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.
It is not a matter of demonizing,
stigmatizing nor erroneous stereotyping it is a matter of the evidence.
Recourse to the immediacy of cultural counter argument, as each sentence and
idea is encountered, in an attempt to ignore the evidence and reinforce bias from
either adherent or non-adherent will not sweep the burning buildings, broken
bodies and lives from in front of humanity - as each new
generation regurgitate the exact same culturally derived codex excuse for their
diabolical behaviour to blame Other for their own cultural codex derived
behavioural variance. Own it.
You have a genocide construct of Other anywhere within your cultural codex in
time and space it will manifest itself in your cultural behavioural variance
'spectrum' within whatever Public Square it is allowed to enter.
My view is the cost of just one child's life and the unfathomable grief such a
loss brings is not worth such a culture being allowed anywhere near the Public
Square. Yet humanity have evidence of thousands upon thousands historic and
current, apart from the oppression of Other and women in particular, yet we do
not act. I am saying we should and we must.
Just one child?
"Communities (cultures) tend to be
guided less than individuals by conscience and a sense of responsibility. How
much misery does this fact cause mankind! It is the source of wars and every
kind of oppression, which fill the earth with pain, sighs and bitterness." (Albert Einstein, 1934)
How is it done, with so many so called self-defined moderate 'individuals of conscience and a sense of responsibility'? As it always has been, cultural altruistic punishment imposed by a few
with increased intensity - cultural incentive positive and negative imposed by
the 'good' and the 'radical' where the difference in ethics is only the method
violent/non-violent each riding upon the back of the other to achieve the same
political end. Violent/non-violent justified and authorised by cultural codex
otherwise it would not be possible.
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".
But is it really the 'few', for without underlying jointly held cultural
ethical constructs how is it possible to achieve the enabling silence of the so
called majority 'moderates' of any culture to enable the 'few' to do what they
do so well, impose a 'radical' agenda- time after time? It is because the
'radical' agenda is the 'good' cultural outcome the cultural leaders and more
importantly cultural exemplars and textual codex have determined generation
after generation as the as the 'right' way of life to be aspired to.
Therefore the culture as a whole is responsible for outcomes such a culture
informs 'good' or 'evil'.
"• 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
Patrick Wintour, Political editor The
Guardian, Wednesday 23 July 2014 “The extremists (imams) often start by teaching people about the parts of the Qu’ran — Islam’s holy book — that have never been mentioned by their imams and then inject violent thoughts in people by misinterpreting doctrines,” he (Adudulkrep, head of the state-run Xinjiang Islamic Institute) said. .... “If the religious leaders compete with the (religious leader) extremists on Islamic knowledge, I cannot guarantee that they would win. That’s what worries me,” said Adudulkrep, who is also head of the (China) state-run Xinjiang Islamic Institute." CHINA LOSING BATTLE AGAINST EXTREMIST ISLAMIC TEACHINGS, SAYS MUSLIM OFFICIAL MARCH 30, 2015
The two statements above tell us exactly why "(Muslim) liberal-moderate Parents and religious leaders do not have the 'confidence' or ability to argue successfully against the articulate and forceful Muslim religious leader activists".
Why? “If the liberal-moderate religious leaders compete with the (religious leader) "violent, radical, fanatical, nihilistic" extremists on Islamic knowledge, the Islamic knowledge the liberal-moderate religious leaders utilise cannot guarantee that liberal-moderate religious leaders would win.", this is because as logic would dictate the so called (religious leader) 'extremists' are ‘teaching people from the Qu’ran — Islam’s holy book’ the Islamic/Muslim cultural codex of beliefs, ethics and values and exemplar behavior, which are justified and authorized by the same Qu’ran — Islam’s holy book from which these same liberal-moderate parents and religious leaders utilise to obtain Islamic knowledge to counter (religious leader) extremists Islamic knowledge.
The Qu’ran — Islam’s holy book as a whole is determined as sacrosanct and as it determines within all statements even if apparently contradictory remain valid (this in itself therefore a sacrosanct statement) ALL beliefs, ethics, values within the Qu’ran inclusive of the ethics of "violent, radical, fanatical, nihilistic" belief — Islam’s holy book from whatever part remains a valid source of Muslim belief, ethics and values. You cannot therefore argue Is-Islam selection of part of the Quran is any less valid than the Not-Islam selection of part of the Quran as each part the Qu’ran — Islam’s holy book is sacrosanct and therefore valid.
