Wednesday, December 17, 2014

'How was your latte?"

If you want to watch Plato skimmers (citizens who never look below the surface of their latte) in action watch the following. But I must advise given what has occurred since this episode was shown it may be very upsetting as it determines Islamic/Muslim cultural derived terror as 'little to do about nothing'.

To those who understand high relative levels of intelligence contains no inherent defense against being ignorant, just enables in this case one to be much more adept at justifying ones belief system however erroneous, it may simply be taken as another case study proving the validity of such a hypothesis.

Idiots in action and the definition of idiots is not found wanting regards these Circus members and guests.

These twits clearly suppose themselves to be the young intelligentsia in contact with 'reality' it is a shame none of them had the need for a latte they would have had to come face to face with how 'little to do about nothing' Muslim terror really is when you are the actual victim not the ones sneering on the side "How its all so overblown.".

If you ever see any of these citizens in the street make sure you ask them 'How was your latte?"

I sit this morning in café Poppy looking out towards the softly shadowed Australian War Memorial of .....

I sit this morning in café Poppy looking out towards the softly shadowed Australian War Memorial of dreams lost and dreams protected and I rejoice in the gift I have been granted, we have been granted by our forebears, those who courageously bore arms and those who stoically bore industry to enable us to have the means and more importantly the peace and security to sit quietly in any café in safety to reflect upon our past and imagine a better future.

That was the day before yesterday, in Australia today we no longer have what was very hard gained by blood and toil, betrayed by our very own gatekeepers politicians, parliamentarians, local Councillors and their failed policy advisers as well as our own apathy and ignorance of history and the fact different cultural codex constructs of Other determine we are not as humans all the same, our values ethics and derived cultural behavioral variance regards Other can be and are significantly different.

As in Germany in the 1930’s there is a Cultural genocide construct of Other in our midst and we as the Germans and those cultures surrounding Germany in the 1930’s ignore and minimise its imminent threat to our way of life and life itself at our peril.

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

We are assured 'moderates' are in charge for did they not tell us they were such, did they not wear “I love Australia” T-Shirts in front of the iconic Australian BBQ to assure us they were one of us. “Things could be much worse if it were not for us they assure us.” as each new cultural atrocity arrives, the “I love Australia” T-Shirts starting to look very worn along with Others patience and belief.

We, Other are to be comforted each time by the fact the full force of the genocide construct that is the Islamic/Muslim culture has not at this specific time and space been able to be fully realised - not yet they tell us. Well I ask what then are these broken bodies and broken lives that surround them mere tokens of what we can look forward to?

In chorus “It could be worse.” the politicians and their advisers chime in as atrocity after atrocity internal and external occur or have been fortuitously deflected, and in time they are right, it is so. It does get worse.

Humanity have heard this all before the apologists for tyranny believe by not confronting cultural tyranny head on surely the culture will see 'reason', they never do, for our 'reason' is not their 'reason' yet we still persist with a failed and dangerous strategy. We blame the extremists who could not exist without the non-extremists.

“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

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...

Malcolm Turnbull holds aloft the Western Christian cultural artifact the cross, ‘Love’ emblazoned on its apex, imbued with the full power of Western cultural belief and definition.

'A determined love': Malcolm Turnbull calls for Australians to stay united following Martin Place tragedy The Age Matthew Knott December 17, 2014

Malcolm Turnbulls suggestion the Western definition of ‘love’ will overcome the power of a cultures clearly defined genocide construct of Other and the very results not only in Australia’s own streets but strewn across neighbouring Nations and history itself from the very beginnings of this cultures creation, is based upon Malcolm Turnbull’s own Western cultural ‘rational’ model such acts of terror are completely irrational and surely reason (Western love) will enable intercultural peace to be attained.

No doubt this has happened before in the face of the exact same genocide construct at the gate or as in the case of Australia as elsewhere in time and space from within. 

What happened Malcolm Turnbull, did wishful thinking and future bias derived from misplaced belief in the power of one’s own cultural artefacts and definitions save the day. Surely as I can see the power and benefits derived from such beliefs and values surely this other culture can or will in time? Those that followed closely beside the likes of yourself in the past received what benefit from doing so?

Malcolm Turnbull this is the basis for your policy, ”This is the way I view the world should be, it is so obvious surely everyone will agree?”. Do you know what grave peril you place us all in by believing in the overwhelming certainty you own Western cultural derived view will surely prevail?

The flaw in Malcolm Turnbull’s argument, if he only took the time to check, is Malcolm Turnbull’s definition of ‘peace’ and ‘love’ are not the same as other cultures – the ‘love’ of which Malcom Turnbull refers to even if existed in another culture as he defines it is invariably circumscribed as to whom ‘love’ may apply.

Malcolm Turnbull and those who ascribe to his flawed view should reflect on why this may be the case. Those running in the streets of just two nations, Egypt and Iran, of the many shouting ‘Freedom!’, ‘Freedom!’ did these individuals and groups shouting this revered word mean the same thing in terms of the politic ‘Freedom’ would finally inform and the outcomes for Other and particularly women?

Malcolm Turnbull as one of our eminent cultural gatekeepers has to seriously reflect, has his notion of Western ‘love’ worked in the past, is it working now – understand Malcolm Turnbull there are two dead Other and two dead Muslims as a result of your ‘love’ Malcolm Turnbull. And there will be more will there not Malcolm Turnbull?

"The findings of the study indicate that citizens (Hofstede and Hofstede (2005)) of Islamic countries share similar cultural values that vary significantly with those of the Western countries."
Conceptualizing the Islamic Personality Model, Abdul Kadir Othman, Muhammad Iskandar Hamzah, Nurhazirah Hashim, Faculty of Business Management, Universiti Teknologi MARA, 42300 Puncak Alam, Selangor, Malaysia

Not one life lost is worth the price of having such a culture within, which enables such unfathomable grief from the loss of just one child let alone the thousands upon thousands we have seen and will see.

Malcolm Turnbull in two hundred years from now do you really believe your Western notion of ‘love’, in reality politically doing nothing, really is going to enable another such as I to sit in the morning in café Poppy looking out towards a softly shadowed Australian War Memorial of dreams lost and dreams protected and rejoice in the gift they have been granted by the likes of you.  Given the history of this Islamic/Muslim culture of genocide, 
what do you think that citizen will see, that citizen feel?

Hate for a genocide and misogynistic cultural construct is not misplaced, crying for understanding regards an Islamic/Muslim culture which from generation to generation frames hate against Other directly from its codex and informs consistently constantly tragic loss of life and the terror it brings in Australia as elsewhere in time and space clearly is misplaced.

Cultures justify and authorise terror the individual ‘few’ deliver it. The culture is responsible for terror and therefore must be held to account.

Tuesday, December 16, 2014

"No victim is the price of a cultures entry to the Australian Public Square understand or get out."

"No victim is the price of a cultures entry to the Australian Public Square understand or get out."

I had the terrible misfortune today to watch on the ABC Breakfast morning show (16/12/2014) a so called security expert saying the loss of two Australian lives was not as bad as overseas. Normalising Muslim terror - "Look it could have been worse." Obscene.

The exact same logic enabling exactly the same consequences by 'Normalising tyranny' is not new.

“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

Clearly for the ABC Breakfast commentator and their uninformed guest history has been written so fools can ignore it.

I repeat:

"No victim is the price of a cultures entry to the Australian Public Square understand or get out."

Tuesday, December 9, 2014

The paradox, even dare I say insanity, of holding such a notion of Is-Islam and Not-Islam, is .....

The paradox even dare I say insanity of holding such a notion of Is-Islam and Not-Islam, is because it is exactly the same logic as determining Is-Bull Elephant, Not-Bull Elephant without firstly explaining how an animal initially determined as one entity could suddenly be determined as two distinct entities comprised of diametrically opposed elements without any proof whatsoever as to where this schism between Is and Not occurs and nor provide justification as to why completely against the laws of nature (social psychology) such a condition has been enabled to occur in the first place.

Of critical importance when dealing with a culture, is which part of the behavioural variance radical-liberal-moderate-very dedicated/Pious-radical will in the end come to dominate, to attain the political space and associated systems reflective of the normative cultural belief and values. Not who we as Other wish would dominate, the radical-Liberal-moderate in part in relative degrees reflecting back Others own core ethical values, but who in reality in time will and does invariably set the cultural agenda.

Which end of the Bull Islam will determine direction the Bull shit end or the Bull trunk end? 

One can infer from the nature of the question, given the evidence presented below, the answer to this question is Crystal Clear, beyond doubt, except for the most dedicated delusionalist. Which is why the current Western cultural gatekeepers in charge of policy and outcomes in Western Public Squares are so dangerous to their own cultures survival.

In regards the Islamic/Muslim culture the answer, just one example of many, came in UK Birmingham. Just one other example of current note is ISIS. How many more of the thousands of examples of the Islamic/Muslim cultural perfidy do you need to determine having such a construct within the Public Square is a terrible mistake?

But firstly let us understand why it is rational to decide another culture as unworthy of having anything to do with, and does not represent a mental illness, a phobia, in coming to such a decision, as in the same way we would decide another person as untrustworthy and therefore not enter into a cooperative relationship with them because of the real possibility, as psychology determines it, of defection.

What does anyone before entering into a relationship of cooperation ask:

“Can I trust?

Am I valued?

Will I receive social support?

To the extent that an individual answers ‘yes’ to these questions, such a person will increase their level of cooperation with others, whereas answers of “no” will result in a decrease in cooperation.”

The following attachment should not be construed as particular to Islam for individuals as cultures will lie to preserve themselves, from the white-lie to lies of a much more detrimental misleading nature.

Lying (Taqiyya and Kitman) - Are Muslims permitted to lie?

