Sunday, July 27, 2014

Cultural Wars: How do they play out:



Cultural Wars:

How do they play out:
1. Unambiguous attacks attacks directly upon your walls - China in the South China Sea, Russia in Georgia and the Ukraine.

2. Ambiguous (only to those being attacked due to culturally derived constructs of Freedom of Religion and multiculturalism) attacks within your walls enabled by completely corrupt and/or inept cultural gatekeepers.

China's economic manipulation and Confucius Institutes, Britains Birmingham Islamic Trojan horse, Byzantine Empire with the Christians destruction of the Greek Culture along with Greek education destroyed with education aligning to Christian theocratic constructs.


It is a state where at a point of time five to ten years from now you accept an ethical construct and resultant cultural behavioral variance within your public space, even including increased terror and threat thereof, which you would now consider completely counter to your ethics and meaning of Liberty Equality and Fraternity.

In fact the political elite all along the way will determine it a good and the terror and movement of ethical mean not an aspect of the attacking culture at all, as the attacking culture now have sufficient control of the political elite agenda either through numerical power or psychological manipulation of the attacked cultures own belief system - As was perpetrated in Birmingham Britain where Islamist utilised non-existent Islamophobia (non-existent as rational fear is not a phobia - as Birmingham just by itself proves) derived from the in situ cultures beliefs regards freedom of religion and multiculturalism to enforce and grow their counter ethical constructs and behaviors within the Public Square.


There appears to be a very dangerous notion underlying Western policy making that because cultural wars are destructive they therefore rationally must give way in time to Western derived reasons for not having such terrible conflicts because it is all so obvious.

Obvious to Western Culture maybe but if the other cultures fail to play the game as they have failed throughout history both religious and secular your culture is in a very dangerous situation.

Wishful thinking is not a good policy option. Cultures based upon ideology religious, secular or a combination of both are not benign never have been never will be.

Please note cultural wars never end as long as the underlying cultural foundation codex (textual and exemplar (messianic) template) construct of Other of either one or the other or both sides does not change to defuse any possibility of future conflict. Otherwise there is only ever a lull in proceedings.

Thursday, July 24, 2014

Ever heard of a cultural strategic inflection point - this is one. The following is a facet of how a culture destroys itself. It is not a new story in fact it is often repeated.

Ever heard of a cultural strategic inflection point - this is one. 
One of the ringleaders of the Islamist plot to take over British schools is exposed today as a sexist, racist bigot. School chief Shahid Akmal.

















It is not a matter of stigmatising nor erroneous stereotyping it is a matter of the evidence.

Ever heard of a cultural strategic inflection point - this is one. The following is a facet of how a culture destroys itself. It is not a new story in fact it is often repeated.

It just requires the Tranquility of Silence of so called self-described moderates of "conscience and a sense of responsibility" on the part of the attacking culture and completely corruptible and/or completely inept gatekeepers of the Other culture.

The determination of threat of a culture to a society are the actions of that culture relative to the other cultures within the same space. What have been Islams/Muslims actions which may determine Islam a 'real' threat to in situ Western Democratic cultures?

No increasing signs of major schism, terror developing or occurring, no political push underhanded or otherwise to impose Muslim ethical constructs within the Public Square diametrically opposed to the ideals of Liberty, Equality (particularly for women) and Fraternity?


"School chief Shahid Akmal told an undercover Mirror reporter that “white women have the least amount of morals”, white children were “lazy” and that British people have “colonial blood”.

Akmal claimed that women were “emotionally weaker” than men and that their role was to look after children and the home.

He defended jailing or exiling gays and adulterers under Sharia Law as a “moral position to hold”.

Until last week, Akmal was the chairman of governors at Nansen Primary School in Birmingham, where music was banned and inspectors found pupils were not sufficiently protected from radicalisation.

The hardliner revealed he has plans to set up a series of after-school tuition centres to instil “our morals and our values and our principles” in impressionable youngsters."


Jul 22, 2014 06:00 By Nick Sommerlad 

What are these 'morals and values' to shape young minds to inform adult political actions against Other?

"School chief defends Brunei’s death penalty for gays and says they should face UK exile"

Patrick Wintour, Political editor The Guardian, Wednesday 23 July 2014 06.42 AEST

The question is will the current construct of multiculturalism which determines ethical schism as a norm to be managed rather than eliminated by accepting systems be they religious or secular can and do inform systemic terror and major schism, and seek to alter and remove the offending system rather than deal with the recurring symptoms to prevent burning buildings and broken bodies and lives?

Freedom of Religion came into being on an agreed basis for Other and common cultural text and exemplars (messianic) templates, a culture not party to this agreement with diametrically opposed construct of Other and in this case women will and has caused what to happen within the 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)


How is it done, with so many so called self-defined moderate 'individuals of conscience and a sense of responsibility'? As it always has been, cultural altruistic punishment imposed by a few with increased intensity. achieving the Iranian and Nazi Germany Tranquility of Silence - that is how, Justified and authorised by cultural codex otherwise it would not be possible. How is it you think your culture, nation is immune given the evidence external and internal - no evidence of a movement in the Muslim ethical mean?

"• Parents do not have the confidence to argue against the articulate and forceful activists who seek to impose their views, for fear of being branded as disloyal to their faith or their community."
Schools face new curbs on extremism after Birmingham Trojan horse affair 
Patrick Wintour, Political editor The Guardian, Wednesday 23 July 2014 06.42 AEST


Such acts of reforming cultural norms are not attained over the weekend, it takes organisation and time, sometimes centuries to attain the required ethical construct transformation. The shock here in Birmingham is how quickly such change was achieved.

Strategy:"According to Clarke’s findings, the group of radicals had been spending years spreading radical Muslim agendas in schools, while slowly gaining momentum within the education community. The report claimed that the radical “educators” would earn influence with school principals and leaders, gaining sympathetic friends to the radical agendas of Islam, while plucking out less-supportive teachers."
Extremist Muslim Teachers Claim Boston Bombing Was A Staged HOAX 1:37 PM 7/23/2014

Tactic (one of ?):
Trojan Horse plotters used broken fire alarm to force out head teacher
By James Cartledge, Birmingham Mail Jul 22, 2014 16:41

Not only do such successful actions require the Tranquility of Silence on the behalf of the attacking culture it requires the acquiescence of those with sufficient power within the culture being attacked to allow such destruction of their own culture to proceed through their gates unhindered. The acquiescence does not have to be positive incentives such as monetary bribes psychological exploitation of the in situ cultures ethical constructs are enough. In this case Freedom of Religion. 


Those who attack religious ethical constructs and even have the temerity to assert such constructs if allowed to frame young minds lead to terror and major schism are determined to have a mental illness, a phobia in this case the non-existent Islamophobia. Non-existent because as this event to control the educational system in Britain have proved even in this incident rational fear is not a phobia - there were very good reasons to be fearful of what Islamic teachings would and do inform.

"Scathing report prompts call for rethink of schools oversight as MP threatens to name council officials who took no action

A group of fundamentalist "activists", mostly men of Pakistani origin, infiltrated the management of at least 10 schools in Birmingham, sometimes breaking the law in order to introduce Muslim worship and sex segregation, according to a highly critical report.