Also what the above statements inform is even worse for Other (even Muslims themselves determined as such) because the liberal-moderate religious leader utilization of Islamic knowledge from selective parts of the Qu’ran — Islam’s holy book can in no way guarantee such Islamic 'moderate' knowledge will counter (religious leader) extremist Islamic "violent, radical, fanatical, nihilistic" knowledge derived from the same source in fact the statement by Adudulkrep, who is head of the (China) state-run Xinjiang Islamic Institute, infers the liberal-moderate religious leaders would lose.
This is the reason for the Parents being in "fear of being branded as disloyal to their faith or their community." it is not derived at its core by fear of the violence against Parents a Muslim extremist can and does do, it is that the Parents cannot with any Islamic codex they select as justification and authorisation override the Islamic "violent, radical, fanatical, nihilistic" codex justification and authorisation which determines such extremist violence within the Islamic/Muslim cultural 'rational' model as valid. Of course they are afraid of being 'branded disloyal' because such a values position justifiably challenged by the very same codex which they claim supports their position clearly it does not for if it did there would be absolutely no reason for Parents being in "fear of being branded as disloyal to their faith or their community." because the extremists would simply not exist as the Islamic codex would give them no cultural justification and authorisation for their behavior.
The so called (religious leader) extremists (from a Western cultural rational model perspective) therefore are known by 'moderate' (religious leaders) to have potentially greater Islamic codex justification and authorisation underwriting extremist Islamic knowledge than the 'moderate' religious leaders and claims by so called 'moderate' Muslims the behavior of Muslim terrorists are not justified and authorised by the Islamic/Muslim codex are therefore lies and worse still either must know this to be true or are suffering a psychotic delusional state for anyone who has one eye, even without the ability to read the Islamic/Muslim codex or history, can perceive the obvious Islamic/Muslim cultures connection to the burning buildings, broken bodies and lives before them.
"Mr Ali has been recorded saying that over the course of seven years he had identified 240 'radicals Islamists' within his community (Australian) centre, 120 of whom continue to have extremist views and are seen to potentially be on a path to "extreme acts". Mr Nawaz, who says he understands extreme Islamist groups because he was once a true believer, thinks Mr Ali's admission is a serious concern."
Eradicating radical IslamJuly 3, 2013, 6:18 pm James Thomas Today Tonight
The ‘true’ Islam resides within whatever Muslim analogised behavior are determined by adherents as reflective of the 'true-perfect belief' contained within the Islamic/Muslim codex and importantly the Islamic/Muslim codex words and sentences can be integrally connected to them. For to claim the condition of 'true-perfect believer' exists one has to be certain such behavior reflecting this 'true-perfect belief' state exists and can be readily be shown to be so in a belief system rationale otherwise one would have not reason whatsoever to make such a claim. Certainly given the human condition there is room for error, but mere statistical analysis of the number of such claims by leaders and followers alike, even claims from those determining themselves once 'true-perfect believers' clearly points to the Western categorisation of 'extremist' being an Islamic/Muslim 'true-perfect believer'.
Simply determining this is not the case given the evidence of bloodied bodies each and every day before humanity and determining Islam is an ideology of peace composed of 'liberal-moderates' reflecting back diminishingly Others beliefs, ethics and values ignoring the always present 'extremists derived from the very ranks of the so called 'liberal-moderate' Muslim families, communities and institutions existent in the same behavoral variance and therefore the Islamic/Muslim culture is not an intrinsic threat to Western notions of Liberty and Equality is a very dangerous thing to do – for in leaving the Is-Islam in play also leaves the overriding Not-Islam in the Public Square as well to continually inform terror and intensify major schism as can be clearly seen elsewhere. It also ignores a truth Not-Islam adherents are being derived from the Is-Islam space if they were really unconnected ethically this would not be happening. Is one Child's life worth such a culture being in our midst? Just one fellow citizen being shot in the back of the head?
Islam is either a "violent, radical, fanatical, nihilistic" fascist construct or it is not, you cannot have a condition which informs Half Free Half Slave and determine the entity Free. To determine a culture is peaceful when it systemically informs "violent, radical, fanatical, nihilistic" adherent behavior is the same as determining Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot as worthy exemplars and the "violent, radical, fanatical, nihilistic" behavior of their followers as not reflective of the nature of these leaders nor has anything to do with their ascribed cultural codex which causes the behavior to occur - it is pure insanity. Yet this is the kafkaesque reality humanity have created in maintaining in the Public Square Is-Islam Not-Islam of 'It is our cultural differences which make us stronger."to inform increasing terror and grief.