What is disturbing regards the Islamic/Muslim culture is the extent to which the justification for intercultural lying exists within the Islamic/Muslim cultural foundation codex and tradition. A person lies to conceal the ‘real’ nature of their view and/or intent which in a specific time and space may be detrimental to them. For a culture to codify the authority to lie to such a degree surely sends a message that Other in time have something to be justifiably concerned about.

Also as we see above ‘trust’ is a primary requirement for cooperation a culture which clearly determines lying as a necessary tool for intercultural relations with Other specifically to mask the cultures ‘real’ intent surely on this basis alone such a culture, and their erstwhile supporters, have no right to determine those who believe such a culture untrustworthy must be suffering from a mental illness, a phobia.

As well as trust being important in evaluating any relationship we judge whether such a relationship is worthy of persevering with dependent upon the overall attitude the partner, be it an individual or cultural entity exhibits towards us. Yes we are aware a partner can be altruists at times cooperative but also maybe self-interested, competitive, and aggressive.

The point is, given the self-interest, competitive, and aggressive orientations-behaviour is/are a consistent, constant and possibly increasingly prevalent, there comes a point where whatever vestiges of altruism or cooperation may exist in the relationship are outweighed by the negative attributes of the partner individual or culture.

Which will be the defining Islamic/Muslim cultural attitude which will take precedence in informing intercultural orientations-behaviour in the relationship to Other: "Altruism-Enhancement of outcomes for Other, Prosocial orientation (a) Enhancement of joint outcomes (cooperation), (b) Enhancement of equality in outcomes (egalitarianism), Individualism, Enhancement of outcomes for self, Competition, Enhancement of relative outcomes in favour of self. Aggression, Reduction of outcomes for Other." (a)

In other words it may be the Islamic/Muslim cultural behavioural variance informs one, some or all of the above orientations-behaviours in a intercultural relationship to relative degrees dependent upon the existing societal social structure at a specific point in time,
but what in the end predominates to determine what happens, not whether or not you have a so call radical-liberal-moderate segment proclaiming altruistic or cooperative intentions towards Other, as this would be expected particularly when cultures are initially in the minority as not doing so will almost certainly have detrimental consequences.

As can be seen above this view of lying to Other about 'real' Islamic/Muslim intention is seen as a natural cultural/ethical value position for Islamic/Muslim cultural policy when dealing with Other. There are some from a Western rational model who may determine this is a terrible and unsubstantiated slander against Islam - I would simply remind such Other cultural rational models are not all the same - otherwise all cultures would be out at this very moment informing so called Death Cult behavior (Death Cults another multiculturalism invention).

I would also remind these Other words and sentences within a cultural codex simply did not turn up on the off chance the construct they inform may be needed, such words and sentences inform schema which are framed by real cultural experience over time and therefore serve a necessary cultural purpose otherwise they would not exist.

Each of us has our own view as to the extent we can 'trust', how much we are or will be 'valued', and the 'social support' we can expect from another individual or culture. Also we have differing views as at which point we believe an individual or cultures attitude towards us is such the partnership is voided. We can also make a judgement as to where the relative power resides within a personal and cultural construct which will in the end determine outcomes and how and to what degree these outcomes may impact upon us negatively or positively.

To make decisions as to the veracity of any relationship we require evidence such a partnership is worthy of continuance be it personal or intercultural. Let us examine whether in reality Islam can be trusted not to defect, or even as the evidence below appears to determine is not already in the process of defecting and therefore must be removed from the Public Square before it informs even greater damage against Other.

And importantly in time, if Is-Islam (given it even existed as determined by multiculturalism which it cannot in reality) really is the representative of the ‘true’ Islamic beliefs and values and being so, has the Islamic/Muslim codex (textual and exemplar (messianic) template) derived justification and authority to assume altruistic enforcer power to control Not-Islam (another non-existent multiculturalism pretend construct) and force it from the Public Square?

The evidence:

“The investigation found that some teachers and school board governors at the other schools were encouraging homophobia, anti-Semitism and support for Al Qaeda, sometimes inviting speakers who endorsed the establishment of a state run under Sharia law.

One school stopped music and drama lessons as well as Christmas and Diwali celebrations, and subsidized trips to Saudi Arabia for Muslim students.

In another school, the report found, girls and female teachers were discriminated against, and compulsory sex education, including discussions about forced marriage, was banned. Girls and boys seen talking for too long or considered flirtatious were reprimanded, while boys were given worksheets that said a wife had to obey her husband.

The report, released in July, highlighted Mr. Bains’s case and concluded that there had been a “coordinated, deliberate and sustained action, carried out by a number of associated individuals, to introduce an intolerant and aggressive Islamic ethos into a few schools in Birmingham.”

A Sikh Principal, Too English for a Largely Muslim School NYT By KIMIKO DE FREYTAS-TAMURADEC. 7, 2014

"• 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

As we can see in reality above in Birmingham does the  Islamic/Muslim "radical-liberal-moderate" part of the Islamic/Muslim behavioral variance exhibiting various degrees of public support for Others ethics (not necessarily on closer inspection as found in Indonesian research and surveys in Turkey to be actually reflective of Muslims 'real' beliefs and values) have the Islamic/Muslim culturally derived justification and authority and what should be reflected power to be able to enforce its Is-Islam view? It clearly does not.

Western Cultural Gatekeepers are you really telling us this finding, along with history stretching back to the seventh century, does not present a real danger to Other by continuing to allow Is-Islam being utilised as the 'real' Islam as the basis for public policy despite clear evidence to the contrary?

You are really prepared to take your own culture down to protect your ego.
"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

"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

Cultures justify and authorize terror, the individual adherent 'few' deliver it.

Why do cultures utilise terror, because there is an iniquitous construct they are attempting to impose internal and or external on Other and fear works.

"Fear can, .., be useful in inducing attitude change if the recipients of the message believe the danger applies to them and that they can do something to avoid it" (Dillard & Anderson, 2004; Olson & Zanna, 1993)

Think how the fear of what Islamic/Muslim culture can do has been internalized within via the multicultural construct of Islamophobia and also erroneously redefining religions as a race so the connotations of 'racism' and imagery of holocaust may now be linked to deflect justifiable criticism of ideological constructs of women and Other and enabling the determination those raising objection to such constructs are bigots, racists, right wing.

Such erroneous multicultural constructs can be clearly shown in Birmingham and Rotherham in northern England to enable tyranny to go unchecked as Western cultural gatekeepers paralyzed with fear of being labeled fail to do their duty. This is not 'induced attitude change' where there were no so called 'terrorists' in sight, where Islamic 'norms' were being realised via 'normal' very dedicated/pious Muslims utilising 'fear' to obtain the very political constructs the Muslim terrorists are promoting?

Who then is really in control of the cultural direction the Islamic/Muslim culture will take, those dressed after each Muslim atrocity in 'I Love Australia' with the Aussie BBQ as the inevitable backdrop the 'radical-liberal-moderate' end of the Muslim behavioral variance or the 'very dedicated/pious-radical' end of the Muslim behavioral variance? No consideration at all of a predetermined inflection point where data within a 95% confidence interval determines current policy has failed and it was never going to work anyway? No threshold of Muslim extremism and/or violence informing major schism where direction is to change?

"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)


Is the data showing, via.the Islamic/Muslim codex construct of Other, individual Muslim adherents of "conscience and a sense of responsibility" can be, have been given enough cultural power, not to stem, but to be able to stop increased Muslim terror and major schism? If not the policy of Is-Islam Not-Islam was doomed to failure from the very beginning.

Does the evidence show Is-Islam the radical-liberal-moderate part of the Islamic/Muslim cultural behavioral variance is the ’real’ Islam and therefore when push comes to shove it has the Islamic/Muslim codex justification and authority, and controls the reflected systems so Not-Islam does not appear or is diminishing along with terror and major schism in our Western streets? 

Is Islamic/Muslim cultural proclaimed altruism and cooperation overriding Islamic/Muslim self-interest, competitive, and aggressive behavior? If not what does this say about the Is-Islam, Not-Islam paradigm the basis for public policy?

And also is the cost of having the Islamic/Muslim culture in the Public Square really worth the tragic loss of life, enormous redirection of scarce resources and continuing pressure to have Western values align to the dictates of Islam or at the very least the existence of legislative and legal framework demanding citizens show no open disrespect/ hostility for such a genocide and misogynistic construct which clearly has no respect for Western values when able to control in time and space political space.

Who will rid us, via non-violent democratic means, of these dangerous inept Western cultural gatekeepers utilising the Is-Islam, Not-Islam lie to enable such an abhorrent cultural ideology to inform such increasing, not diminishing, negative tragic outcomes in our streets and across the world?

‘Not Islam’. It is just not going to stand up to any reasonable evaluation as increasingly the broken bodies and lives keep rolling in.

(a): quoted and utilized text from "Cooperation, The Political Psychology of Effective Human Interaction" 2008

Friday, November 28, 2014

The Delusion Family Central To the Creation of Values,Ethics and Behavior - Pro-Family is a NonSense For it Equals Pro-Oxygen - Who can Argue.

Family Central To the Creation of Values,Ethics and Behavior - Pro-Family is a NonSense For it Equals Pro-Oxygen - Who can Argue. Pro-Family is a political method of oppression under the guise of promoting 'good' values, values which Family as a cultural enforcing unit has no control over. 

It is in fact a method to culturally construct Family definition in a oppressive manner - scripted heterosexual Male dominance and ownership of what is moral. The very people who propose such oppression is right, determine other cultures cannot inform their version of oppression as well. The only common thread their delusional view of family serving exactly the same purpose.  This is were humanity have arrived the choice between two evils not a choice between good and evil. We have not moved very far which is not surprising for both came from the same spring.

