fact that Muslim radicals going off to kill Other have had an education and even employment appears to have been missed by WHO. WHO is utilising a correlation equals cause and evidence to the contrary under what is clearly science based upon duty to certainty not duty to doubt.

Scientific method does not apply. WHO clearly does not understand, as the Australian and US Government a basic statistical known “correlation does not equal cause” no matter how significant it may be – even if it is one to one. Really having to teach WHO a basic statistical known is an incredibly sad place to be particularly as such a failure on WHOs part is causing and will cause much more tragedy.

You want this to stop, talk to your local doctor, counsellor, psychologist, health worker and tell them you are not happy their organisations are supporting such a dangerous program and you want it stopped. Why your local health workers because they are the ones who vote in the representatives on to these representative bodies that must have agreed to this so called WHO ‘Harm minimisation program’ being introduced into your space.

The root cause of terror is the Islamic/Muslim cultural codex construct of Other made necessary because of the iniquitous constructs contained within of women, Other and the method 'provoked violence' utilised to enforce adherence to these iniquitous constructs within and outside the Islamic/Muslim cultural space.

If unemployment, underemployment or boring employment was an actual cause of terror every unemployed person would involve themselves in beheading people in their own streets and within other nations

Are they?

Underlying such a view unemployment is the cause of terror is a false assumption that the grey flannel suit, car, and white picket fence surrounded by christian catholic, protestant, Christian orthodox, secular values ethics and behaviors is just what these terrorists derived from an Islamic/Muslim cultural rational model want.

The whole reason for Islamic/Muslim terror is that the Islamic/Muslim cultures version of the world they want to create, in whatever space they exist, is diametrically opposed to cultures around them. In fact it is a political construct where Other is without power and persecuted.

To stop the terror it is the Islamic/Muslim political construct of Other and the iniquitous constructs contained within the Islamic/Muslim codex have to be changed or deleted.

Any level of Muslim employment is not a cause of terror, as unemployed Other would be expected to be involved in the same behavior, they are not therefore such a view is invalid.

A significant correlation may exist between Muslim employment and the propensity of a Muslim to participate in terror activities, this is to be expected and is in no way therefore a cause of terror. The fact is not everyone turns up at the front line of any inter-cultural conflict be it a full scale battle or an insurgency.

Social psychology clearly shows cultural altruistic enforcers of cultural beliefs, values, ethics and informed behavior are proportionally small in number yet they can and do have a significant influence upon the relative moral direction a culture takes as a whole in time and space.

Also such a correlation with employment and terrorism fails to recognise the real existence of what are called cultural tipping points.

Tipping points in cultural terms are where cultures behaviour are dictated by the relative amount of power they have, or perceive they have, in time and space to realise or not realise the ‘true’ nature of their cultural codex version of the world.

Initially when within an Other politically dominated space, cultures wishing to survive will reflect back the required amount of Others beliefs, values, ethics and behaviour otherwise there will be a severe reaction by Other against its existence within Others space commensurate with the degree the values differ from Others. This has been proven by psychological research where individual adherents of cultures are in the minority they will take on to varying degrees Others beliefs, ethics, values and behaviours which would not be tolerated if their own culture owned the political space. They therefore hand on heart are generally not lying when they say they support the cultures they are currently residing in.

The problem is time does not stand still, one can see this across history, from the Romans/Greek cultures, the Byzantines, etc you have cultures developing within which determine your Gods as evil (be they secular or religious) and followers of such Gods destined rightfully to grievous harm or severest penalty and you believe their pronouncements that although they view your gods as evil they are fully supportive of your right to exist as a culture you are destined in time to oblivion as this cultures political power asserts itself in your space.

One can see this being played out in Australia across time supercharged by illegal boat arrivals of the Muslim culture within the Australian space. This is not a view that any immigration is a problem far from it diversity is a wonderful thing to behold and be involved in but only if values are intrinsically the same ‘moral relativism’ is simply impossible as Lincoln rightfully observed to exist for long in any space.