As we can see 'fascist imams are necessarily qualified' from exactly the same Islamic codex source as the so called non-fascist imams. And as the previous argument details there is a reason why there is a "rise of Islamic fascism" it is an integral part of the Islamic codex and also the justification and authorisation of it existence cannot be overcome by a liberal-moderate narrative because the liberal-moderate narrative does not have the same level of Islamic codex justification and authorisation as Islamic fascism. The proof is that firstly Islamic fascism is able to exist in the first place and secondly it manages to rise in the face of repeated claims of a liberal-moderate majority/many.
"Enough is enough. It is time to speak out.
“Islam is innocent” is an incomplete sentence. Introspection is needed, for, if we shy away from reality, the alternative will be more images like those we witnessed last Tuesday night, when brave Lt. Muath Al Kasasbeh was burnt to death in a cage." ‘We have a problem’ by Zaid Nabulsi The Jordon Times Feb 10, 2015
"Pressed on whether the ANIC had
been vocal enough in condemning young jihadis travelling abroad, Mr Benegadi
referred The Australian to a press release issued by the council in June in
response to suggestions by the chief of the NSW Counter-Terrorism Squad, Peter
Dein, that the Muslim leadership had been “very passive” in the face of
The “very passive” does not only apply, nor the reasons for such passivity to Muslim Parents as it has to necessarily apply to the Muslim leadership the so called liberal-moderate cultural altruistic enforcers - for where do liberal-moderate Parents obtain their lead? Clearly such liberal-moderate Muslim leaders do not have sufficient Islamic codex justification and authority to be the 'real' Muslim cultural altruistic enforcers which explains the “very passive” nature of their response to the rise of Islamic fascism within their space. Who then does?
Why does Other have to hear the same message Muslim leaders claim they are
giving to their communities that Muslim terror is not a good? Because Other
have no faith the very culture from which the terror is emanating are doing
enough to stop it, as it keeps coming and intensifies. Muslim leaders saying we
communicate our objections in our own community is a worthless exercise because
it clearly is not working. Other want to hear the words and know what actions
are actually being taken on Others behalf to protect them from the Muslim
"Report reveals gang rape and
trafficking of 1400 children over 16 years. ...Sometimes they
were afraid of being accused of racism if they talked about the
perpetrators mostly being Pakistani taxi drivers."
The 'few' determine their response by what mechanism, justification and
authorisation - from their own derived ethical construct? There is no external
connection at all?
"More than 1,400 children were
sexually abused over a 16 year period by gangs of paedophiles after police and
council bosses turned a blind eye for fear of being labelled racist, a
damning report has concluded.
It appears there was at a senior level a collective blindness over many years
to the suffering of children who endured almost incomprehensible levels of
violence and intimidation."
The debilitating fear the 'few' Gate Keepers experienced and or enforced came
Not from the imposition of 'Freedom of Religion and Multiculturalism as a good
which frames a non-existent mental illness Islamophobia? And determines anyone
raising objections to another cultural norms as bigots, racists? These Gate
Keepers have to have been subject directly to or observed action of altruistic
punishment based upon their own cultural codex directional response. Unless
this cultural codex is identified, changed or deleted this will happen again
and I would proffer is occurring even now for exactly the same reason.
There is no pattern of cultural enforced 'fear' emerging which is preventing
action against cultural derived evil?
"Several staff described their
nervousness about identifying the ethnic origins of perpetrators for fear of
being thought racist; others remembered clear direction from their managers
(cultural altruistic enforcers) not to do so"
The framework of Freedom of Religion and Multiculturalism has created these
failures by implementing laws and norms which silence questions/accusations
about the nature/ethics of any culture or the adherents of those cultures by
setting a very dangerous norm that "any
action which is reasonably likely, in all the circumstances, to offend, insult,
humiliate or intimidate another person or a group of people" is a crime.
What has this enabled where 'reasonably likely' and
'offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate' are so open to interpretation that
one simply says nothing. Here is the proof above where what was considered
completely unacceptable behaviour now becomes tolerated or even accepted as a
cultural ethic. Each of us determine ourselves above being culturally
influenced to ether do harm directly to Other or stand back silently to enable
it to occur - We are completely mistaken as to our capacity to resist because
we simply are already primed to do so.