"Open system also share the characteristics of negative entropy, feedback, homeostasis, differentiation, and equifinality. The law of negative entropy states that systems survive and maintain their characteristics internal order only so long as they import from the environment more energy than they expend in the process of transformation and exportation. The feedback principle has to do with information input, which is a special kind of energic importation, a kind of signal to the system about environmental conditions and about the functioning of the system in relation to its environment. The feedback of such information enables the system to correct for its own malfunctioning or for changes in the environment, and thus to maintain a steady state or homeostasis. This is a dynamic rather than a static balance, however. Open system are not at rest but tend toward differentiation and elaboration, both because of subsystem dynamics and because of the relationship between growth and survival. Finally, open systems are characterized by the principle of equifinality, which asserts that systems can reach the same final state from different initial conditions and by different paths of development." THE SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY OF ORGANIZATIONS -Daniel Katz & Robert L. Kahn - Book Review By - Dhiren N Panchal

Simply put - Adapt Improvise Overcome - to maximise "growth and survival" at each point in time and space the cultural politic required to realize more effectively the relationships/behavior derived from the cultural codex. This is what ISIS is doing nothing more or less, this is what all cultures do.

Accepting as valid at a specific time and space a cultures proclamation it has only peaceful intentions, and as the culture does not currently inform the same relative level of terror, major schism and oppression of Other and women consistently and constantly informed elsewhere in time, is a very dangerous thing to do.

What is responsible for individual behavior external and internal to culture?

Is family, although intimately closer to us as individuals, the ultimate definer of our beliefs, values and informed behaviors?

Will by simply determining 'Family' as the core determinant of 'values' and therefore Family must be considered primary really achieve anything other than ignoring the fact the parents derive the justification and authority, procedures and methods for their framing of infant-child-adolescent with beliefs, values. ethics and informed behaviors from the culture/ideology within which they exist?

The family is therefore not the prime source of an individuals values, ethics, beliefs in fact the family unit in a specific culture may be informing more harm than good to those around them and still be able to see themselves as 'good' under their cultural model of rationality.

There is no doubt the family are significant contributors to an individuals taking on a particular value system, but the family in my opinion in regards to derived values are of little importance, they simply apply what the culture they are within have determined as acceptable.

If you really want to achieve value change demanding a return to family 'values' or primacy of families without understanding these values are externally sourced, aligned and reinforced will achieve nothing. For any individual imbibed with the same cultural values, same reference groups, same peer groups, same institutions, not related to another in anyway, could just as effectively educate infant-child-adolescence in these values - as they do.

It is rather disconcerting those claiming that this is not possible, and it is only through the 'normal' parent related child paradigm true adherence to good values may be obtained, believe themselves very capable of imbuing non-relations young and old alike with cultural values which even differ significantly from what these subjects supposedly previously held.

It is not that the family is not important,for it is generally of prime importance to the individual and family group. Though for me this engenders a false view in my opinion the family is the central influence on life outcomes, The family clearly is not it is a bit player in the delivery of ethics and also importantly the value determinants informing the relative possibility of a flourishing life economically and socially for an individual, particularly for women are framed elsewhere.

How I ask will Family First's (just utilised as an example of this view) assertion returning taxes to the individual families improve values if they have already been set elsewhere and more particularly the success or failure of cultures/societies has a lot more to do with investment in the variables out sidet he family than within.

Which clearly Family First realise "prosperous nation builds up its infrastructure - roads, ports, power stations, airports and telecommunications. It also has strong defence capabilities and is able to afford the latest and best equipment for its defence forces". Such things have to be paid for with taxes. The concern here are values, and rightly so, but will being 'pro-family' really achieve such a goal of value change - what does pro-family mean regards such a notion when they have little or no say in determining those values in the first place?

Who is not pro-family, it is a nonsense position, it is the same as saying I am pro-oxygen. I wish those proposing pro-family would simply be honest and stop hiding behind such a notion and say what they actually mean - homosexuals should not be parents. Given there is no scientific proof homosexuals are any better or worse than informing the new generations of cultural values than heterosexuals I find this a rather unjustified position to take. In fact a rather cruel one for it seeks to deprive a person of a rather unique aspect of being human.

Want to improve values start with you own codex if it contains anywhere within an iniquitous construct of Other be they of homosexuals, women, or simply anyone not of your faith secular or religious change it and it will in time change down the line - otherwise nothing changes.

Until each human knows within their heart each daughter is my daughter, each son is my son, each mother is my mother, each father is my father we will let apathy and our Cultural Foundation Codex ‘Other Last – If At All’ be their last memory of us.

Saturday, November 15, 2014

David Cameron is being dangerously dishonest for such a statement reveals immediately previous and current public policy to combat Muslim extremism and terror is failing and worse will continue to do so.

""No, the root cause of the challenge we face is the extremist narrative. So we must confront this extremism in all its forms. We must ban extremist preachers from our countries. We must root out extremism from our schools, universities and prisons." David Cameron
David Cameron is being dangerously dishonest for such a statement reveals immediately previous and current public policy to combat Muslim extremism and terror is failing for if it was working these so called Muslim extremists would not exist in such increasing numbers in "our schools, universities and prisons" to pose a rising threat to the values David Cameron determines need protecting.

It is a dangerous dishonest statement for it proposes the 'narrative' of Muslim extremists is disconnected from the inferred existence of a Muslim non-extremist 'narrative'.

David Cameron is claiming the impossible which is
 nothing which exists within the Muslim non-extremist 'narrative' exists within the Muslim extremist 'narrative' to enable a Muslim non-extremist derived adherent to exhibit extremist behavior.

It is an impossible claim because it proposes two separate Muslim cultures exist, the same as determining two Nazi cultures exist an 'extremist' Nazi and a 'non-extremist' Nazi which would mean an individual infant-child-adolescent would not be provided with the mental schema to enable them to be regarded as part of the other group, not be supported in anyway by the other group - not connected in anyway socially, politically, psychically, even though the core ideology upon which they derive their behavior is exactly the same. David Cameron has invented two cultures even though it can be proved both adhere to the same Muslim 'narrative' because they are 'Muslims', they are not Muslims and not Muslims.

The statement is dangerously dishonest because it seeks to diminish the validity the connection to the actual Islamic/Muslim religious codex (textual (Quran) and exemplar (messianic) template (Mohammed)) by inferring the belief/ethics system of so call extremist Muslims are based upon some 'short story' 'narrative' which can in no way be reflective of the whole story. The real story of Islam is determined without proof as separate, even though the extremists themselves and many Other can show categorically it is the real story of Islam/Muslim culture as it has been since the seventh century.  

Why is David Cameron's statement so dangerously dishonest because it means a clearly failed policy is to be continued dealing with symptoms, the end product of the Islamic/Muslim educative system of infant-child-adolescence, while allowing the very non-delineated Islamic/Muslim cultural codex (textual (Quran) and exemplar (messianic) template (Mohammed)) to remain in the Public Square which provides the justification and authorisation for Muslim mental schema, the actual cause of each new generation of Muslims hatred for Other and oppression of women will change nothing,

The statement is dishonest in that seeks to propose the exact same Islamic cultural codex utilized to create "extremist preachers" outside a country will not create exactly the same in your own. It is an absurd logic which determines no country- nation actually creates "extremist preachers" they just appear from no where.

It is a logic which determines a recipe for a cake in one country will produce a totally different outcome utilising the exact same ingredients and methodology than in another. This is what multiculturalism is telling us is possible and if you refuse to accept such an dangerous absurdity you are called racists, bigot, etc.

For the 'extremism' to be accepted by any adherent in the first place requires a mental schema already in existence which informs the adherent the 'extremist' view is a justified and aurthorised part of the Islamic/Muslim cultures behavioral variance which can clearly be linked directly back to the Islamic codex, otherwise every culture would be informing the same terror and major schism as Islam. They are not.

Also these so called Muslim extremists are coming from self-described and externally described non-extremist families and communities this is clear proof David Cameron is being dishonest, this would not be possible if the extremist 'narrative' was separated from the whole Islamic story, the real story of Islamic/Muslim culture.

Therefore the real culprit is the Islamic codex not the "extremism from our schools, universities and prisons". 

' the root cause of the challenge humanity face is the Islamic/Muslim narrative' - Ban the Islamic codex or change nothing.

You might not like what I am saying but please I simply ask given the fact everyday people are being murdered by Muslims for cultural reasons, rather than utilise a flawed heuristic which enables you to sweep over what I am saying with renewed assurance you are right for the last child killed make the effort to take time to challenge your perspective.

Do you really believe on reflection the basis for my argument 'Cultures justify and authorise terror the individual 'few' deliver it.' is false?

‘Not Islam’. It is just not going to stand up to any reasonable evaluation as increasingly the broken bodies and lives keep rolling in.

I am wondering if the 'dangerous' personality traits may be more a derivative of culture, than mere genetic propensity?

Indirect Personality Assessment of the Violent True Believer J. Reid Meloy, Ph.D., Master Lecture Society for Personality Assessment, March 21, 2003

The McVeigh analysis (Meloy, 2003) appears to me to leave a lot to be desired, but Mohamed Atta's details may explain to some extent:

"The findings of the study indicate that citizens (Hofstede and Hofstede (2005)) of Islamic countries share similar cultural values that vary significantly with those of the Western countries."
Conceptualizing the Islamic Personality Model, Abdul Kadir Othman, Muhammad Iskandar Hamzah, Nurhazirah Hashim, Faculty of Business Management, Universiti Teknologi MARA, 42300 Puncak Alam, Selangor, Malaysia

The question is why a culture requires to produce consistently constantly from generation to generation “the violent true believer,”. My personal view is that McVeigh is a Western outlier though with Islam as a system appears to have developed a cultural psychological production line.

My view is cultures do this because within their codex exist iniquitous constructs which cannot be justified with reason, i.e. they are so starkly iniquitous violence has to be utilised to gain alignment internal and external.