".the family migrated from Libya in late 2010, the father said he had hoped his children would benefit from good schools and universities."
Father fears for son who joined Islamic State Grant Taylor February 21, 2015


To determine Muslim migrants are not a security risk to Australians is so devoid of rationality given just this example it beggars belief. Muslims are adherents of a genocide construct of Other which is exactly the same as contained in the Nazi Mein Kampf and have terrorists, as with the Nazi in the 1930s, 1940s, being derived from so called liberal-moderate families.

I repeat different cultures within is a wonderful thing but having cultures with a genocide construct reside in the same space I do not believe it is a wise policy decision of any society. It is absolutely ridiculous we treat a secular construct with the exact same construct of Other as a religion totally differently yet the outcome terror is exactly the same.
What do we see – I simply ask you go through Australian newspaper archives from 1900. You will find along the way much earlier than you were possibly aware an Islamic/Muslim terrorist attack at the beginning of the twentieth century a lull as is not unusual and then I believe an indication of a cultural tipping point the fatwa against Christmas by the Imam of the Mosque at Lakemba, Sydney Australia.

The same ethics which underlie such an edict as those that enable people to be set alight in cages. Did the claims at the time that this edict did not represent Muslims actual ethical position stem the tide of Islamic political organisations either supporting such ethics or not denying their validity, nor individual Muslims increasingly advocating and actually utilising these Muslim ethics to commit atrocities on Australian soil and elsewhere?

Also this notion of the 'young' being involved in the cultural war as being unexpected is really ridiculous, for which age group do cultures look to, to carry out their dirty work, the elderly and infirm? Blaming 'hate preachers' derived from exactly the same culture for 'brainwashing' the 'young' to take up arms is the same as blaming Winston Churchill for exhorting ‘young’ men and women to take up violence against the Nazi and vice versa = it really is a nonsense.

Yet social psychologists I believe are now committing a heinous crime against humanity by not standing and telling humanity the truth “Cultures justify and authorise terror the individual adherent ‘Few’ (cultural altruistic enforcers) as individuals or in groups deliver it. The culture is responsible for the carnage the individual terrorists commit against humanity as terrorists are simply instruments utilised to advance whole of cultures view of the world.


'To fight extremism, Franklin D. Roosevelt calls on US to embrace its Nazis.'

Given social psychology has proven cultures justify and authorise terror and the individual 'Few' (cultural altruistic enforcers) deliver it as individuals or in groups, and as with any culture the radical-extremist end of the behavioral variance are derived from the so called liberal-moderate end of a cultures behavioral variance, as can be clearly proven with those Muslims joining ISIS such a request by Obama to "embrace its Muslims" just shows how detached from reality the current policy on the Muslim generated cultural terror is.

"But instead, the 23-year-old has traded his university studies for a career in violent jihad under the tutelage of the Islamic State and its murderous commanders.


"He was always a good boy who liked soccer, going to the gym, seeing his friends," the father said. "Sometimes they (your children) hide things from you that you could not even imagine.""
Father fears for son who joined Islamic State by Grant Taylor The West Australian February 21, 2015

Lack of education or education opportunity is not a cause of terror is it WHO. It is not a question.


WHO IS RESPONSIBLE? The World Health Organisation thats WHO.

Tuesday, February 17, 2015

For Director-General Duncan Lewis (Head of ASIO)


Two Murdered Australians in a Café in Sydney and the ASIO head determines such loss not a failure.

“No I don’t,’’ Mr Lewis (ASIO) said.
ASIO boss admits Lindt Cafe gunman Man Haron Monis was a terrorist by SAMANTHA MAIDEN NATIONAL POLITICAL EDITOR THE SUNDAY TELEGRAPH FEBRUARY 15, 2015

One has to ask the question uncaring to any degree it may be impertinent or cause offence “What number of murdered Australians does the head of ASIO Mr Lewis determine as a failure?” The logic would determine no number. For when does one judge the loss to humanity of human life in such a manner, it only matters when it is in the millions?

Mr Lewis informs us ASIO has no list of terrorist of suspects and (I have a word for it but I will leave it out least to say it starts with ‘w’) adds “It’s probably better to describe it as a matrix.” A matrix which when updated, weighted, run gives you a …… Yes you guessed it a list one would hope of high to low potential terrorists with what they may indeed do – one would hope.