Their activities were unimpeded by council officials who were fearful of allegations of Islamophobia, who forced ousted teachers to sign gagging clauses rather than treating their complaints seriously as whistleblowers, Ian Kershaw, the authority's independent adviser, concluded.

Sir Albert Bore, leader of the city's Labour-run council, apologised on Friday to the people of Birmingham "for the way the actions of a few, including some within the council, have undermined the great reputation of our city".
Fears of Islamophobia gave activists free rein in Birmingham schools Helen Pidd, Patrick Wintour and Lyndsay Warner The Guardian, Saturday 19 July 2014 05.45 AEST

The most important point is as cultural psychology asserts it only takes "the actions of a few" to cause and enable major schism and terror. It should be absolutely no comfort taken from "the actions of a few" in fact fear should be palpable because only a few are required to attain cultural alignment. If it happens once and the ideological systems on either side are not altered or deleted to stop what is occurring and only symptoms of the relevant ideological systems are dealt with it will happen again.


One can see how this occurs in Iraq.

"US military and Iraqi security officials estimate Isis has at least 3,000 fighters in Iraq, rising towards 20,000 when new recruits since last month's advance are included."
Iraq: Isis warns women to wear full veil or face punishment Reuters in Baghdad The Guardian, Friday 25 July 2014 14.21 BST

3,000 fighters t0 20,000. The 'few' controlling and moving the ethical mean under their sway to enable some 17,000 new fighters willing to participate in acts of genocide and support for aligning core Islamic codex tenants to adherents and non-adherents alike.

"A cleric in Mosul told Reuters that Isis gunmen had shown up at his mosque and ordered him to read their warning on loudspeakers when worshippers gather.


"Anyone who is not committed to this duty and is motivated by glamour will be subject to accountability and severe punishment to protect society from harm and to maintain the necessities of religion and protect it from debauchery," Isis said."

Here we see how it works the cleric claims it is not me its them ISIS. Yet the cleric enforces the edict by his own actions, a 'moderate'? Does it make any difference? 

There has to be an Islamic construct of women already in place to be able to enforce this ethic, to be even able to propose it is possible. The only thing which prevented its previous enforcement were Other outside ethical blockers determining such a construct as oppressive. Yet ISIS is Islam, the basis of ISIS rational and logic dictates such a state does not impinge on Freedom/relative independence. This is Islams definition of Freedom, alignment to cultural Islamic norms.

"This is not a restriction on her freedom but to prevent her from falling into humiliation and vulgarity or to be a theatre for the eyes of those who are looking."  

How many more so called Muslim moderates even in comparison to the just 20,000 ISIS fighters will now enforce this edict?

It is a pure branding exercise of Muslim mans ownership and subservience training to accept Muslim Mans 'leadership'/ownership/control. It is a control of sex for Muslim Mans benefit.

In Western Democracies despite the plethora of Women studies deconstruction of this type of self-serving Man made framework we are allowing this to be increasing imposed upon women and call it a multiculturalism, Freedom of Religion good. When it fact it is pure evil.

ISIS issues genital mutilation decree AP JULY 25, 2014 12:00AM

Genital mutilation is not occurring in 'barbaric' places on the edged of chaos it is happening to girls in Australia and elsewhere for exactly the same cultural reasons imposed in Iraq by ISIS and those imposing such an obscenity in Western Democracies are they termed terrorists?

"Last weekend Isis gave the city's Christians a stark choice: convert to Islam, pay a religious tax, or face death. "They said there is no place for Christians in the Islamic state," one distraught refugee said from the safety of Bashiqa, 16 miles from Mosul. "Either you become Muslim or you leave." Mosul's last 1,500 Christian families were reportedly robbed at Isis checkpoints as they fled"

'They are savages,' say Christians forced to flee Mosul by Isis Fazel Hawramy in Irbil The Guardian, Thursday 24 July 2014 12.54 BST


There is this perception ISIS like Al Qaeda, Boko Harm, Hamas, Taliban, etc. are radicalised are not of the Islamic faith, determined as distinct, the Islamic text and Muslim exemplar behavior is not represented in their actions, yet there are so many in fact the mere number of groups let alone numbers of group members points to an inconvenient truth they are not 'savages' they are Muslims. They are representing the Islamic faith to the letter and representing the Muslim exemplar behavior of Mohammad exactly. They are determined even by some so called moderate Muslims as the 'true' believers.

ISIS like Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, Hamas, Taliban, etc. are not radicalised are of the Islamic faith as they can point to the supporting Islamic text to justify their actions and Muhammad's actions for support so can I, they are simply Muslims being rational.

How can this be?


"Every set of beliefs introduces its own logic and its own constraints."
Source: Distinguishing Spiritual from Temporal Power, Inventing the Individual, The origins of Western Liberalism, Larry Siedentop, 2014

When you claim to have rationally derived a point of view or behavior this is only from your perspective, individual, group, culture, nation.

"..to a decision scientist, “rational” means “consistency with
some model.” Rational decisions are not necessarily dispassionate,
nor well reasoned, nor selfish. They are not even necessarily good

decisions, from others’ perspectives. They simply are consistent."

Therefore Islam/Muslims inform evil in time within whatever Public Square into which they are allowed. The fact all Muslims are not involved at once is irrelevant they never are it does not stop the terror against Other nor the subjugation of women and that I believe is the point. 

What has ISIS in Iraq to do with Birmingham? As power builds what happens in both places? Enabling of Liberty Equality? Democracy strengthened? Security strengthened? ISIS and the Birmingham Muslims will not be back under another name? They will because the Islamic codex which creates ISIS and the Birmingham Muslims each and every generation is still in the Public Square - the Quran and the exemplar Mohammad.


"A house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure, permanently, half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved — I do not expect the house to fall — but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing or all the other. Either the opponents of slavery will arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate extinction; or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become lawful in all the States, old as well as new — North as well as South." Lincoln 1835

This is not going to stop until Islam is removed from the Public Square. There is a choice between slave or maximum relative independence based upon Liberty, Equality (inclusive of women), and Fraternity. As Lincoln saw clearly you cannot be half slave and half free you in the end have to make a choice.

Given the nature of cultural war I am possibly not going to be around to tell you I told you so and I am fully aware you will do nothing, just for the record. I just suggest you reflect on my theory Maslow's level 1 allows for a false perception cultural harmony is possible even with diametrically opposed ethics within the Public Square but would like to point out there is no inherent ethical conflict in a can of beans.

An Historical Research, Negroes and Slaves and as Citizens and Soldiers, By George Livermore 1863 provides a rather disturbing indication of the types of excuses humans use to accept 'evil' in their midst based on future bias and wishful thinking surely the 'rational' and just view will in the end prevail - major schism can and will be avoided. Trouble is the definitions of 'rational;' and just are not the same. Tony Blair may have been wrong on a few issues but on this one he is not.


The reality is this the Western Construct of Freedom of Religion and multiculturalism is enabling terror and major schism to be manufactured unhindered in time and space internal and external. 