"Macquarie University’s Professor Kathryn
Millard said volunteers escalated the shocks believing they were acting for a
noble cause — science.
Stephen Reicher, a professor at the University of St Andrews in Scotland, said
the implications were far-reaching.
It showed that ordinary people could commit acts of extraordinary harm, but
that thoughtlessness was not the main motivator, he said.
“We argue that people are aware of what they are doing, but that they think it
is the right thing to do,” he said.
“This comes from identification with a
cause — and an acceptance that the authority is a legitimate representative of
One must ask the question how quickly, when already supplied with the
justification and authorization of a cultural codex of a genocide construct of
Other does an imbued/primed infant-child-adolescence 'good' be turned to
'radical' adult given the cultural codex itself frames authority consistently
constantly to promote such a genocide construct as a cultural 'good'?
"Authorities believe these two
unlikely self-styled sheiks exerted a powerful influence over 18-year-old Abdul
Numan Haider in his fatal slide towards extremism." Sheiks influenced teenage extremist Numan Haider
CAMERON STEWART AND MARK SCHLIEBS HERALD SUN SEPTEMBER 26, 2014 6:40AM
Five inconvenient questions for those such as Australian Prime Minister Abbott
fallaciously determining cultural terror is a simple generic crime and Muslims
as a Cultural whole are not responsible:
1. "ordinary teenagers" are not already imbued with cultural
beliefs/ethics which have to already exist for them to be influenced by others
to cross the ethical bridge to terror?
2. What culture formed "these two unlikely self-styled sheiks", or
did they just appear out of thin air?
3. How is it any Muslim cleric seen as a possible 'radical' are now referred to
as "unlikely self-styled sheiks" rather than what they are Muslim
4. How far in fact did "18-year-old Abdul Numan Haider" have to slide
ethically before he met "these two unlikely self-styled sheiks"?
5. What would systems analysis say about the validity of the disconnect of
Muslim derived terror and major schism from the actual source the
Islamic/Muslim culture itself?
Does it matter being primed with such a Islamic/Muslim construct of Other, the
direction to move from 'good' to 'radical' is external to the immediate space
of the adherent i.e. in a globalised world of advanced communication technology
enabling covert and not so covert cultural altruist enforcement across borders
to align to already justified and authorized acts simply being culturally
replicated from current and historical Muslim cultural exemplar templates?
How many times do we have to reflect upon the meaning of "barbaric" and
"literally beyond belief" in time and space regards Muslims behaviour
to determine there is something inherently evil emanating from the
Islamic/Muslim culture and systems theory would tell us this behaviour must
exist because it serves a Muslim cultural purpose/function.
Reflect on the following and ask yourself why do you think Muslim culture
inherently contains the justification and authorisation (purpose/function) of
terror and violence internal and external to perpetuate itself? Also does this
not underline the idea ISIS or anyone else external is the only or even the
main cause of Muslim radicalisation when you have exactly the same ideology
being allowed without check within Australian space itself.
"Hizb ut-Tahrir is a (Australian)
political party whose ideology is Islam, so politics is its work and Islam is
its ideology. It works within the Ummah and together with her, so that she
adopts Islam as her cause and is led to restore the Khilafah and the ruling by
what Allah (swt) revealed. Hizb ut-Tahrir is a political group and not a
priestly one. Nor is it an academic, educational or a charity group. The
Islamic thought is the soul of its body, its core and the secret of its life.
1. The Reasons for the Establishment of Hizb ut-Tahrir
Hizb ut-Tahrir was established in response to the saying of Allah
"Let there be among you a group that invites to the good, orders what is
right and forbids what is evil, and they are those who are successful"
Its purpose was to revive the Islamic Ummah from the severe decline that it had
reached, and to liberate it from the thoughts, systems and laws of Kufr, as
well as the domination and influence of the Kufr states. It also aims to
restore the Islamic Khilafah State so that the ruling by what Allah revealed
returns." Hizb ut-Tahrir (Australian) political party
Reflect how such notions, so anti-Western Democracy actually provide the
motivation for terror given Muslims inherently know as detailed in the Quran we
Other are not going to go quietly into the night and be subject without
shackles to such a heinous societal construct/system of oppression particularly
for women. The notion of authority promoting the very codex construct of Other
in part or whole being determined as a norm within the Muslim cultural
behavioural variance and thereby forms the ethical bridge by which an adherent
can and does traverse very quickly from 'good' to 'radical' under Islam
relative to Other cultures with less defined negative constructs of Other via
textual and exemplar behaviours.