There was clearly a significant omission in this matrix, the paradigm under which ASIO, and one must then infer the rest of the Western Security apparatus are operating under, is flawed if one accepts the two Murdered in the café was a security failure.

Let us place Director-General Duncan Lewis (Head of ASIO) and Australian citizens having to hear Director-General Duncan Lewis (Head of ASIO) denial in the context of what is the reality of what is actually occurring with the two in the Sydney cafe, those in France, those Coptic Christians beheaded (pick a time and space), those in Denmark, in Britain, in Nigeria, in Kenya, in ... and many more to come

“It has been said that denial aims to reshape history to rehabilitate the perpetrators, and to demonise the victims. It demonstrates the fragility of memory, truth, reason, and history. Israel Charny labels denialists as the arrogant killers of truth who try, by the murder of recorded history, to write the final chapter of the original genocide. The denial of genocide celebrates its destructiveness, minimises the significance of human life, and subordinates people to unquestioning obedience to government and authority.

Yisrael Gutman adds the refusal to acknowledge the very facts of genocide is a brutal attack on morality and fosters distrust in historical record. The process of denial becomes increasingly sophisticated through rationalisation, relativisation, and trivialisation. The denialists are more interested in justifying the present and shaping the future than they are in honestly portraying the past. By concealing the truth, they become defenders of and accomplices to a great crime.”


Source: Denial of the Armenian Genocide with some comparisons to Holocaust Denial by Richard G. Hovannisian, The Inaugural Armenian Genocide Commemorative Lecture Macquarie University, Sydney 28 April 1996.

It appears one has to prove intent here it is in codex form but of course this is a health issue not a cultural codex issue according to the WHO paradigm which enables Director General Duncan Lewis (Head of ASIO) to do what he does so well with his little matrix, ‘little’ only in terms of its failure to save two Australian lives.

Have I sinned? What is a Genocide Construct of Other and Why it is formed?

Is there a better way than a useless matrix, errrr list? Yes? It will not stop the terror immediately but a least it provides an avenue to stop terror eventually which is more than the ASIO matrix will do.

But it needs a complete reversal of the current policy paradigm and the real culprit the Islamic/Muslim cultural codex construct of Other how many more dead will be required for this to happen? From the ASIO response the number will never be reached. So cut down on the coffee breaks.

How do you go about it. One Child Lost is One Child Too Many. One Child Lost is One Child Too Many. One Child Lost is One Child Too Many. One Child...

Monday, February 16, 2015

Why in shock? Copenhagen should have contacted WHO they would have told Copenhagen it was inevitable

People in Copenhagen in shock over terror shootings
Robin Herr, Special for USA TODAY 1:08 p.m. EST February 15, 2015
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/02/15/copenhagen--denmark-terror-attacks/23454941/

Why in shock? Copenhagen should have contacted WHO they would have told Copenhagen it was inevitable and simply a price citizens in the West are going to have to pay for WHOs violence harm minimisation programme.

As ASIO (Australian security service) said regards the two Australians killed in a cafe in Sydney by a Muslim if there had been a security failure he replied “No I don’t,’’ Mr Lewis (ASIO) said.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/asio-boss-admits-lindt-cafe-gunman-man-haron-monis-was-a-terrorist/story-fnpn118l-1227219923154

And Mr Lewis (ASIO) is right under the 'harm minimisation' scheme being driven by WHO these murders are an expected part of the program as they are with the heroin methadone program 'So what citizens get murdered as a result it could be worse."

As with the heroin 'harm minimisation' program those responsible are not culprits they are victims and need therapy as are the Islamic/Muslim culture WHO regards as victims and should not be held responsible for producing the growing numbers of the 'Few' to commit murder. WHO have determined they are simply the oppressed have mental health issues and need our help.

WHO is providing the wash basin so Mr Lewis (ASIO) and elsewhere can have clean hands “No I don’t,’’ Mr Lewis (ASIO) said.

You see the wash basin is needed because in reality terror is a cultural derived artifact not an individual derived behavior - the Islamic cultural codex is to a Muslim terrorist what heroin is to a drug user without either the individual would tend to inform less destructive behavior.