So the culture has to produce, justify and authorise via codex (textual and exemplar (messianic) templates), these altruistic cultural enforcers - so the nature of infant-child-adolescent formation has to be subject to adult behavior which elicits the required result. The Islamic construct of Other and subjugation of women to Mans leadership appear to be prime candidates for the activation of cultural violence.

Of course only the 'few' are at the front end but they are not alone are they.

I suppose for me cultures justify and authorise violence the individual adherent few are given the unpleasant task of delivering it and in the process are condemned by the very culture which created them - deniability clearly a part of the cultures required tactic for survival particularly when the culture is surrounded by Other their victim.

Two relatively famous experiments I believe go some way to prove my point that where a cultural iniquitous relationship (after all extraneous qualifications taken into account) are codified within a culture, violence and oppression will ensue and be regarded as the 'norm'. Milgram experiment and Stanford prison experiment.

Also it may be proved by simply picking up a religious or secular cultural codex and ascertaining the existence or not of iniquitous relationships and the relative egregious nature of such codex and compare-this to relative levels of cultural violence (not generic crime) a culture informs.

This comparison simply cannot be based upon relative numbers of incidents to cultural population because this ignores the fact such violence may be shaped for different purpose and the specific cultural ethics may inform less severe outcomes - the data should be evaluated upon the relative cost to society each culture informs not numbers of incidents - though the severity of the incidents should match the relative egregious nature of such codex.

Why is this important? Human relationship constructs have been in large part externalized into what may be determined genetic cultural codex as an individuals genetics is passed down from parents informs a behavioral propensity so does the genetic cultural codex which links with the individuals genetic individual behavioral variance within a genetic cultural behavioral variance bounded by the limits set and enabled by the genetic cultural codex.

Clearly this genetic cultural codex may significantly inform different value systems between cultures (Hofstede and Hofstede (2005)), and what is seen as rational in one culture may be regarded as completely irrational from Others perspective. 

Importantly if these genetic cultural codex iniquitous constructs of Other and women are not removed as with an individuals genetic potential behavioral variance statistically one has to expect they will appear in the cultures behavioral variance - particularly one would expect the infant-child-adolescence parent relationships would be constructed to produce enough 'few' to meet the cultural demand for the same. One would expect the nature of child-parent attachment reflects this cultural need for potential violent enforcer.

Therefore with Islam utilising inductive reasoning from observation of very costly cultural derived violence there has to exist within the Islamic/Muslim genetic cultural codex at least one iniquitous construct  which the Islamic/Muslim culture cannot support  by reason alone even within its own construct - for the violence is meant to be two edged internal and external.

Therefore with Islam utilising deductive reasoning from the Islamic/Muslim genetic cultural codex of at least one iniquitous construct Islamic/Muslim cultural derived violence will be found to exist, possibly mathematical equation link, to the relative egregious nature of the iniquitous construct itself.

Given this is the case dealing with symptoms extremists in schools, universities, prisons, etc will not stop them appearing with each new generation because the Islamic/Muslim genetic cultural codex remains unedited. As you would expect with an individuals genetic propensity to inform certain behaviors - individuals are not going to cease to exhibit potential behaviors because such behaviors are externally determined as not 'nice'.

Please note there seems to be some evidence emerging that there exists a individual genetic propensity for certain emotional states prejudice, happiness, etc which from my perspective may by culturally derived over time and may set a heighten propensity for specific behavior such as extremism when keyed in with the genetic cultural codex, framed by the adult child relationship.

Conclusion change the Islamic/Muslim genetic cultural codex or change nothing. If it means removing the whole codex from the public square so be it for the unfathomable grief the loss of just one child brings is not worth having such a culture within. Multiculturalists and Western Politician gatekeepers in the main believe the cost, deadly and otherwise is worth it I for one do not.

Wednesday, November 12, 2014

Churches, mosques face tough new rules after the Kanyari ‘seed’ scandal - At last reality is informing a rational public policy direction

Kenya's Insightful Attorney-General Githu Muigai

Churches, mosques face tough new rules after the Kanyari ‘seed’ scandal POSTED SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2014 | BY- BERNARD NAMUNANE - 

"The Government on Sunday said it is planning to start registering churches and mosques to stop them from being abused for either personal gain or to cause insecurity."

The Kenyan legislation and the political fact Kenya with its 
Attorney-General Githu Muigai rationally see this as a political necessity and not having anything to do with racism, bigotry, etc., on the understanding 'Freedom of Religion' is not an inherent 'right' but a privilege subject to the limit of spiritual guidance which informs benefit for the societies within which the religious culture exists, any action by a religious cultures institutions which inform 'personal gain or cause insecurity' will be rightfully subject to penalty inclusive of the removal of the privilege to operate 'freely'.

It would be advisable to keep track of what Kenya is proposing so as to inform future legislation. I believe and rightfully so the current Kenyan legislation which is to be amended to include penalties upon religious institutions applies as well to non-religious cultural institutions

At last reality is informing a rational public policy direction, recognising Freedom of Religion is not simply a blank check to generate terror and exploit the vulnerable. Attorney-General Githu Muigai's blue print I believe will become the basis for other nations to follow.

"..religious leaders yesterday warned the government against the decision, saying that the Constitution guarantees them freedom of worship."

The fact is there is no such thing as freedom of anything, only the relative independence fellow humans and nature allow at any point of time.

If any cultural institution, religious or secular, seeks to reduce the little independence a citizen has by spreading terror and/or exploiting them for their own gain these offending cultures access to the societal Public Square must be restricted to the extent such actions cease, even if this means their complete removal from the Public Square.

Such a public policy increases the potential for the relative independence of citizens to be maximised. Is this not a worthy goal?

ISIS is simply a political entity framed directly from the Islamic codex of which both they and the so called Muslim moderates are adherents of.

Who are the 'moderate' Muslims in this image? Who are the 'moderate' Muslims outside this image?
All ideologies seek to construct a political space which enables the full realization of their cultural codex constructs. We are not surprised in the West when the Socialists, Capitalists, Greens etc. seek to change societal relationships at the individual citizen and institutional level and in some cases quite dramatically.

Determining certain avowed Greens ideological adherents for instance were members of a 'Death Cult' would have such adherents killing whales instead of saving them. The Japanese whalers are therefore Greens supporters who have 'hijacked' Greens ideology. Clearly such actions exist completely outside the informed bounded rationality of the Greens codex. Such a position is absurd.

Yet we are told we have to accept the absurd, on pain of being called a bigot, racists, as suffering a mental illness a phobia, of hate speech, etc. the existence of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria ISIS as being outside the bounded rationality of Islamic/Muslim culture.

Islam unlike Christianity does not recognize the Emperor, the State is not due anything. Within Islam the State-Societal governance of a separate secular entity simply does not exist. Also Islam does not determine laws outside Sharia law are valid.

What happens as with all cultures the adherents of a culture in time and space, given the limitations of co-existing cultures and environment within the Public Square will move inexorably to frame the political space in a form which enables their cultural codex constructs to be realized to the full extent it can be given the circumstance at the time.

This is all that ISIS, Boko Haram, Hamas, Taliban, Al Qaida, Muslim Brotherhood, etc. are doing, this is all that Muslims are doing as are any other cultures, developing within the limits which surround them a political space/environment within which cultural precepts may be more easily enforced.

What does this tell us? Firstly cultures will be continually in a process of seeking to change the environment within which they exist to reflect their values not only in the soft sense of personal and institutional relationships but the very physical fabric of the environment, architecture for instance.

Culturally we have a tendency to view our own values as universals, understood and so obvious in their inherent benefit alignment of other cultures to our values is inevitable – this is dangerous wishful thinking. Empires have fallen, cultures have disappeared based upon such delusion.

"The findings of the study indicate that citizens (Hofstede and Hofstede (2005)) of Islamic countries share similar cultural values that vary significantly with those of the Western countries."
Conceptualizing the Islamic Personality Model Abdul
Kadir Othman*, Muhammad Iskandar Hamzah, Nurhazirah Hashim, Faculty of Business Management, Universiti Teknologi MARA, 42300 Puncak Alam, Selangor, Malaysia

This is not to say all values will be different but clearly enough are which must and clearly are now forming the basis for a violent struggle for alignment of the others culture to the others values set. Multiculturalists see this, violent at times engagement, as ‘normal’, an intercultural negotiation of a loss of or diminishment of beliefs/values to arrive at an agreed settlement or at the worst to agree to disagree. It is a view which is based upon a false assumption any cultural value no matter how diametrically opposed can exist within the same Public Square at the same time.

It is a false assumption for it is a strategy which does not seek to have the foundation codex of each culture edited to the same degree, for instance Multiculturalism informs there is nothing wrong with the Islam/religious construct it is simply misinterpreted, the Islamic codex constructs of Other and women remains intact. Therefore there is never a ‘settlement’ between the cultures. Islam/Muslims as a culture will therefore continue to seek the political space, which is all ISIS is doing, to have their Islamic codex fully realized. 

It is not a struggle to come to an inter-cultural mutual beneficial understanding it is a struggle of climbing in time and space political steps for complete imposition of the others values – which clearly have been shown by research to be significantly different. There is never an ultimate point where cultures finally agree to disagree, agree to disagree are only interim understandings based upon political blockers to which the culture simply adapts, improvises and overcomes.

There is a very dangerous public policy existent in the West which seeks to determine any objection to the expansion of Islam as a political construct as bigotry, “promoting disunity”, and frame it as negative behavior even though the culmination of such a construct, given historical and current Islamic political constructs even in part realized, informs the end of Liberty and Equality. Particularly for women, many men and women have fought and died to end such constructs being represented in our Western Public Squares yet here now in the Twenty-first century after so much sacrifice the inept Western Cultural Gatekeepers having learnt nothing from history are enabling the destruction of their very own culture and calling it a ‘good’.