Unless the obvious truth of psychological research is grasped regards the influence of cultural codex textual and exemplar (messianic) templates on societal outcomes when such a codex contains a genocide construct of Other be it religious or secular, this very dangerous policy paradigm, which deals only with ideological systems symptoms rather than the ideological system itself, accusing and punishing detractors of such madness with labels of insanity, Trolls etc. Islamic/Muslim terror and major schism continues with increasing political elite acceptance within the Public Square of ethical constructs of oppression. It does not have to be this way.

Cultural psychology determines an adherents behavior is created via a genetic propensity and cultural indoctrination.

Now you take out ISIS and Birmingham Muslims 
has this solved humanities problem?

Does the culture still exist? Therefore.....


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...

It is not a matter of stigmatising nor erroneous stereotyping it is a matter of the evidence.

Monday, July 14, 2014

Take Time To Challenge Your Perspective. - Monastic life is a teenage rebellion against Nature


Take Time To Challenge Your Perspective.

Monastic life is a teenage rebellion against the inherent constraints of the reality of life imposed by Nature. Having no power to hold to account or punish Nature for its temerity in so constraining human desires from being fully realised in all its facets we seek shelter from our natural desires by constraining ourselves even further and call it good.

It would appear to me such an approach on balance has informed more evil than good as to do so requires the construct of cultural exemplar behavior of increasing tyranny which invariably is reflected in societal relationships of an oppressive nature.

Religious faith inherently sets the lowest bar from which the psychological comforting notion of equality is attained. Faith seeks to negate the existence of the inherent hierarchy of the secular state, in fact ‘reality’ where equality simply does not exist. Inferiority is explicit. Failure is explicit.

Faith obliterates Inferiority by linking humans directly to the Big Cheese, adherents are as ONE with the Master, psychological comforting notion of equality with the one in charge at the top the Father at the very starting point the lowest bar - Faith. 

Psychological comforting notion of despite being on the lowest rung of the secular seeing oneself as connected to the highest rung of power to negate feelings of inferiority and subservience-all the while existing daily within the 'reality' of a relatively severe religious hierarchy.

Faith obliterates Failure with a bar so low there is no such thing as Failure no matter the crime, just Mercy, Forgiveness, in fact Love –  Love society’s greatest prize acceptance with all your warts-finally a perfect Family - Perfect Father, Perfect Mother - at last a 'real' home. Without even putting pen to paper – you’re in the in-group – just say yes – and follow the program.

Just reflect upon the pedophilia within the Catholic Church – Is Pope Francis asking for Justice (Imposition of the secular label Failure with the penalty inherent) or Forgiveness for sin (Augustinian acceptance of inherent human weakness of habit-requires fervent reflection on the divine presence within)?

Trouble is believing in irrational constructs requires irrational behaviors to maintain it. Other will and does pay a heavy price for your indulgence.

Intelligence is no defense in justifying belief in nonsense for it has been found higher relative intelligence simply provides greater adeptness in counter argument despite the relative merits of the argument, in fact it tends to reinforce belief even if ‘reality’ clearly shows an unjustified bias.

Believing in nonsense takes no aptitude, and derives for those willing to exhibit increasing dedication to nonsense increasing plaudits no matter how manifest the damage either physiological or physical to oneself or Other – as the Muslim Australians involved in genocide in Iraq clearly demonstrates.

"Focal points—like cooperation itself—aren’t necessarily good or
bad. Focal points can help us reach consensus in group discussions
and help us negotiate to a mutually beneficial outcome. However,
they can also lead to unwanted collusion. Focal points provide
a potential tool for increasing the efficiency with which we
collaborate, for better or worse.
....

Regulations are often criticized because they limit our freedom of choice and there are surely situations were those criticisms hit their mark but the idea we are free to choose is based on the idea of the single decision maker acting in isolation as game theory shows sometimes we are better off restricting our own choices counterintuitive as that may seem.
" Source: Behavioral Economics: When Psychology and Economics Collide, Professor Scott Huettel, Duke University

I am not claiming dedication to nonsense applies only to the religious inclined it just happens to affect the greatest relative number of humans.

I simply suggest the focal point of Liberty must be shifted from Freedom of Religion to Maximising Relative Independence and humanity will have a greater chance of a flourishing life restricting our choices of what Ideology Religious and Secular are allowed into the Public Square based upon this new focal point of Liberty.

If you developed a counter argument before you completed reading the above your time is wasted.

Now is the time.

Tuesday, July 1, 2014

These same factors affect many more millions in Other cultures yet the relative level of violence and major schism do not occur.

What’s Behind Latest Nigeria Attacks by Boko Haram? By: Liz Harper, United States Institute of Peace, February 25, 2014

"According to the (United States Institute of Peace) report, unemployment, illiteracy, and weak family structures make or contribute to making young men vulnerable to radicalization while itinerant preachers capitalize on the situation by preaching an extreme version of religious teachings and conveying a narrative of the government as weak and corrupt."

Why Nigerian Youths Join Boko Haram – Report By Kareem Haruna— June 30, 2014

These same factors affect many more millions in Other cultures yet the relative level of violence and major schism do not occur. Other cultures have 'preachers', secular and religious, who could be determined as 'itinerant' yet the behavioral variance of the culture does not include the relative level of violence and major schism Islamic preachers inform be they 'itinerant' or not.

I was listening in Australia to a report on domestic violence where a radio announcer proposed economic circumstances may be the 'cause' of domestic violence the response from the researcher on domestic violence was rightly 'many more men are not violent against women even though they are subject to poverty'. What the researcher was intimating was just because there may be a statistical correlation this does not in anyway mean it is the actual cause.

Let us test the veracity of the argument of the United States Institute of Peace report via critical thinking:

Such proposed contributory factors can be determined as invalid immediately one finds increasing numbers of examples which do not accord to the same, statistically they can no longer be regarded as extremes (outliers) - just two examples of thousands, Osama bin Laden and the Australian Muslims participating directly or indirectly in supporting Muslim genocide against Other occurring in the case of Iraq right now not in some tribal ancient past.

I do not have the breakdown of the economic status, etc. of those joining Boko Haram but given current and past actions of Muslim youth and older joining Muslim terrorist groups statistically for me the non-existence of those counter to the within United States Institute of Peace report would be a nonsense for which I am sure data can be found. Why would it be any different?

In fact all you have to do is to find just one example which does not conform to the reports argument to prove it false. Why? Because unless they can explain why a person who does not fit, exists within the terrorist organisation the 'real' cause cannot be as they say it is as this person simply falls outside the logic. One statistically, ,,, three maybe... more than this you are starting to have real statistical problems calling these extreme (outliers).

Australia has more than a hundred citizens involved with Muslim terror organisations with many more sympathetic to the cause and unable to leave to join because their passports have been cancelled - how do these fall under the reports cause for joining terror groups?.

These persons Muslim women and men, Osama bin Laden and the Australian Muslims, were/are not subject to unemployment, illiteracy, and weak family structures nor where their lives in the main subject to 'itinerant' preachers, the preachers they were subject to whereas with the Muslim cleric who called for a jihad against Christmas in Australia was from the Main Mosque in Sydney was not at all an 'itinerant' - quite the opposite. Yet the ethical construct of such a call underlies the genocide against Other around the world.