As with the harm minimisation methadone program the heroin addict is still a drug addict as methadone is still a dangerous addictive drug the State simply takes over the drug dealer role.

With radical Muslims the harm minimisation program "delivers a range of tailored services such as mentoring, counselling, education and employment services" instead of methadone (which probably would be a better idea).

The State takes on the role of cultural altruistic enforcer utilising Western beliefs, ethics and values money and services (in essence a very expensive bribe) to turn the Muslim radical away from the Islamic 'rational' model beliefs, ethics and values to change the Islamic cultural belief system of the radical and bring them over to the Western cultural version of nirvana.

Of course these Western values are framed as 'Is Islam ' values not overtly what they clearly are Western values so it may be easier for the Muslim radical to swallow along with all the other goodies.

Trouble is changing a belief system as psychological research proves is neigh impossible and any perceived takers of such a very beneficial package of goodies will be mouthing alignment yet holding to their beliefs. You see the Islamic codex already has set the mental schema Other will try this on and as we see such acts of largess in the end make absolutely no difference terror continues and intensifies.

A heroin harm minimisation program can only work if heroin is not freely available in the streets as a Muslim terrorist violence harm minimisation program can only work if the Islamic codex is not available in the streets. Such programmes can only minimize harm to individuals and to Other. Therefore “No I don’t,’’ Mr Lewis (ASIO) said." It could be worse we need more money and programmes more security" and on and on it goes.

The Muslim terror continues and intensifies whilst the security and politicians clam success so is the WHO paradigm.

Another World Health Organisation (WHO) deliverable and more to come. - One person has been killed and three police officers wounded at a free-speech gathering in Copenhagen"
http://citizensfirstasnau.blogspot.com.au/2015/02/another-world-health-organisation-who.html

Sunday, February 15, 2015

Another World Health Organisation (WHO) deliverable and more to come. - One person has been killed and three police officers wounded at a free-speech gathering in Copenhagen"

Another World Health Organisation (WHO) deliverable and more to come

Enough, is Enough! A CHARLIE HEBDO T-Shirt Design for every occasion.

“One person has been killed and three police officers wounded at a free-speech gathering in Copenhagen organised by controversial Swedish artist Lars Vilks.”

It is a paradigm driven by WHO policy where cultural terror is a mental health issue not a cultural codex issue which determines ‘Free Speech’ as controversial. So the actual culprit the Islamic/Muslim culture is left unchallenged as to their manifest culpability.
WHO IS RESPONSIBLE? The World Health Organisation thats WHO.

Change the Architect and Builder or Change Nothing


It is the same as determining the violence generated by having slavery in the same space as liberty and equality in the US simply needed anti-violence intervention.

“This programme identifies radicalised and at risk people and delivers a range of tailored services such as mentoring, counselling, education and employment services, that will help them turn away from ideologies of violence and hate,” King Louis XVI said”. France 1785

Father of Sydney terror suspect Omar Al-Kutobi says he was lonely in Australia February 12, 2015 - by SMH Rachel Olding and Paul Bibby

Now we will have loneliness, boredom as a prerequisite correlated cause for terror given clearly employment, and education as the news article above clearly proves are no longer a supportable assumption as a cause and never was. Correlation does not mean cause.

Who holds WHO accountable for each new atrocity nobody. Play with your little statistics the terror keeps coming and intensifies.

Declare you have won the war in Iraq leave and see what happens what have you left in the public square? What is WHO leaving in the Public Square unchallenged – it is the Islamic codex construct of Other – it remains in the liberal-moderate end of the Muslim cultural behavioral spectrum as it does in the radical-extremist end, which is why extremists can and are derived from the liberal-moderate space = there is a problem.

‘We have a problem’ by Zaid Nabulsi The Jordon Times Feb 10, 2015

The writer Zaid Nabulsi Jordanian attorney and partner in the law firm of Nabulsi & Associates has a further problem, as does humanity as a result, from where was the Wahhabi cultural codex analogy derived from for it is only an analogy from the very 'text' he claims by inference informs good rather than evil - this is impossible for if one informs evil so does the other.