The existence of any so called 'good'/'moderates' already primed under such a
construct of Other based squarely on the cultural codex, being subject to
cultural authority external to the adherents immediate space i.e. ISIS
authority figures in Iraq etc., feed directly into the adherent belief of an
already primed Islamic codex identifiable genocide construct of Other being a
'good' and therefore despite cultural authorities in the adherents immediate
space all determining otherwise (which in realty 'all' has not happened - given
the codex this is not unexpected) as the Islamic codex clearly justifies and
authorizes such genocidal acts as 'good', so combined with authority such a
cultural genocide construct will inform adherent action. As it has and will
continue to do so until it is realized by Muslims and Other alike the Islamic
codex is a genocide construct and has to be removed from the Public Square for
If you generate as a culture terror against Other and you complain when Other
enforces its right to a flourishing life, what reply do expect Other to give -
Any dogma, be it secular or religious,
which enables the escape from the judgement of reason via cultural foundation
codex construct of justification and authorisation for action via divine
inspiration and/or human direction of 'grievous harm' or 'severest penalty'
must be rationally determined as an inherent threat to humanity and swiftly
removed from the Public Square. No amount of so called liberal moderates of
adherents to such a dogma in time and space will dull the marching fervour
across the broken bodies of Other.
Is even one victim of such a dogma worthy of the terrible price of its
It is not always someone elses, not my concern, is it, until? Those heads held
in the hand of the Australian Muslim in Iraq at the same time the same Muslim
determines “Did you think I would leave your
country without leaving a surprise. Fireworks coming up soon keep a close eye.”.
It is inevitable as in Bali, as in Boston, as in Pakistan, as in Afghanistan,
as in Russia, as in .... as from the 7th century to the 21st century........
Statistically untenable to say Islam does not inform systemic terror and major
schism, despite as with the Nazi the ever present 'moderate'.
We observe once again: "Experience has taught me that all
argument is useless with fanatical young Nazi of this kind, and so I say
nothing." Norman Hillson “I speak of Germany”,
We know that not only does Other say nothing in fear of attack, from the young
and inevitably the not-so-young fanatic/fundamentalist 'few', as in Birmingham,
nor do adherents claiming to be 'moderates', adherents open supporters of exactly
the same ideology. And yet we determine forcefully despite increasing violence
against Other and the missing: “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”,
We assure ourselves 'moderates' are in charge for did they not tell us they
were such, things could be worse?
“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
We can see this changed mindset of accepting the once '2007 Iraq: "violence that was often savage quite literally beyond belief" (D, Kilcullen, 2009) as the lesser evil even though we utilise the
exact same terms "barbaric", "beyond belief" where
in determining the Islamic State Iraq/Syria as now even worse but utilizing the
exact same terminology. Is it really worse than previous Muslim behaviour against
Other? Humanity have not seen this Muslim behaviour before in this century or
the previous enacted anywhere derived from Muslim communities?
"For Al Qaeda, meanwhile, disputes
with the Islamic State are an opportunity “to reposition themselves as the more
rational jihadists,” said Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, a researcher at the
Foundation for Defense of Democracies."
As Kilpatrick from the New York Times underlines this behaviour is not new. In
fact the only difference in between lulls is the quantitative utilisation of
the exact same methods inherent in Islamic/Muslim violence which is continual
at isolated local levels. We have come to accentuate ISIS behaviour only
because of the scale which indicates a greater capacity to inform the same
elsewhere-the threat of Muslim violence to be able to be actually delivered to
us as individuals, cultures has increased - that is all. Whereas the actual
Muslim behaviours have not ceased as a template since the seventh century.
There has to be a cultural system continual belief/ethical flow to enable this
stock of terror/violence exhibited by ISIS to exist in the first place. Such
cultural behaviour has to have a justification and authorisation to exist.
Terror-genocide simply develops in both directions.
And importantly there has to be a
cultural system purpose/function for terror/violence to be an element in
Islamic Muslim culture system otherwise it would not exist. What was the reality, more importantly as there is nothing we can do
about the past, what is the reality with Islam/Muslims now? If trends of
growing cultural ethical constructs publically stated in text, voice and
actions show a movement towards terror, major schism and subjugation of women
why do we believe things will get better - wishful thinking, future bias - does
And what else does Islam/Muslims inform
which humanity must be rid of?