We have no impediment in determining different political ideologies in time and space will inform quite different political environments. We have no qualms determining the establishment of political instruments such as political parties, groups inform a vehicle by which a specific cultures beliefs/values can be politically advanced, we have no qualms being concerned when ideologies with whose precepts we find completely objectionable call for changes to laws which govern our lives – words and sentences we inherently know are not strung together for no purpose.

Yet regards Islam Multiculturalist inform us we should have no fear, and if we do these fears are a mental illness – a phobia. It is an absurdity for such logic determines being in opposition to any political construct be it religious or secular is a mental illness.

Why are the Multiculturalist framing the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria as a ‘Death Cult’? It is because if citizens start to realize:

1. the truth ISIS, as with other Islamic political entities, is a reflection of the political space/environment Islamic foundation codex informs is required for Islamic/Muslim precepts to be fully realized,

2. that the Islamic/Muslim culture is not simply another political entity in time and space within the Western Public Square which is capable in the end-game of accepting others values as valid though different and therefore accept though with reservation the majority view will prevail without taking away the right of a citizen to remain in opposition nor seek to take their life.

3. the behavior exhibited by ISIS is not new, it is a political framework in existence since the seventh century at various levels of severity – the underlying beliefs/values are consistent and constant they simply did not appear from thin air in the twenty-first century in Iraq/Syria– there is an Islamic/Muslim cultural codex basis for the ISIS Muslim adherent behavior,

4. the exact same Islamic/Muslim codex exists in my space therefore simple observation and logic would dictate the Islamic/Muslim culture will endeavor to inform the same political construct utilizing the same Islamic/Muslim codex justified and authorized methods for doing so – terror is an inherent factor of dealing with the Islamic/Muslim culture,

5. if ISIS is a ‘Death Cult’ and has derived its behavior and political institutional framework directly from the exact same codex so called ‘moderate’ Muslims claim as their own source of behavior then clearly the radical and the moderate are both adherents to a ‘Death Cult’ ideology.

The citizenry will know, if they have not already started to realize, they have been lied to and will therefore seek political retribution (as we are seeing in the formation of new anti-islamic political entities) and new Public Policy to actually target the actual cause the Islamic/Muslim codex. Political entities such as ISIS do not simply appear without justification and authorization for a specific cultural politic, nor the method of that imposition – it has to come from a cultural codex in this case Islam.

As ISIS is a true reflection of the ‘true believer’ Islamic political space/environment vision directly sourced from the Islamic cultural foundation codex clearly the beliefs and values contained within this codex are so diametrically opposed to Liberty and Equality no accommodation, settlement agreement to finally agree to disagree is possible with Islam. Western Governments and political entities have to push back Islam/Muslims access to the Public Square by firstly restricting and then removing the potential for new generations of citizens to be imbued with such a genocide and misogynistic construct and the political frameworks which are required to enforce such precepts upon Other and women.

I repeat ISIS is simply a political entity framed directly from the Islamic codex of which both they and the so called Muslim moderates are adherents of. This is what Islam has informed, can and does inform, believing attempts to create the same in the Australian space is not in progress given the existence of political entities such as Hizb ut-Tahrir in Australia with Multiculturalists excusing the existence of such a political force and their reticence to condemn ISIS as a reaction to colonialism really denies the reality.

Such cultures values are so misaligned to Other of course there will inevitably be push back by Other. The Quran itself, clearly through experience of its authors, forecasts this will happen Other will be provoked by the value clash, interpreted by Islam/Muslims as Other being deaf, dumb, blind, duplicitous, evil, and inherently unable to see truth, and this is determined as ‘hate speech’ even an attack upon the veracity of the Islamic codex itself rather than a reasoned and rational response to tyrannical Islamic constructs, which the Muslim simply cannot recognize as such. Worse, based on this rejection Islam then frames the jihad.

It is simply an Islamic cultural construct of provocation of Other, with rejection defined as persecution in order to justify and authorise violence and commendable sacrifice of one’s life in the process of retaliation for such rejection.

“..the aggressive motive in a martyr from his provocation of others to persecute him in order to obtain self-punitive or masochistic gratification, in our time martyrdom has taken on a much more directly aggressive intent: the intentional killing of others as well as the self.”
“Indirect Personality Assessment of the Violent True Believer”, J. Reid Meloy, Ph.D.Master Lecture, Society for Personality Assessment, March 21, 2003

Where as martyrdom in the Western tradition is one of being subject to a violent death in the course of following ones beliefs in the Muslim culture martyrdom is being subject to a violent death in the course of violently imposing ones beliefs upon Other, whilst believing erroneously Other is responsible for their own demise because Other had the temerity to reject Islamic 'truth'.

Clearly Islam is no ‘normal’ political entity with which in your own political space in time an accommodation of diametrically opposed values will be obtained, understanding this, the manifesto imperative of the Australian Liberty Alliance Ltd needs to be taken very seriously “all attempts to impose Islam’s theocracy and Sharia law must be stopped by democratic means, before the demographic, economic and sociopolitical realities make a peaceful solution impossible”. Though I must add I do not agree with the Australian Liberty Alliance Ltd views on 'The Natural Family' regards homosexuals not having the right to have their relationships legally recognised by the State.

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, November 10, 2014

Conceptualizing the Islamic Personality Model - In search of the Muslim Cultural Self-Delusion Variable.

Reading the following and reflecting upon the Muslim derived burning ruins, broken bodies and lives from the seventh century to this very hour one would suggest if a researcher on the subject was to be scientifically honest this 'new' Muslim personality measure must include a measure of self-delusion. For clearly it is a particular characteristic of some significance of the Muslim mental state.

Conceptualizing the Islamic Personality Model 

Abdul Kadir Othman* , Muhammad Iskandar Hamzah, Nurhazirah Hashim
Faculty of Business Management, Universiti Teknologi MARA, 42300 Puncak Alam, Selangor, Malaysia

As Liberty, Equality and Feminism are to be redefined why not reshape personality as measured against what is determined as 'appropriate' from a Muslim perspective and determine it as 'healthy'.

The pièce de résistance for me was the view the current measures of personality do not cover Muslims great capacity for "controlling emotion through forgiveness".

Muslims Crucify Two Teen Boys for Being Christians By Onan Coca / 20 May 2014 /

It would appear given the reality of what the Muslim behavioral variance consistently constantly informs the idea you can convince yourself or others can, is simply by repeating the same thing over and over and over and over until presto it is reality even though blood is flowing unceasingly through the door.

No wonder Muslims view the greatest achievement for a Muslim child is repeating the Quran from memory only. The damage done in this process from Others perspective is horrendous particularly when Other are perfectly aware of the constructs of Other contained within and prejudice is set in stone in these early years.

What this paper underlines for Western policy makers is their definition of values are not the same as Islam/Muslims and unless they come to grips with this burning buildings, broken bodies and lives are going to increasingly be a part of our Western lives. 

For clearly for whom the supposed Muslim "controlling emotion through forgiveness" applies to is very severely restricted.

"The findings of the study 
(Hofstede and Hofstede (2005)) indicate that citizens  of Islamic countries share similar cultural values that vary significantly with those of the Western countries."

Thursday, November 6, 2014

Australian, Sydney, Penrith, Councillor Marcus Cornish - Rare Insightful Western Cultural Gatekeeper - Fights against an Islamic Mosque to Protect Other


I would appreciate your consideration of the following for the sake humanity who will be either condemned or saved by your decision.

Mr Cornish concerns regards an indoctrination/reinforcement center in Penrith preaching the Islamic/Muslim cultural codex (textual and exemplar (messianic) template) constructs of Other and women to frame infant-child-adolescent mental schema to inform subsequent behavior are well founded.

Although I am not a resident of Penrith clearly the influence of the ethical constructs of Islam or in fact any ideology do not tend to recognize borders:

Religious leader shot outside Islamic centre in Greenacre following threats SMH Megan Levy Date November 3, 2014 - 2:08 PM.

"The British parliament's intelligence and security committee (ISC) also warned that government programmes to prevent radicalisation were "not working", a particular concern as hundreds of Britons go to fight in Iraq and Syria.

It said the authorities, used to dealing with terror networks, must adapt to the increasing threat from "self-starting terrorists"."
Killing of soldier Lee Rigby reveals UK intelligence failures AFP November 26, 2014

"Agencies fail to stem jihad flow" MARK SCHLIEBS THE AUSTRALIAN NOVEMBER 05, 2014 12:00AM

"Agencies fail to stem jihad flow.", "government programmes to prevent radicalisation were "not working"" Clearly the current policy to stop growing Islamic terror internal to Australia and other Western Nations and from being exported have failed. Why? It is because it is a policy of addressing symptoms not cause. There is a systemic Western Institutional problem with dealing with Islamic/Muslim terror and it derives from not accepting it is Islamic/Muslim cultural derived terror. 

An individual's behavioral variance derives from three things genetic propensity, psychological experience, and culture, culture in this case being Islamic/Muslim culture. Psychological experience in the main determined by the culture within which the individual exists.

What is the major determinant of an individual’s behavior? Clearly culture for it sets the adherent mental schema infant-child-adolescent by which cultural terror is enabled. Psychology informs us Individuals simply do not form ‘Death Cults’ based on thin air there has to be a cultural derived justification and authorisation for adherent actions.

There is therefore no such thing as a "self-starting terrorists" and Western Institutions tasked with authorising the existence of Muslim institutions, Mosques, Schools, etc. have to realise and be held to account for their culpability in enabling Muslim terrorists be they 'lone wolf' or grouped to be produced in their streets.  

"Schein (1992) say culture lies at the level of basic assumptions and beliefs. Culture involves shared values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviours that distinguish one group from members of others (Lehman, Chiu, & Schaller, 2004). It is something you learn even subconsciously, and it shapes your awareness of the world around you. Samuals, a psychologist specialising in life-span development, describes this process of subconsciously absorbing cultural norms, mores and expectations as 'the cultural trance' (personal communication, June 18, 2004). 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

Culture in this case Islamic/Muslim culture via its "artifacts, rituals and text" creates "shared values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors" and an Islamic/Muslim filter which "establish boundaries between groups" and how those boundaries are to be managed.