As with 'Why Nigerian Youths Join Boko Haram' one needs the cultural ethical codex construct of Other and women already in place to enable the Islamic not mickey mouse inspired joining in with terror.

Culture determines ethical constructs of Other which enable genocide and subjugation of women not unemployment, illiteracy, and weak family structures nor 'itinerant' preachers.

Unemployment is due to economic and cultural factors intertwined, illiteracy due to cultural derived education systems, 'weak family structure' (whatever that means) is framed by cultural codex (individual group behavioral variance determined by the culture) and even the 'preachers' themselves itinerant or otherwise are formed directly from the exact 'same' cultural foundation codex - Islam. What is the common denominator? What is always present never never absent? Just by statistical correlation alone which approaches, in fact is 1?

It all comes back to this:

Cultural Foundation Codex (genetic, (con) textual authority and exemplar (messianic) templates)=Ethics=Ideas= Motivation=Consistent Cultural/Adherent Behavioral Variance('spectrum')=Cultural Action For and Against Other.

And that any number of so called ‘moderates’ self-described or otherwise within such an ethical construct makes no difference to the outcome in this case for Other and women:

"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)

The answer to the Nigerian, in fact humanities tragedy regards the outcomes derived from the ethical construct which is Islam:

Change the Architect and Builder or Change Nothing.

Rich or poor. Illiterate or literate, strong family weak, preachers standing straight or leaning left or right do not remove Islam from the Public Square major schism continues until either Islam has triumphed or Liberty, Equality, Fraternity for All. It is your choice.

Freedom which enables the crushing of Liberty is not a good.

Why did they really join why do they join from whatever culture into terror against Other this is why and how to stop it occurring in your and my Public Square:

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...

Sunday, June 29, 2014

It is an example of how Democracies in time and space are just as likely to inform Tyranny as Liberty when Democracies allow diametrically opposed ethical constructs to fester within the Public Square.

Two Diametrically Opposed Ethical Constructs Within the Same Public Square.

What must Happen?
An Historical Research, Negroes and Slaves and as Citizens and Soldiers, By George Livermore 1863

This is a reflection of how Democracies work. It is an example of how Democracies in time and space are just as likely to inform Tyranny as Liberty when Democracies allow diametrically opposed ethical constructs to fester within the Public Square. The fact is the US could still have slavery as an ethical construct within the Public Square if the political power was balanced in the other direction or if General Robert E. Lee had advanced on the North when Lee had the North militarily on their knees.

It is not as if there were none of sufficient statue who had forecast major schism because of the diametrically opposed ethical constructs within the same space of the United States of America.

“Mr. Jefferson Davis, on the 29th of April, 1861, in his message, says: -

……

“As soon, however, as the Northern States that prohibited to African slavery within their limits had reached a number sufficient to give their representation a controlling voice in the Congress, a persistent and organized system of hostile measures against the rights of the owners of the slaves in the Southern States was inaugurated, gradually extended. A continuous series of measures was devised and prosecuted for the purpose of rendering insecure the tenure of property in slaves.

….

“With interests of such overwhelming magnitude imperiled, the people of the Southern States were driven by the conduct of the North to the adoption of some course of action to avoid the danger with which they were openly menaced. With this view, the Legislatures of the several States invited the people to select delegates to Conventions to be held for the purpose of determining for themselves what measures were best adapted to meet so alarming a crisis in their history.” – National Intelligencer, Tuesday, 7 May, 1861.”

....

“The associate of Mr. Davis, Mr. Alexander H. Stephens (Vice-President, as he is called,) thus frankly avows his sentiments in a speech, delivered at Savannah on the 21st of March, 1861: -

“The new constitution has put to rest for ever all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institutions, - African slavery as it exists amongst us, that proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. JEFFERSON, in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the ‘rock upon which the old Union would split.’ He was right. What was conjecture with him is now a realized fact.”


An Historical Research, Negroes and Slaves and as Citizens and Soldiers, By George Livermore 1863, p3-4

With Islam what does Humanity have to do to try and avoid major schism - recognise there is a clear ethical conflict and: Change the Architect and Builder or Change Nothing

Sunday, June 22, 2014

Do you have that 'right'?

Image source: Aussie jihadi in Iraqi executions MARK SCHLIEBS AND PAUL MALEY THE AUSTRALIAN JUNE 21, 2014 12:00 AM  Paul Maley
"Chief executive Craig Niemann said having a mosque in Bendigo (Council) did not take away anyone's rights - in fact, it showed a respect for others from different backgrounds."

Mosque approved amid fear and anger Bay Post By EMMA-JAYNE SCHENK June 18, 2014, 9:52 p.m.

Were the rights of the many victims of Islam today yesterday not 'taken' away from them?

Why is tomorrow on Australian soil (or any where else for that matter) to be any different?

Tell humanity Chief executive Craig Niemann 'Why' in time and space it will be different in Australia when it has not is not elsewhere for exactly the same reason as exist in Australia Islam being allowed into the Public Square?

Bendigo Council if this was instead a Nazi pictured throwing a gas canister into a concrete 'shower room' would you have approved the building of a Nazi education center in the middle of Bendigo? Well this is what you have done. Islam has if you had only taken the trouble to check the exact same genocide construct of Other. You support.....?

Where do you think cultural ethics are derived from? Not cultural foundation codex (textual and exemplar (messianic) templates)? Please explain then how a cultures behavioral variance - ALL OF IT not just the little bit in this corner or that you obscenely utilise to justify the unjustifiable?

Nothing in Islamic codex which at all supports such an act as the Nazi codex. Ignorance, wishful thinking and future bias should not be a basis for societal decisions.

Count the bodies connect the dots for the sake of not only Bendigo because genocidal constructs such as Islam and the Nazi clearly recognise no artificial boundaries ethical or otherwise.

Aussie jihadi in Iraqi executions MARK SCHLIEBS AND PAUL MALEY THE AUSTRALIAN JUNE 21, 2014 12:00 AM Paul Maley

A Christian Convert, on the Run in Afghanistan NYT By AZAM AHMEDJUNE 21, 2014

Libyan human rights activist shot dead in Benghazi FRANCE 24 2014-06-26

Sydney teenagers head for Iraq SMH Natalie O'Brien Date June 28, 2014

Syrian Teens Murder Sister for Islamic "Honor" BEIRUT/TRIPOLI, Lebanon— Friday, June 13, 2014


Video: Missing French schoolgirl ‘joining jihadists in Syria’ Richelle HARRISON PLESSE Latest update : 2014-06-21

And the rest burning buildings and broken bodies and lives since the seventh century to this very day.
Sharrouf in Iraq: The image showing Khaled Sharrouf and executed Iraqis.: AUSTRALIAN jihadists fighting with the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham are carrying out massacres of captured Iraqi prisoners and participating in some of the most gruesome war crimes committed during the two-week-old Iraq insurgency.