We are dealing differing 'rational' cultural models what appears to be insane behavior from Others perspective, and diminishingly along the liberal-moderate end of the same Muslim culture delivering the terror reflecting Others own ethics not their own as determined by Islamic codex, is sane behavior based upon the Muslim cultural 'rational' model.

Just one child worth having such a cultural construct with in the Public Square – any Public Square?

"Communities (cultures) tend to be guided less than individuals by conscience and a sense of responsibility. How much misery does this fact cause mankind! It is the source of wars and every kind of oppression, which fill the earth with pain, sighs and bitterness." (Albert Einstein, 1934)


Friday, February 6, 2015

The Terrible Harm Done in the Name of The Good: I want you to understand why you are being regarded and determined as racists, bigots, suffering from a mental illness and importantly why you are not and never have been




I want you to understand why you are being regarded and determined as racists, bigots, suffering from a mental illness and importantly why you are not and never have been for coming out and determining Islam is a genocide and misogynistic construct and for humanities sake the Islamic cultural codex must be removed from the Public Square.

What the' powers that be' the elite our inept dangerous cultural gatekeepers have decided is to 'treat' cultural terror as a Harm Minimisation Program as they do drug addiction such as heroin addiction by the utilisation of a 'Gold Standard' methadone program which in essence kills people as a side effect, even innocents such as children associated or not associated with the drugs addicts themselves i.e. giving methadone to their own children to shut them up or sell it to other children who are killed in the process but this it is determined Ok because these elite believe ‘It could have been worse, more drug addicts they determine would have died by being held responsible for their own addictive behavior.” 


Without publishing it, informing the world citizenry even discussing it to obtain citizens approval they have unilaterally created a 'Gold Standard' 'violence' program. It is a paradigm where all violence inclusive of cultural derived terrorism are now to be regarded as a 'health' issue, terrorism under such a paradigm no longer a specifically 'cultural' derived abhorrent behavior but an individual 'mental health' issue.

This is a cultural war not a 'health issue' was the existence of slavery in the USA a 'health issue'. Was the Divine Right of Kings in the French space a 'health issue'?

The USA Northerners who opposed the USA Southern Planters slavery construct simply needed a job and feel included in the others value system? It is totally absurd yet this is the logic of the current policy which allows terrorists and the ideology which creates Muslim terrorists the Islamic/Muslim culture to operate freely 'under observation'.

Where as in the USA with slavery two diametrically opposed ethical constructs existed in the same space as Lincoln said either one or other would in the end take the space. And anyone who has read the history of that period would know just a few decisions made in a different way would have had slavery in every State of the Union. Good does not always triumph.

France has sacrificed many lives to be rid of 'Duty to Certainty' and has in major part been the philosophical creator of the foundation stone of Democracy as represented in Charlie Hebdo the 'Duty to Doubt' do we want to lose what was so hard fought for over centuries in a matter of years?

The Islamic values which are diametrically opposed to Western philosophical tradition based upon Duty To Doubt as opposed to Duty to Certainty are explored in the following link - all the major values hard fought for are being returned to the Western Public Squares and of course Other are going to object and the Islamic/Muslim culture will have to utilise terror to enforce its view of the world as they have consistently done since the seventh century.

Cultures have no ‘Master Plan’ there never is but there is invariably a cultural codex stipulated principle ALL should convert to the True belief,
The culture is no longer to blame 'violence is no longer inherent in the cultural system' the cause is now the environment – lack of employment opportunity and essential services driven by Others prejudice, your prejudice a mental illness a phobia in fact Islamophobia. You are to be regarded as even sicker than the terrorists because you have an illness which is irrational and the terrorist’s actions are rational because look at the environment they are in and your prejudice (mental illness) how could they not go out and burn people alive in cages. Terrorists are now misunderstood individuals “trying to right what they perceive to be a social or political or historical wrong” who ‘sincerely’ inform Other the victim it was only a last resort “after long deliberation, because they felt they had no choice.”