"Every set of beliefs introduces its own logic and its own constraints."
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.

" 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."

The Islamic/Muslim cultural codex (artifacts, rituals and text) therefore informs an Islamic/Muslim behavioral variance bounded by the 'rational' of the Islamic/Muslim model, you cannot simply pick up a part of the Islamic/Muslim behavioral variance and determine it not Islamic/Muslim simply because it does not fit what you yourself would determine as rational - i.e. ISIS behavior.

Or in the case of the Islamic/Muslim community the actions derived from the Islamic/Muslim behavioral variance brings rightful discredit upon your culture and justified Other response, denying culpability when the source codex (textual and exemplar (messianic) template) are common is tragic self-deception. Tragic because acceptance of such a position determines the terror will continue.

The deletion of an inconvenient truth from the Islamic/Muslim behavioral variance and re-framing it as a completely disconnected 'Death Cult', a psychological impossibility, forms the basis for current policy regards the Islamic/Muslim communities. 

It is the same as claiming an individuals 'good' part of their behavioral variance is liberal-moderate and the 'evil' part of their behavioral variance has nothing to do with the individual at all, it is a disconnected 'Death Cult' for which the individual must not be held accountable, on the pain of being called far right-wing, a racist, bigot, etc..

Clearly history and current events show a definite Islamic/Muslim terror behavior "consistency with" the Islamic/Muslim model. The Islamic/Muslim behavioral variance therefore is one which in time and space consistently informs terror against Other. We are not talking about potential here, humanity are suffering from actual outcomes which have to be driven by Islamic/Muslim cultural derived mental schema.

Sydney 'beheading plot' could have taken place within days, PM says Yahoo7 and Agencies September 19, 2014, 8:41 am

Islamic/Muslim culture as a whole is therefore responsible for the "values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviours" exhibited by the Muslim jihadist, as the Islamic/Muslim culture must justify and authorize terror in their educative infant-child-adolescent process. It would be psychologically impossible for the terror to exist otherwise – there would have to be no cultural schema for such actions.

Unless what is in the Islamic/Muslim culture educative infant-child-adolescent process which leads to Muslim terror are identified and deleted nothing will change we continue to deal with symptoms and the "Agencies will continue to fail to stem jihad flow”. internal and external and the burning buildings, broken bodies and lives which are the final result.

Cultures justify and authorise terror the individual adherent ‘few’ deliver it.

"Ritualised religious experience are simultaneously cultural and psychological phenomena. .. For the group, they provide a sense of solidarity, cohesiveness, and certainty of shared values and beliefs."
Psychology Burton, Western, Kowalski, 2012

"The boys are simple boys," he said.

"They are religiously involved but not hardline or radical."

Sydney IS brothers send haunting text Ava Benny-Morrison 7 News, November 16, 2014

ISIS Beheads Another American as 60 New Terror Groups Join BY RIYADH MOHAMMED, The Fiscal Times November 16, 2014

IS Bothers "not hardline or radical" "They are religiously involved"?

How clear has the statement to be "not hardline or radical" "They are religiously involved".

This is the 'rational' model Islam informs the fact the definition of genocidal maniacs is a 'rational' Western cultural interpretation is being ignored by the AFP and policy makers and the Islamic definition "The boys are simple boys," "not hardline or radical." the basis for policy - this is so insane it beggars belief. It is as if we have twits wearing funny noses and clown shoes responsible for our safety. Just clever enough to pick up the odd symptoms but no where near clever enough to stop these symptoms occurring by attacking the cause Islamic religion.

As we can see in reality the policy makers are enabling the very environment driven by Islamic/Muslim ideological schema constructs Islam/Muslims as a culture require to 'swam'.

"..the structure of the and cohesions of the jihadist movement... it has taken on the characteristics of a swarm (in the group behavior sense)." The transformation of jihadism in the Netherlands - Swarm dynamics and new strength — Dutch intelligence service, AIVD, September 2014

This is not simply enabled by the internet, when Islam attacked the Byzantine Empire with the sword did the internet exist?

This is not simply applicable to Islamic/Muslim culture. Ideologies seek to transform in time space to reflect the constructs of that ideology. As with any organism, cultures seek to prosper and survive. The freedom to do so in time are relatively restricted or enabled by external Other cultural ethical and political structural constructs. Interpreting lulls in inter-cultural conflict as proof a culture which clearly has shown itself to inform major schism and terror against Other is in reality inherently peaceful is the worst kind of wishful thinking and future bias.
"In 1400, Timur Lenk, or Tamerlane, invaded Syria, defeated the Mamluk army at Aleppo and captured Damascus. Many of the city's inhabitants were massacred, except for the artisans, who were deported to Samarkand. At this time the Christian population of Syria suffered persecution."  History of Syria And before this?

And after this?

Dan Cruickshank told humanity 2008:
"This is Damascus the capital of Syria the heart of the Middle East. To walk the streets of Damascus is to see what makes it so successful and enduring ... Along the trade routes to Damascus travelled ideas, the art and religion but rather than dividing the city different religions were absorbed to enrich the culture of Damascus.…

This building shows how Damascus has survived by its ability to adapt. In the fourth century the pagan temple was converted into a Christian cathedral and when the Muslims conquered Damascus in 636 they shared the building with their Christian neighbours for nearly a century… Muslims rebuilt the ancient walls in 705 to create the greatest mosque in the world. But they didn't just sweep the past away inside are rows of Corinthian columns from the Christian Cathedral the memory of this old building was kept alive in this vast Muslim prayer hall. This Doric structure is still a living place of worship. I love this Mosque, it is warm and welcoming and a sense of calm, a sense of peace… very, very reassuring..

And Damascus has survived and prospered because people of different faiths found a way of living together. So the city was divided into separate areas each home to a trade or religious group so there would be a Muslim quarter, Christian quarter, Jewish quarter, and each of these groups would feel secure in their maze of streets and their gates almost fortified tower entries. A place that would be utterly confusing to unwelcome strangers.

It is an incredible thing that Damascus was ancient before Rome became a power in the land, was old when the pharaohs ruled Egypt. The city’s had a turbulent history, attacked by the Christians crusaders in the 12th century, pillaged horribly by Tamerlane and his Mongols in 1401 no one but it survived. It seen empires and tyrants come and go; it offers a fantastic object-lesson in how people can live together creatively and in harmony. It is a wonderful city in which to be."
British Historian Dan Cruickshank BBC series "Cruickshank's Adventures in Architecture, Episode 5 - Connections, Syria, Damascus 2008, First aired on BBC Two in April 2008

What was the reality in the 2008 Human Rights Report: Syria when Dan Cruickshank made his statement "a fantastic object-lesson in how people can live together creatively and in harmony"? This is what multicultural pathological altruism delivers a lie, that peace and harmony in time and space can be maintained with any culture despite the iniquitous constructs within the cultures codex which frames its consistent constant cultural behavioral variance.

What is the reality now in Damascus, in Syria? Should a historian not reflect upon the recurring nature of the historic cultural return to violence and even the architecture itself, the perceived need for utilisation of separate space "Muslim quarter, Christian quarter, Jewish quarter, and each of these groups would feel secure in their maze of streets and their gates almost fortified tower entries. A place that would be utterly confusing to unwelcome strangers." .

What is happening in Australia we are hearing exactly the same words and seeing exactly why 'secure' space apart becomes necessary for preserving life - we really want this as a norm?

The above does not negate the fact cultures at war in the past can and have come to terms and achieved what may be determined as lasting peace but this does not then prove all cultures can do so. It is because they may have significantly different value systems, and these values because of the inherent iniquitous nature require violence to maintain internally and promote and defend externally. Pathological altruism should not be a substitute for commonsense - history of the inability of specific cultures to come to terms on an equitable basis internally and externally is ignored at your individual and cultural peril.

Time does not stand still, cultures reach political thresholds within their environment framed by their codex and will seek to change political space, the methodology pursued in doing so aligns to the cultural codex otherwise those utilising the methodology would belong to another culture. Where do you think ISIS informed behavior comes from, the back of a cornflakes packet?

Cultural methodology is not only utilised by a culture seeking to break the bonds of a dominant culture but as Ghandi rightly points out cultural codex cultures utilise to gain power will be inherent in the political structures cultures create to maintain power and enforce alignment. Did the Islamic parties once elected to power in Iran, Egypt Muslim Brotherhood and even in Turkey today seek to enhance the political system to enable greater liberty and independence for women?

And to add insult to real injury we have inept and in essence dangerous local councillors despite the evidence inclusive of the above approving the very religious institutions which are integral for creating these "simple boys" "to wreak havoc and have catastrophic consequences."
. At the same time these same councillors have the temerity to claim moral high ground for their actions, I am certain the inevitable victims of these 'simple boy' genocidal maniacs, as I,  will understand the true moral nature underlying the councillors actions.

"All theories of moral development recognize that conscience begins to take shape in early childhood. And most agree that at first, the child's morality is externally controlled by adults." 
Development Through the Life Span Fifth Edition

The adults influence and reinforce moral values of their infant-children-adolescent, the adults moral constructs sourced from the Islamic/Muslim cultural codex construct of Other and women. 

The Religious ritual via Mosques forms a leadership role in explicitly defining and reinforcing the ethical bounded rationality based upon Islamic/Muslim codex - not a bi-cultural amalgam. Where the definition of freedom is not the same as a Western derived definition. Where the definition of feminism is not the same as a Western derived definition.