If you can disprove Chief executive Craig Niemann and the Bendigo Council that my assertion and in fact this Australian Muslims(not a Mickey Mouse supporter) assertion that Islam the construct you have allowed so freely into your Public Square enables the justification and authorisation consistently constantly from Muslim generation to generation of the murder, euphemistically under the labels of 'grievous harm' or 'severest penalty' of Other, you have the 'right' to be aggrieved by my accusation that you and the Bendigo council have acted in a detrimental manner towards the welfare of humanity not just your Bendigo constituents. 


And the rest burning buildings and broken bodies and lives since the seventh century to this very day.

Do you have that 'right'?

Tuesday, June 17, 2014

SBS: “WITHOUT OUR DIFFERENCES, WE WOULDN'T BE THE SAME” : PROMOTING A GENOCIDE MISOGYNISTIC ISLAMIC CULTURAL CODEX IS NOT A SOCIETAL GOOD.

The Reality: 'Join In' With SBS and a Genocide Misogynistic Construct and the Destruction of Liberty

Where I ask is the image of a Nazi supporter for The Nazi have exactly exactly the same cultural codex construct of Other as Islam?

Diversity of diametrically opposed ethics which enable a genocide misogynistic construct within the Public Square is not a good. Colouring it in with a different stencil does not make it any more palatable.

The purposefully chosen smile and oh so beautiful symmetrical white as white correlated european facial features and complexion does not hide the thousands of grim and tortured faces of europeans and so many other cultures, even today broken victims of such a codex Islam informs particularly for women. Which makes the depiction even more sickening given the reality.

What has happened in todays news, what happened in yesterdays news, what will happen in tomorrows news which determines the Australian SBS a promoter of terror and major schism along with those persons who have lent themselves to such a dangerous deluded state riven by wishful thinking and future bias - Pathological Altruism.

Muslim terrorists kill dozens of Kenyans who fail Islam quiz By Associated Press June 16, 2014 | 12:59 am
- and the rest.

The Different Cultural Cuisines at Maslows Level 1 contains Societal Benefits because there are no ethical disputes inherent in a can of beans, but having a different cultural codex construct of Other particularly of women as Islam clearly does applying above Maslows Level 1 leads to Major Societal Schism. Where do you think SBS in time and space, Islamic terror is generated from the back of a cornflake packet? Bloodied bodies simply fall from the sky?

Again I ask "Where is the image of a Nazi supporter for The Nazi have exactly exactly the same cultural codex construct of Other as Islam?"



7/7/2014
What is Join In all about? Promoting Societal Acceptance of a Misogynistic Genocidal Cultural Construct - Islam.

The image in promoting SBS 'Join In' with a Muslim woman draped in an Australian flag who proclaims wearing  Muslim ascribed clothing causes her to be regraded as unintelligent is a misunderstanding of the nature of cultural indoctrination. Yes of course it is wrong to determine merely by skin color, clothing, secular or religious affiliation ones level of intelligence.

The fact is IQ has nothing to do with whether or not you realise you are subject to a cultural construct which is demeaning and in fact dangerous to the associated gender. Decision making process formed in the main from 1-5 age based upon pleasure and pain dependent upon cultural codex (textual and exemplar ( messianic) templates) reference points and probability of cultural pleasure and pain being applied is what determines if you allow yourself to be subject to or involve yourself in the most draconian of cultural constructs and processes such as genocide against Other being perpetrated even by Australian Muslims now in Iraq.

Also such a process of cultural indoctrination leads to a consistent, constant, cultural behavioral variance, any changes from this variance are due to Others ethical construct blockers or enhancers within the Public Square - the culture itself only allows behavior outside the cultures behavioral variance to the degree its enforcement mechanisms both for internal adherence as well as external acceptance can be fully realised.

What is happening in Australia as these enforcement mechanisms are being realised - you see no change in Muslim social enforcement - none at all? No increasing pressure for internal and external attacks against Other nor cultural pressure for Muslim women to adhere to Muslim dress code? No increasing political pressure for Australian laws to align with Islamic?

Being Albert Einstein or a mere mortal makes no difference - the point is, is it 'right' given the development of philosophically derived human rights reference points as of 2014 particularly regards women and Other  that we continue to allow females from whatever culture to be convinced  they are subject ALL THEIR LIVES to Mans 'leadership', continue to wear the shame of that subjugation and Other continue to be increasingly at unambiguous risk?

Consider the fundamental purpose of clothing - "it protects us from the elements."

Now ask yourself what "elements" does a women 'believe' intrinsically via cultural indoctrination a women needs to be protected from on the way from no veil - to burqa? The weather? Or M..... or even more to the point fellow W...?

'Complete Proof' within the Islamic behavioral variance 'spectrum' women being 'free' to choose their own clothing style is a lie and why.

Intelligent maybe who can tell, unacceptable in a society which believes in Liberty, Equality Fraternity for ALL? Or do we cross out Equality and Fraternity, simply determine Liberty to be subject to whatever cultural ethical construct you like despite the terror and major schism it enables.

Change the Architect and Builder or Change Nothing

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, June 16, 2014

'Complete Proof' within the Islamic behavioral variance 'spectrum' women being 'free' to choose their own clothing style is a lie and why.

At last a spark in the darkness.

Recognition as chains around the neck of a slave freely worn or not represents a political status of subservience unacceptable to Human Rights as they have been developed as of 2014. So its is with the mark of shame of Muslim veil-burqa of subservience to the 'leadership'/ownership of Muslim Man.
"The European Court of Human Rights has upheld a French ban on wearing face-covering veils in public, rejecting arguments that the measure violates religious freedoms.."

France: European Rights Court Upholds French Ban on Veils By ALAN COWELL JULY 1, 2014


'Complete Proof' within the Islamic behavioral variance 'spectrum' women being 'free' to choose their own clothing style is a lie and why.

Those women who support such a condition of 'freedom' existing within the Islamic codex are the most heinous perpetrators of an obscenity on their fellow gender.


"TWO female teachers from the Islamic College of South Australia have gone to court to fight against being unfairly dismissed based, in part, on their attire being considered inappropriate.

The teachers were sacked last year by the West Croydon school, which issued a warning to all female teachers - Muslim and non-Muslim - to wear a hijab head scarf or face the sack."

Furious debate as teachers at Islamic College of SA's West Croydon campus ordered to wear hijab or face sack INVESTIGATIONS EDITOR BRYAN LITTLELY ADELAIDENOW FEBRUARY 13, 2013


Even non-Muslim women 'forced' to wear a 'standard' Muslim hijab or face cultural exclusion - Are these women being allowed to choose 'freely' their own dress style even within a Western Democratic space? Conform or else! Is this 'Freedom'?

"Two thirds of legislators call for steps to ensure women correctly follow dress code...