Under such a paradigm it is determined by the inept dangerous cultural gatekeepers:

"There Are Two Causes of Terrorism

All terrorist acts are motivated by two things:

Social and political injustice: People choose terrorism when they are trying to right what they perceive to be a social or political or historical wrong—when they have been stripped of their land or rights, or denied these.

The belief that violence or its threat will be effective, and usher in change. Another way of saying this is: the belief that violent means justify the ends. Many terrorists in history said sincerely that they chose violence after long deliberation, because they felt they had no choice."


Source: The Causes of Terrorism Two Causes of Terrorism By Amy Zalman, Ph.D. Global Terrorism Expert

Although we know cultures justify and authorise terror and the inevitable individual adherent 'few' as individuals or in groups deliver it and the culture must be held responsible you and I are being determined as having a mental illness for saying so and even blamed for the terror in our very own streets.

The fact is the elite have to determine you instead of them are suffering a mental illness as they have to determine themselves as sane even as the bodies keep rolling, being burnt, crucified, blown to bit or simply having heads removed from bodies plus the continuing female genital mutilation driven by Islams construct of woman's 'purity',  as the cultural Western definitions of liberty, equality are irreparably damaged, given the water bill for washing their bloody hands under a tap and the cognitive dissonance of having to suppress the reality is extremely high.

The very institutions meant to protect our well being physical- doctors etc and mental-psychologists etc have to be supporting this and therefore you should be sending emails to the Medical and Psychological institutional bodies in your local area telling them this policy is dangerous to your own physical well being as well as your cultures and they should stop the policy. Even raise the issue with your local MD and therapist as they determine the policy their institutions follow by voting in the representatives who promote or at the very least acquiesce to this barbaric policy of enabling Islamic terror to be perpetually in our midst, tell them that you are not happy in fact angry such a dangerous policy has been adopted allowing terroists to roam our streets to murder people in cafes and you want the policy changed to holding the actual cause Islamic culture responsible and could they contact their institutions and inform them of your view.

WHO is responsible for this driving and coordinating this dangerous insane policy world wide? 


WHO IS RESPONSIBLE? The World Health Organisation that's WHO.


This is at its core a political harm minimisation program for it seeks to minimise the political risk of the embarrassment of the political elite of a clear recognition of their failure to stem terror, the deaths and injury to their citizens at home and abroad and the enormousness financial cost combating such terror entails by blaming such terrible cost on anyone but the true culprit. Why?

For the political elite to determine the truth the Islam cultural codex is a genocidal and misogynistic construct is seen to have in the short to medium term potential severe economic cost (energy) and would possibly lead to a spike in Islamic/Muslim cultural terror and even major conflict with Islamic nations and in situ communities. It fails to occur to them there are many ways to achieve the required outcome which does not entail the Islamic/Nazi way of committing genocide.

Violence to combat violence which is inevitable if the current policy is continued with because Other will start producing John Browns and hopefully Lincolns not Hitlers, there will be civil war as we can see wherever the Islamic/Muslim culture is allowed to flourish. The alternative rather than proving false is true simply utilise the tools the West has developed, scientific method to research if there are iniquitous constructs of Other and women informing terror in the streets and why. One can then justify utilising State power to remove these codex constructs from the Public Square be they derived from secular or religious codex as a price cultures have to pay for access to the Public Square - No victim is the Price a Culture Pays to Gain Access to the Public Square.

Such a notion does not intimate no victim will occur as inevitably any human construct secular or religious is flawed, but to gain access to the Public Square any culture has to make sure, as best as current knowledge pertains, its codex contains no construct of Other and women which can be utilised to inform an oppressive construct and also if one is found to exist as time passes the culture has to immediately move to remove such codex subject to State sanction or removal from the Public Square - surely humanity has come this far to enable such a state to be achieved.

It does not mean cultures containing genocide and misogynistic constructs will not inform terror as a result or even major conflict. But surely we owe something to the victims past, current and to come if things remain as they are and innocent citizens are determined as evil for telling the truth.

What do you want to be remembered for 'Duty to Certainty' Be Certain, Be Compliant, Be Silent or 'Duty to Doubt' Be Doubtful, Be Sceptical, Be Critical. Words create reality lawyers and social psychologists know that for a fact, what world are you creating by your actions?