To claim this is not true please explain how the Iranian political construct informs freedom, the Saudi construct informs freedom, ....., Explain how it is possible to be a Muslim feminist when you have to accept an equality which is inclusive at the same time of inferiority to Man, subject to Mans leadership.

The following segment informs a clear disconnect between Muslim definitions and Others definitions of humanitarian, gentle, help, saving human life, etc.

Sammy Salma, 21, of Roxburgh Park was killed in an explosion in Aleppo while working for humanitarian aid.

Mr Salma, who has been in Syria since October, died on the front line but was not involved in the war between government soldiers and rebels, his older brother Mohamad Salma said yesterday.

``He was a gentle person and wanted to help people - that was his nature,'' he said.

``He was an inspiration to a lot of young people who looked up to him.

Australia's boss of Free Syria Army Zaky Mallah said despite the highly dangerous situation in Syria, it was worth the risk to help out the people.

``It's definitely worth it. You are saving human life and Syrians who need help,'' he said.

``It's our duty of care. We know it's risky and that we may be killed.''

Sammy Salma was not a representative of the Red Crescent/Cross nor of any other 'independent' organization. Choice of "front line" determines your allegiance and therefore the statement ".not involved in the war between government soldiers and rebels" is absurd particularly as Sammy Salma was as can be inferred from the article a "front line" member of the Free Syria Army which has been involved in Aleppo on and behind the 'front line' in atrocities as have those the Free Syria Army are fighting against.

What have the Free Syria Army and those they are fighting against have in major part in common? It is the Islamic/Muslim "artifacts, rituals and text" construct of Other which creates "shared values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors" and an Islamic/Muslim filter which "establish boundaries between groups" and how those boundaries are to be managed. And you are puzzled such a cultural Other construct will not inform the same in life? And is clearly doing the same in Australia’s own streets as elsewhere - it is worth enabling such an ideological construct in your own space with such definitions?

The following is a clear indication we have people in specific critical cultural gatekeeper roles such as the Australian Human Rights Commission who influence policy outcomes regards intercultural relations and either have not got a clue how a citizens values are derived or are lying to protect the guilty and deflect their responsibility for the increasing Muslim terror potential within Australia against the very people who are stating an obvious truth Islam is a genocidal misogynistic construct and will as it has and is elsewhere will inform major schism.

"We are a country that is today defined by our values, and not by race or religion."

Our values define us not our race or religion Canberra Times September 30, 2014 Tim Soutphommasane Australia's Race Discrimination Commissioner

"The findings of the study indicate that citizens (Hofstede and Hofstede (2005)) of Islamic countries share similar cultural values that vary significantly with those of the Western countries."
Conceptualizing the Islamic Personality Model, Abdul Kadir Othman, Muhammad Iskandar Hamzah, Nurhazirah Hashim, Faculty of Business Management, Universiti Teknologi MARA, 42300 Puncak Alam, Selangor, Malaysia

Clearly from what has been stated prior to Tim Soutphommasane quoted comment above and the quote from the "Conceptualizing the Islamic Personality Model" below it clearly sets out values are not in any way separate from race and religion/secular ideology they in fact "define" Australian citizen values.

There is no such thing as the concrete Australian identity. The Australian identity of an all pervasive 'Fair Go' is a myth to excuse infamy - because clearly over time 'Fair Go' did not apply to all. Australian values have always been and will be an amalgam of values informed by the different cultures within, each cultures values enabled and constrained by the reality of the relative political power each culture holds not necessarily relative to numerical numbers of adherents in these separate cultures, in a specific time and place. These amalgam of values derived directly from separate race and religion-secular ideology have shaped and are reshaping our political Australian landscape right now - this is the point there has never been a static Australian identity - values of cultures within inform real political outcomes and as we are seeing with Islam terrible tragic outcomes in lives and lost opportunities due to vast redirection of resources just to protect ourselves from these Muslim cultural derived outcomes. This is clearly not about the 'fanatical few' it never was this is just a device to shift blame not only by the Muslim community itself but those who have nailed themselves to the policy mast of 'not-Islam'.

Islamic values have been found to be so "
significantly" different than Western countries values there is even a call to create a separate personality test.

The pièce de résistance for me was the view contained in the "Conceptualizing the Islamic Personality Model" research paper which claimed the current measures of personality do not cover Muslims great capacity for "controlling emotion through forgiveness".

Muslims Crucify Two Teen Boys for Being Christians By Onan Coca / 20 May 2014

The above is not meant as irony as easy as such a cheap shot would be this Muslim action is not unique historically nor currently, it has been a consistent constant Muslim behavior since the seventh century. It exists in time and space as an inherent part of Muslim behavioral variance. 

As Liberty, Equality and Feminism are to be redefined why not reshape personality as measured against what are determined as 'appropriate' from an Islamic/Muslim perspective and by differentiating such personality traits and redefining "teamwork, consultative, participative, egalitarian (equality)" with Islamic meaning, devoid of reference of how this relates in time and space to Other and women and determine such high values as 'good' informs what type of world.

Tim Soutphommasane in determining 'Thousands from the Lakemba Muslim community having attended under the banner of "Muslims Love Australia." and therefore fellow citizens have nothing to fear:

ignores the reality every culture has their very dedicated/pious-moderate-liberal-radical, 

ignores the fact cultures inform very different behavioral variances, most of which do not inform terror to the degree Islam does. 

ignores the fact it is not unusual for individual adherents of "conscience and a sense of responsibility" to claim they are looking for "peace not only for themselves but for everyone else", individual adherents are not the culture.

“..the Germans (inclusive of the Nazi) that great unified people are looking for peace and see friendship with Britain as a basis for peace not only for themselves but for everyone else”. Norman Hillson “I speak of Germany”, London 1937

"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)

ignores the fact leaders of genocidal constructs deny their codex in any way informs the killing of Other - even Hitler did so in a court case,

ignores the fact such claims of cultural innocence that have to be repeatedly stated indicate the culture are lying as Other can accept a few insane outliers but thousands consistently, constantly informing the same behavior in differing time and space it simply is not possible.

ignores the fact if the Islamic/Muslim codex did not contain an egregious construct of Other there would be no Muslim terror, no ISIS,

ignores the fact there would be no ISIS participants being sourced from the moderate peace loving families, communities institutions if ISIS was really a Death Cult with no value connection to Muslim culture.

ignores the fact this exact same Lakemba Muslim communities Mosque "head imam at Lakemba, Sheikh Yahya Safi, told the congregation during prayers (2012) they should not have anything to do with Christmas." The exact same values supporting such a view driving ISIS values and behavior against Other - and this is not the only space and time in which such views have been expressed and acted upon. Has the basis for current policy 'not-Islam' diminished this Muslim view of Other and is Muslim behavior informed by it non-existent in Australian streets and elsewhere, has the wearing of t-shirts by any number of Muslims declaring 'I love Australia' diminished the threat of terror or given history can anyone really in good conscience determine 
will diminish the capacity of Islam/Muslims to deliver terror?

Lakemba Mosque imam issues 'fatwa against Christmas' - report NEWS CORP AUSTRALIA NETWORK DECEMBER 23, 2012

ignores the fact as indicated below regards the survey of Muslims in Turkey the view regards the justification of violence against Other are not limited to the so called insignificant 'fanatical few' who actually deliver the terror. The 'fanatical few' cannot exist without the significant many which enable them to become what they are and continue to sustain them and also could not have become the 'fanatical few' without the justification and authorisation of the Islamic/Muslim codex of which all Muslim very dedicated/pious-moderate-liberal-radical are adherents to

'You therefore can judge entire communities by the actions of extremist minorities. ISIL and its supporters are representative of Islam' to determine ISIL members and supporters are not linked directly to Islam is to claim they were framed by a completely different cultural codex not connected to Islam which is impossible since they as we see, invariably come from so called moderate Muslim families, communities and institutions. Islam is therefore responsible as a whole culture for what is occurring for without one there would not be the other. Cultures justify and authorise terror the individual 'fanatical few' created by the culture deliver it.

The logic would determine the very dedicated/pious-moderate-liberal Nazi or in regards to any culture have no role to play in enabling the radical to appear and sustain themselves. 

Tim Soutphommasane position is a very dangerous one for it is a rational which enables the following statement to be made Intolerance fans extremist flames by: Carly Crawford, John Masanauskas From: Herald Sun September 10, 2011 12:00AM.

This is blame shifting, the continuing failure of public policy, enforced by the likes of Victoria Police's counter-terrorism chief, Assistant Commissioner Steve Fontana, to stop the escalation of the potential Muslim terror and its actual delivery in Australian streets or elsewhere are blamed on those pointing out genocide constructs be they religious or secular are causing terror to escalate - it has always been the Islam/Muslim culture delivering terror and major schism which as we see requires no incitement - mere absence of response is enough.

Based upon simple observation as to the impact in time and space upon any society of an Islamic/Muslim culture being allowed unhindered into the Public Square with its inherent construct of Other and women, with the clear record from the seventh century to this very day of burning ruins, broken bodies and lives could anyone in clear conscience determine there is no risk to Other now or into the future by allowing an altruistic cultural enforcement mechanism such as the Islamic Mosque into Penrith?

You can guarantee no cultural derived terror will be sourced from such an institution? 

To claim you cannot guarantee this for any cultural institution is an invalid argument for it is based upon a clear false assumption, all cultures inform the same cultural behavioral variance. If this was the case at this very moment we would have so called 'Death Cults' in the exact same relative numbers from all cultures from around the globe - is this occurring? Everything is relative - we make our decisions based upon probabilities. 

What is the probability of an Islamic institution informing terror compared to Others institutions?

If the difference is zero or less for an Islamic institution you have no problem. If it is more this is the measure of your responsibility for what happens next. Though I am not sure how you relate the difference in probabilities in any measure to the unfathomable grief which comes from the loss of a single son or daughter.