Police in Tehran earlier this month launched a new drive against non-compliance of the female dress code. Officers were deployed on the capital’s biggest roads, and women — drivers and passengers — checked." 
Iran MPs demand stronger veil law enforcement, June 15, 2014 Gulf News

"Both need to understand that whatever the culture, the woman has the right to decide what she puts on her body and the right to walk out wearing whatever she wants without being subject to harassment.” We Must Put an End to Street Harassment, Morocco World News Friday 13 June 2014 - 12:13 by Saba Naseem

"“You know, I wasn't always wearing the hijab. At first I was harassed every time I went out, sometimes it was awful and just too much to bear. Then I wore the hijab and thought now that I’m a bit covered and more modest in the way I dressed, harassment would stop or at least diminish, but it didn’t. Then, I felt all guilty about it and was wondering maybe it’s me, maybe I’m not well covered and maybe I’m still a source of “fitna” and I felt very bad about it. I decided to wear the full niqab, no more colors (very dark colors, mostly black), and no more clothes that shows the figure.  I felt and still feel very good and at peace with my decision, but I would lie if I say that harassment stopped because it didn’t. I still get the harassing gazes and the harassing words about my eyes (though my face is covered). But at least, I feel that it’s not my fault.”"  Sexual harassment in Moroccan streets, who is to blame? Thursday 14 February 2013 - 22:42 Moroccan World News

I have just seen another article which questions the veracity of the notion a woman actually freely chooses to wear the "hijabs and niqabs". It is this article - Shariah Police Intensify Raids Prior to Ramadan Jakarta Globe By Nurdin Hasan Jun 12, 2014.

"The province’s shariah police, known as Wilayatul Hisbah, has roped in the police and the military to help in the raids, to be held “day and night to minimize shariah violations” — but which are targeted almost entirely at women wearing clothes deemed too figure-hugging...


We usually raid cafes where we find men and women who are not muhrim” — related by blood or marriage — “alone together,” he said. “We give them advice and if they fight back, we will take them to the office for further processing.”

'Alone together' the logic particularly 'Alone' in a cafe really is an Islamic cultural insanity.

Alone: having no one else present; on one's own. etc. "she was alone that evening" synonyms: by oneself, on one's own, all alone, solo, lone, solitary, single, singly; unescorted, without an escort, unattended, unchaperoned, partnerless, companionless.

Unless this 'cafe' is intent on making no income by having 'No one' in attendance such an assertion 'Alone' lacks credibility. These actions are once again to control women's sexuality to enforce Mans ownership nothing more - Man enforcing such a construct with the help of Muslim women - how disgusting.

Clearly from a relative psychological position surely there has to be greater cultural pressure for women to conform to a 'standard' not equally demanded of Man. This article proves this to be a false claim?


Islam via Muhammad's Quran textual codex clearly demands women submit to a draconian clothing regime relative to Man.

Both Men and Women are determined Quran SURAH 24.30/31 "..should lower their gaze and guard their modesty..". Equity, not at all.

As Mohammed then goes on in the Quran SURAH 24.31 to demand women not Man conform to a stringent dress code "..they (women) should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands -close relatives, small children and eunuch slaves ("male servants free of physical needs"). Also restriction upon any 'intentional movement' on behalf of women perceived "to draw attention to their hidden ornaments."

So not only are women subject to continual cultural examination as to their success or failure in meeting the Muslim dress code to hide 'beauty' and hidden ornaments, in other words suppress the mere representation of femininity, they are also subject to continual cultural examination as to their success or failure of meeting the Muslim 'intentional movement' code which may "..draw attention to their hidden ornaments.". 


As one can see from the article above Sexual harassment in Moroccan streets, who is to blame? Thursday 14 February 2013 - 22:42, Moroccan World News, the reality is these demands on women relative to Man are a very subjective sever psychological construct upon women, as it places women in a position where it can be claimed as it is by the behavior by Man in the article, Women either by failing to meet the appropriate Man Muslim (Mohammed) dress code or 'intentional movement' code can be and are subject to harassment and even as we know much worse.


Not satisfied with dress code and an intentional movement code Mohammad (Man) determined to set a 'speech code' to hold women accountable for their '..too complaisant of speech, lest one in whose heart is a disease should be moved with desire..' It is the women who is now responsible via her speech for inciting Mans 'desire', Man diseased is not responsible for his own passions. Woman are to 'stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display.'. And the Man, is Man to do the same? Just four walls for Man?



Quran SURAH 33:59 – “O Prophet(Mohammed talking to himself, I wonder why?)! Tell thy wives and daughters, and the believing women, that they should cast their outer garments over their persons (when abroad). That is most convenient, that they should be known and not molested.”

Why would a Man determine a 'dress code', 'intentional movement code' and 'speech code' is a 'good' regards women but not Man? Ownership 'known' and Control of women's sexuality by the individual Man and cultural Man via threat. The ever present threat for non-conformity inherent in SURAH 33:59 being determined as ".. guilty of evident unseemly conduct, the Punishment." in this case non-adherence under Quran SURAH 33:59 of being 'molested'.

Why is this?

Have Muslim women adhering to the constructs demanded above, by the Mohammad (Man) defined 'dress code', 'intentional movement code', and 'speech code' ever stopped to think - "Hang on a minute, a Man wrote these rules of cultural behavior for women, could it be as in real life Man was/is after something for his own benefit, to excuse certain exploitative Male behavior under the Man made cloak of divine authority?" 

Why is it Mohammad has made no similar demands on Man, himself, not "to draw attention to their hidden ornaments." or Mans 'beauty' or Mans speech? Man cannot by his 'beauty' or intentional movement or speech incite sexual desire within women or even other Men? 

If as a Muslim woman or Muslim Man you have experienced such desire means clearly an inequitable rule exists - for the 'sin' is the same and why it came to be is the same - as inequity exists someone individual and/or group had to benifit and another individual and/or group had to lose from such an arrangement.

You may claim even after considering and ignoring the arguments and examples above at least a billion persons are of the same mind, this is not proof you have not all been tricked into believing a nonsense as current psychological research clearly proves. As the chinese proverb states it only takes five persons to say a Tiger is in the market place for it to be true. For some it only takes one.


You are that gullible? I cannot claim to be any less but only hope to be able when push comes to shove to be able to accept I have been mislead once someone has revealed an inconvenient truth as to my existing beliefs.


The shaming and blaming of women for harassment even rape, even personal and other societal catastrophes for not adhering to imposed cultural dress constructs revolve around Mans desire to control women's sexuality and enforced individual (husband, father, brother, uncle, ...) and Muslim cultural ownership of women as one would fence in and brand a cow or horse or ass - Freedom to be subject to such a construct strikes me as rather obscene.

The notion of the construct of Muslim Mans 'leadership' is in fact ownership  justifies Muslim Mans enforcement measures and oppressive subjective setting of  'dress code', 'intentional movement code', and 'speech code' which is adaptable in time and space to maximise the benefit to Man.

A Muslim woman may claim they are free to choose to wear the veil etc or not, but this is completely dependent upon non-islamic external cultural ethical constructs being able to inhibit Islamic Muslim normative enforcement mechanisms to stop the Islamic codex construct of women being enforced - Islam allows nothing. This can be seen in operation with the examples given in this examination of the Islamic notion of 'free' regards womens dress choice.

The degree Others secular no-islamic secular philosophical codex constructs of women 'are enforced' relative to the women's specific cultural foundation codex within the Public Square will determine the degree women from such cultures are enabled to break with inequitable and damaging cultural codex constructs.

The nature of the 'freedom' of choice is a non-islamic derived Freedom, not an Islamic, a Freedom which is circumscribed in time and space by the extent Islamic normative enforcement mechanisms can be applied within any Public Square. 


The political elite in any society determining such an Islamic construct of women is a 'good', by for instance portraying the veiled woman Muslim as a 'good', is doing a very great disservice to not only women but humanity in general for it promotes a societal construct which seeks to chain not free based upon an inequitable irrational construct - such constructs inevitably have more than one evil attached. Once one is chained who is next, for the justification however insanely derived for one now exists, why not another, and another as or more evil construct enforced as 'normal' from the same culture?

This is why SBS's 'Join In' imaging, by presenting a Muslim women wearing a veil as a societal 'good' is so very destructive to womens rights, and the potential for Muslim women to break away to a cultural codex which enables maximised independence - it is a disturbing disgusting act of pure vandalism against the potential of women to achieve a flourishing life - pure cultural relativist pathological altruism. 

So a woman claiming it is her choice to wear a veil or not is a choice enabled by the secular not the religious. One may argue it does not matter. They would be wrong because the choice in itself is circumscribed, what may be able to be chosen this week may not the next, the mere fact the veil is a part of the choice represents a real cultural demand to conform in force in the Public Square, otherwise the veil as an option would not exist in the mind of the woman.

There is no such thing as Freedom only the relative independence fellow humans (cultures) and Nature enable at a particular point in space and time.

Yes in a culture a slave may argue slavery is good and they are quite happy being a slave - it is a cultural artifact but does this make it right, a 'good'?

All cultures build palaces based upon an 'Architects' design (cultural foundation codex (textual and exemplar ( messianic) templates) some only have four walls within which women are able to realise their 'full' potential - Men have?

Simply stating 'it', harassment and demeaning of women, happens elsewhere one has to be concerned how 'it' is relative to a current women's cultural ethical circumstances within the whole cultural behavioral variance not simply the so called 'good' end.

For women have to live under the whole cultural Male behavioral spectrum derived from the cultural codex, to take simply the 'good' end and say therefore everything is 'right' with the culture is a dangerous lie under which women have to exist.

One must then ascertain although 'it' happens in Other cultures is the spectrum under which women have to suffer better or worse? Is another cultural codex offering a greater chance overall for a women to achieve a flourishing life despite the fact 'it' has not been completely eradicated in Other's culture?

If 'it' is much less in the Other's culture a true test of the nature of your own culture is to attempt to change cultures, move palaces - if this is relatively dangerous - you have your answer.


Muslim women claiming they freely choose and Islam enables them to choose freely what to wear when Muslim women themselves are forcing other Muslim women to conform to an Islamic 'standard' template is gross hypocrisy and even worse it perpetuates women's subservience to Man and effectively limits woman's capacity to achieve a flourishing life. And worse enables Man to continue to blame women for Mans own atrocities against women. This is what you are enabling.


"Those who defend the right of women to wear the niqab under the banner of religious freedom gloss over the fact that this “freedom” is often dictated by social pressure. Those who oppose it under the banner of secularism and the oppressive nature of the niqab are making their own assumptions about Muslim women’s motivations." 
I was forced to wear the veil and I wish no other woman had to suffer it By Nesrine Malik 8:02PM BST 20 Sep 2013

Nesrine Malik's argument contains a conundrum, particularly since the whole article is proof the last quoted sentence in the paragraph above has to be a false assumption - Muslim women’s motivations, as are Muslim Mens are culturally derived 'dictated by social pressure' consciously or otherwise. Therefore a Muslim women may determine wearing the hijab or any other Islamic cultural clothing artifact are 'freely' chosen where clearly it cannot be and the observation from a secularist or religious perspective such Islamic clothing are an oppressive construct is not negated by the mere fact those being subject to it believe it to be otherwise. 

It is the same as proposing a slave is satisfied with their circumstance and therefore it is 'right' the slaves view should be respected. Slavery in this slaves case should be accepted as a good and no censure for such a construct should therefore be enabled across society - Liberty of the idea of slavery should be respected. I would suggest 'often dictated by social pressure.' must be changed to 'dictated by social pressure.' and the second quoted sentence be removed to reflect reality in space when subject to the Islamic codex construct of women Muslim women, and even at times as we see above non-Muslim women, being 'free' to choose their own clothing style is a lie. 

This is the whole point of this site Muslims and their erstwhile supporters cannot cannot have it both ways - either Islam informs woman's 'Right' to freely determine their own clothing code or it does not - clearly just with only the evidence above Islam in time and space does not allow Muslim women and even at times non-Muslim women to freely choose therefore Islam does not. In fact Islam can clearly be shown to be utilising harsh measures to enforce womens conformity which are not applied in the same measure to Muslim Man.

When cultural foundation codex creates a cultural ethical construct it necessarily sets up the obligation to enforce within the culture and given there exist many cultural codex constructs for the same entity and/or interrelationship which may be diametrically opposed within the same space and time mechanisms to justify and authorise process against Other's ethical codex construct of the same  entity and/or interrelationship. One would expect as the lack of justification, equity, enabling exists for any entity and/or interrelationship within a codex the such as the Islamic codex construct of women the more draconian the methods either detailed within the cultural codex textual or via cultural codex exemplar (messianic) templates developed in proportion to the irrationality of the construct itself will exist within the Public Square.

The degree these cultural codex can be enforced within the Public Square is dependent on the relative enforcement mechanisms able to be developed relative to Others capacity to nullify them. Assuming in time a heinous construct of inequity will not in time become accepted as a cultural 'right' and that somehow it is an intellectual 'good' to enable the following to be publically supported in Society

"Honour killings are the murder of women deemed to have brought shame or dishonour on their family.
Uthman Badar was scheduled to argue that such acts are seized on by Westerners as a symbol of everything they dislike about another culture." - 
Festival of Dangerous Ideas: 'Honour killings' talk cancelled  Alexandra Back, Michael Koziol SMH June 24, 2014

is extremely dangerous for it sends a message the political elite have determined its allowance into the Public Square as an acceptable construct - one simply has to reflect does such allowance increase or decrease the chance of honor killings now occurring in society by allowing someone to say the objection of the 'West' to honor killings is based upon ignorance and bigotry against other cultures and not upon the complete injustice and inequity relative to Man it informs? 


I repeat words and sentences are not strung together for no purpose they as the cultural foundation codex informs action.

Activists horrified over 'honour killing' | SBS News
May 28, 2014 - One Australian community worker says women here (Australia - anywhere Islam exists) are at risk too, and she recently had to talk a father and son out of killing a family member .

"A mother of three from Manchester was murdered by her "jealous" husband because he believed she was "too westernised".
Rania Alayed case: Wife murdered by 'jealous' husband 4 June 2014 Last updated at 15:04 BST

"too westernised"='too independent of Man' we are to excuse this notion to enable oppression even in our own space?