Clearly Australian Aborigines have been subject to iniquitous action and circumstance by Other which far outweighs what many of these Muslim jihadists have been subject to, yet have Australian Aborigines formed a 'Death-cult'?

Can you guarantee no cultural derived terror will be sourced from such an institution?

If not then for the security not only of those citizens in Penrith, nor of citizens only within Australia but for those outside Australian borders as well the Penrith Islamic Mosque must not go ahead.

Multicultural speak: The 'Few'? The Lie.
"..a majority of Turkish Muslims, who comprise 98% of the population, say suicide bombing and other forms of violence against civilian targets are never justified (58%)."
The Turkish people don’t look favorably upon the U.S., or any other country, really BY JACOB POUSHTER PEW

Therefore a significant proportion 42% of Turkish Muslims think what is justified? Do any of these Muslims regard themselves as Liberal/Moderate? 

Could anyone rationally determine such a percentage 42% of a population determining 'suicide bombing and other forms of violence against civilian targets are justified' constitute just a 'few' radicals?

Not all of these 42% involve themselves directly in violence but they provide the support base from which such acts are justified and authorised by the Islamic construct of Other, Can you claim such views are in no way responsible for the terror Islam informs? How can it be claimed these significant 42% supporting such ethics are not existent within the Islamic behavioral variance?

There are invariably no more than a 'few' altruistic cultural enforcers, to claim the notion of a 'few' excuses the rest of a culture denies the fact they could not exist without initially being imbued with a cultural justification and authorisation for their actions and could not subsequently survive once they take on the role of altruistic enforcers without cultural assistance from those not directly on the front line.

Clearly the attached research paper shows there has to be a significant cultural support for cultural terrorists to exist. To say there only are a 'few' is a lie. Research Paper: ISIS-Turkey List David L. Phillips, 
Director of the Program on Peace-building and Rights, Columbia University’s Institute for the Study of Human Rights Posted: 11/09/2014 11:25 am

"..the terrorism industry requires only a tiny proportion of recruits 'the few' to wreak havoc and have catastrophic consequences."The security risks posed by Islamic converts in prison TANVEER AHMED THE AUSTRALIAN NOVEMBER 08, 2014 12:00AM

Therefore it is not if a majority of a culture nor anyone else determines them 'moderate' it is what the culture enables by its very existence in the Public Square. No culture should have to put up with any co-existing culture which consistently constantly delivers via its cultural codex (textual and exemplar (messianic) templates) 'the few' ".to wreak havoc and have catastrophic consequences.".

For those in prison to be 'radicalised' requires the Islamic mental schema already learnt to move from the outside in, the justification and authorisation for the Muslim behavior of terror has not been invented in a prison cell in the twenty-first century, it is the same polarization which occurs outside as well as in - the polarization must be derived from a cultural script already accepted or primed to be accepted.

The question is not how many of a specific culture claim to be for peace and harmony in any culture for of course the hands shoot up - on closer inspections as in Turkey the reality on further investigation reveals an inconvenient truth the meaning of "peace and harmony" is not inclusive of Western definitions of Liberty and Equality. These 'few' are integrally a part of the whole culture the 'few' do not exist the whole culture does not exist - this is the real test for admission to the Public Square. The the unfathomable grief of the loss of just one child adherent or non-adherent can never justify the presence of such a culture within the Public Square.

“..the Germans (inclusive of the Nazi) that great unified people are looking for peace and see friendship with Britain as a basis for peace not only for themselves but for everyone else”. Norman Hillson “I speak of Germany”, London 1937

We assure ourselves 'moderates' are in charge for did they not tell us they were such, things could be worse? The leaders deny their cultural codex informs such outcomes, it is not unusual Hitler did the same in a German court denying his own Nazi textual construct informed terror. Yet simple observation of the cultural terror generated indicates an egregious codex construct of Other must exist within the Islamic/Muslim cultural codex as it does in the Nazi cultural codex to justify and authorise such acts.

“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

As in Germany, as in Australia, as in Britain, as we see below for Iranian women things do get worse - where are these so called Muslim 'moderates' under such a Islamic/Muslim codex construct, the exact same construct which exists in Australia, to prevent such acts?. Are they wearing 'I Love Iran' t-shits and standing in the streets protecting these women? Does it stop the increasing terror and oppression? No it does not. Why? The Islamic/Muslim construct of Other remains intact - wearing any number of 'I Love ...' after every Muslim atrocity is not going to change anything, other than emphasise the complete hypocrisy of such an act.

Hamas: "Normal Reaction": One dead and more than a dozen injured in new vehicle attack in Jerusalem euronews 05/11 20:12 CET

Can you guarantee no 'few' will be sourced from such an institution "to wreak havoc and have catastrophic consequences."?

Freedom to enable women to be culturally subject, and display that abhorrent state within the Public Square, is not Freedom for the victim nor the viewer.

Freedom to take away Freedom and worse this is your conclusion?

You support a belief/ethical construct you become responsible for all its outcomes such beliefs/ethics inform not just the ones you would like to.

"The attacks - there have been at least four in the busy city in central Iran in recent weeks - appear aimed at terrorising women who dare to test the boundaries of the Islamic dress code.

The crimes coincided with the passage of a new parliamentary bill that allows private citizens to enforce "morality" laws."

Acid attacks in Iran sharpen row over Islamic dress and vigilantism Reuters BY BABAK DEHGHANPISHEH BEIRUT Wed Nov 5, 2014 10:24am

Just one woman, by the justification and authorisation of the Islamic construct of women, to be forced by violence, the implicit/explicit threat thereof or bullying peer group pressure to conform to such a subject construct determines what about your definition of Freedom? 

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

"You cannot put women and men on an equal footing," Erdogan said. "It is against nature. They were created differently. Their nature is different. Their constitution is different."
Women are not equal to men, Turkish president declares

The President of Turkey said this which means in political terms - The "Fanatic Few", it is a dangerous lie.

It is dangerous because it puts in time and space all of Other at risk including under the Islamic paradigm women. No need to fear?

Women in Turkey have nothing to fear regards achieving equality to man, equal justice, equal opportunity when the highest position in the political 'embedded hierarchy' of a nation states "Women are not equal to men."?

You have an iniquitous construct anywhere in your codex which cannot be justified by reason even within because the inequity is so obvious what is required to enforce acceptance internal and external? And the construct of women is not only the only Islamic construct we have to worry about either is it?

You really think words and sentences in a cultural codex are strung together for no purpose? And those you find not-nice can be simply determined as cultural not-codex and everything will be OK? Has this wishful thinking worked so far?

Has the current policy Not-Islam worked anywhere? Think, you are putting us all at risk.

In time they will see reason is the excuse for allowing infamy to develop, for allowing authority/reinforcement Islamic institutions such as a Mosque in Penrith to be created in new space. 

Has this happened in Iran where now the power to enforce 'morality' aligns to the Quran which gives individual Muslims the power of insight into the failure of fellow Muslims to measure up and now the power to enforce penalty at their own discretion - imagine given the construct of Other and women what justified fear not a phobia this will create. Has it in Turkey, is Turkey enabling greater independence for the individual inclusive of women under a restored Islamic ideology?

Given the Islamic cultural codex (textual and exemplar (messianic) template) are exactly the same as that for defining cultural constructs of Other and women Iran, Pakistan, .... how is it in enabling the Penrith Islamic Mosque you will not be enabling the same? Even a possibility of partial replication surely is abhorrent?

Utilising 'Just following rules.' is no excuse for allowing a genocide and misogynistic construct to flourish in your space.

You really think things stay as they are (future bias) and cultural codex constructs (textual and exemplar (messianic) templates) utilised to set cultural mental schema which in time and space inform infamy everywhere else, and are doing so now even in Australian space, will never do so in your own space (wishful thinking)? Through history you will find if you care to look some worthy fellow travelers. What happened? "I just followed the rules my hands are clean."

The following is an a example of what is developing now in Western nation streets can you guarantee the same altruistic cultural 'few' enforcers will not to sourced from such an institution to do the same?

She was attacked by Muslims because wearing a skirt By AM on November 7, 2014 - This is real not pretend this is what Islam informs even on Western streets which is no different than in Iran, Indonesia, ..... - This is what you wish to enable Freedom to oppress? Altruist cultural enforcers if you care to check with a cultural psychologist are invariably only a 'few' - but what relative havoc do Islamic/Muslim enforcers cause - Liberty and Equality? Where are the so called 'moderate' Muslim enforcers in these communities out at night in "I Love Britain" t-shirts stopping these so called Muslim radicals enforcers? 

Penrith COUNCILLORS you really believe it will be different in the Penrith space, it is up to you to prove why given the evidence.

"discriminatory and would breach planning requirements."?

“The fact is that no-one, right, left or centre, got the true measure of Hitler’s National Socialism, a movement of a kind that had not been seen before and whose aims were rationally unimaginable. Not even his intended victims fully recognised the danger. After the summer election of 1932 which left the Nazi as much the largest party, but short of a majority, the (Jewish) editor of the Tagebuch, a left-liberal weekly we took home, published an article whose headline struck me even then as suicidal. I still see it before me. ‘Lasst ihn heran!’ (‘Why not let him in!’). Source: Diary: Memories of Weimar, Eric Hobsbawn

Can you guarantee no 'few' will be sourced from such an institution "to wreak havoc and have catastrophic consequences."?

Sometimes being discriminatory and breaching the 'rules' are clearly justified.

Clearly the 'rules' are required to change to reflect changed circumstance:

"The Government on Sunday said it is planning to start registering churches and mosques to stop them from being abused for either personal gain or to cause insecurity."
Churches, mosques face tough new rules after the Kanyari ‘seed’ scandal POSTED SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2014 | BY- BERNARD NAMUNANE -

At last in Kenya reality is informing a rational public policy direction, recognising Freedom of Religion is not simply a blank check to generate terror and exploit the vulnerable.