To propose the veil and upwards in severity of dress is in no way integral to the paradigm of creating the 'subservient' female and nor connected directly to the Muslim behavioral variance enforcement mechanisms all the way to Honor Killing needs to be proved. For clearly the codex of subjugation exists the enforcement mechanisms to make sure the codex construct of female are acted out each day exist.

7/7/2014

Utilisation of "I am intelligent therefore I as a woman in wearing Islamic cultural ascribed clothing have made a rational decision to do so, therefore what I am wearing is not an oppressive construct." misses the point the level of any persons intelligence or the degree their decision is rationally derived (even from an external cultural perspective) has no bearing on whether or not a person is able to determine from their own cultural perspective the degree they may be subject to an oppressive cultural construct.  

Firstly there is a clear misunderstanding of what rational means, an example of this is the determination terrorists are in the main rational beings - not insane outliers. Most people who see the horrific Muslim derived genocide across the Middle East and Africa would determine such acts as irrational. Outside the norm. The trouble is these persons are no different than you or me, as psychologist researchers looking into why 'ordinary' German persons became involved in Nazi inspired atrocities discovered. They simply are utilising some cultural model reference points driven by cultural rewards and punishment which enable these behaviors to be manifest.

"When we describe one of our friends as rational, we often want to imply that they are dispassionate, logical, thoughtful, and in control of their actions.

However, to a decision scientist, “rational” means “consistency with some model.” Rational decisions are not necessarily dispassionate, nor well reasoned, nor selfish. They aren’t even necessarily good decisions, from others’ perspectives. They simply are consistent."
"Behavioral Economics: When Psychology and Economics Collide" Professor Scott Huettel Duke University

The Muslim rationality determines, whatever the level of intelligence, based upon the Islamic model what is 'right'. In essence an Islamic developed bias which does not simply ignore feminist theory regards Muslim woman's actual state but cannot even rationally under an Islamic cultural model despite the veracity of the feminist position countenance its existence. For to do so destroys completely the Islamic construct of women. 

Muslim women who determine they are feminists cannot be Muslims at the same time as a slave cannot be half free. Which half? Intellectually anyone may understand the reasoning behind feminism as one would understand the mechanics of an engine but this does not make you an engineer. It is behavior which counts.


“I know her, and her (cultural) position is more important to her than speaking the truth to (cultural) power,” he said.
Oct 22, 2010 ... (CNSNews.com) – The head of the U.N. Population Fund blames stereotyping for the perception that Islamic societies are “backward” when it ...
www.cnsnews.com/.../statistics-show-women-fare-badly-muslim-countries-un -official-says-critics-are

It is actual behavior which counts. What was said in 2010 is it any different in the 2013 Global Gender Report despite increased access of Muslim women to education in some Muslim countries?

"The Middle East and North Africa
The Middle East and North Africa region has closed 59% of its overall gender gap this year. Compared to 2006, the region shows a very slight improvement, despite the fact that the Middle East region experienced a decrease in its overall score compared to last year. The region ranks the lowest on the Economic Participation and Opportunity and Political Empowerment subindexes with, respectively, only 39% and 7% of the gender gap being closed. Thirteen of the twenty lowest performing countries on the Labour force participation indicator are from the region as are eleven of the lowest on the Estimated earned income 
indicator. Seven of the lowest countries on the Political Empowerment subindex are also from the region. One of only two countries with a score of zero on the Political Empowerment subindex are from the region. On the Educational Attainment subindex, the region is in fifth place (before Sub-Saharan Africa). The region holds the fourth place on the Health and Survival subindex." 2013 Global Gender Report

Islam as a ideology (islamic cultural foundation codex (textual and exemplar (messianic) templates) informs what type of reality for women where Islam is able to take control of the political space - Liberty, Equality, Fraternity for ALL?


This is what the SBS broadcaster is promoting in Australia as a 'good'. The SBS fails to understand a cultural foundation codex which contains a misogynistic and genocidal construct allowed and promoted within any Public Square will in time and space inform the same. Clearly it is and has everywhere else and just as clearly the Islamic cultural enforcement mechanisms are intensifying within Australia - it is inevitable. For SBS to claim it is different in Australia and Australian laws will stop such behavior ignores the reality National Laws elsewhere have not stopped such behaviour as Muslim behavior in Australia itself clearly is showing with child marriages and development of a growing number of actual Muslim terrorists and supporters of the same within Australia itself.

The image in promoting SBS  Join In with a Muslim woman draped in an Australian flag who proclaims wearing  Muslim ascribed clothing causes her to be regarded as unintelligent is a misunderstanding of the nature of cultural indoctrination. Yes of course it is wrong to determine merely by skin color, clothing, secular or religious affiliation ones level of intelligence.

The fact is IQ has nothing to do with whether or not you realise you are subject to a cultural construct which is demeaning and in fact dangerous to the associated gender. Decision making process formed in the main from 1-5 age based upon pleasure and pain dependent upon cultural codex (textual and exemplar ( messianic) templates) reference points and probability of cultural pleasure and pain being applied is what determines if you allow yourself to be subject to or involve yourself in the most draconian of cultural constructs and processes such as genocide against Other being perpetrated even by Australian Muslims now in Iraq.

Also such a process of cultural indoctrination leads to a consistent, constant, cultural behavioral variance, any changes from this variance are due to Others ethical construct blockers or enhancers within the Public Square - the culture itself only allows behavior outside the cultures behavioral variance to the degree its enforcement mechanisms both for internal adherence as well as external acceptance can be fully realised.

What is happening in Australia as these enforcement mechanisms are being realised - you see no change in Muslim social enforcement - none at all? No increasing pressure for internal and external attacks against Other nor cultural pressure for Muslim women to adhere to Muslim dress code? No increasing political pressure for Australian laws to align with Islamic?

Being Albert Einstein or a mere mortal makes no difference - the point is, is it 'right' given the development of philosophically derived human rights reference points as of 2014 particularly regards women and Other  that we continue to allow females from whatever culture to be convinced  they are subject ALL THEIR LIVES to Mans 'leadership', continue to wear the shame of that subjugation and Other continue to be increasingly at unambiguous risk?

Consider the fundamental purpose of clothing - "it protects us from the elements."

Now ask yourself what "elements" does a women 'believe' intrinsically via cultural indoctrination a women needs to be protected from on the way from no veil - to burqa? The weather? Or M..... or even more to the point fellow W...?

Intelligent maybe who can tell, unacceptable in a society which believes in Liberty, Equality Fraternity for ALL? Or do we cross out Equality and Fraternity, simply determine Liberty to be subject to whatever cultural ethical construct you like despite the terror and major schism it enables.

"Sunni insurgents issue guidelines in mosques on how clothes should be worn to prevent women 'from falling into vulgarity'"
Iraq: Isis warns women to wear full veil or face punishment Reuters in Baghdad, The Guardian, Friday 25 July 2014 14.21 BST

As we have seen above for only a small number of examples Islam informs inforced cultural adherence to the veil through to the burqa via peer  group pressure, political elite pressure, parental pressure, Man pressure framed by the Islamic cultural codex - to claim therefore Islamic culture does not force women even those who claim and may even believe they are free to choose is clearly a lie. 


Change the Architect and Builder or Change Nothing.