“The conversation took a turn for the
worse when they told me that my ideas were un-Islamic and that Islam grants
women full dignity ‘within the four walls of her home’.” Women’s MidEasts Posts 2013
Our lives are constructed exactly the
same as buildings some of our architects and builders can only build four
walls, others have created palaces with many rooms – is it wrong to determine
you are not satisfied with four walls and want to change architect and builder?
That is not to say in a palace there may not still be some problems with
plumbing, nothing is perfect. Also we have to be careful not to believe to readily
four walls constitute a palace.
Strangely a very dangerous thing to do
changing architects and builders for some of our dearest fellow travellers
particularly women – who can see there are many more rooms attached even to
their own four walls yet women are still not able to enter. The palace it
appears are for Man only where the 'full dignity' of man is realised, women's
dignity according to the Male prescribed codex is to be realised within four walls
- they only need four walls, after all they are only women.
“..education of women in particular fosters patterns of thinking that greatly
improve quality of life, for both parents and children.” Development Through the Lifespan, Fifth Edition
Laura E. Berk
I noticed Laura did not say ‘men in
particular’ yet men work so diligently via the justification and authorisation
of Mans defined sacred codex construct of women, an escape from the judgment of
reason, to keep women within their four walls – what could life be like for all
of us if all this potential was enabled to be realized?
THE ISLAMIC CULTURAL CODEX (TEXTUAL AND
EXEMPLAR) MUST BE REMOVED FROM THE PUBLIC SQUARE AS IT IS A PROVEN GENOCIDE
CONSTRUCT AS WELL AS AN ERRONEOUS JUSTIFICATION AND AUTHORISATION FOR MANS
POWER OVER WOMENS DESTINY.
Why Has it come to this - It is because there comes a time when it becomes obvious (statistically,
rationally) a Culture, despite the ever present so called
Liberals/Moderates, can and does cause terror(cultural war) against and major
schism within the Societies they exist. The culture is justifiably feared much
more than the individuals within because of the actions the cultural
behavioural variance 'spectrum', in time and space consistently constantly from
generation to generation, inform against Other and/or women, internal and
There is a growing Muslim and Other
intellectual/political elite recognition.
The Telegraph, By
Damien McElroy 2:29PM BST 19 Aug 2013
Cultural Foundation Codex (genetic, (con) textual authority and exemplar
(messianic) templates) =Ethics=Ideas= Motivation=Consistent Cultural/Adherent Behavioural
Variance ('spectrum') =Cultural Action For and Against Other.
Where Cultural (political) Foundation I perceive aligns to Andrew Vincent's
“The term foundation is used in a very
broad sense. It is taken to imply some class of statements or propositions,
which are favoured absolutely over others. To be foundational, this class of
statements is regarded as fundamental – fundamental implying that its
processors cannot avoid deferring or referring back to it. This class of
statements is, in other words, always presupposed by diversity of other
statements. Insofar as this class of statements is fundamental, it can be
considered near inescapable or near unavoidable in any theorizing. Foundational
statements also allow inferences and systematic deductions to be made, which
explain and account for a range of other statements. Foundational statements,
therefore, have an encompassing capacity. They ensure the overall coherence of
a range of other statements. This coherent set of interlinked statements
constitutes a theory. My use of the term foundation has close parallels with
other terms such as metaphysics, first principles, or absolute
"culture... shared rules that govern the behaviour of a group of people
and enable members of that group to co-exist and survive. 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)
Your identity comes not just from the cultural environment in which you live
today, but from historical influences that have shaped that culture. The way
you develop depends not only on your innate personal characteristics but also
the interplay with the cultural surrounds that envelop everything in your
Psychology Burton, Western, Kowalski,
The point of the above is to emphasise societal major schism is occurring and
intensifying because "Culture uses artifacts, rituals
and text to develop and reinforce a shared sense of identity among members.”. Islam/Muslims "uses artifacts, rituals and text
to develop and reinforce a shared sense of identity among members." which justifies and authorises terror against Other and subjugation of
women from generation to generation. And also that to change the outcomes these
'artifacts, rituals and text' which underwrite major schism have to be removed from the Public Square
if in the long run at least one facet of tyranny against humanity will be
To propose those who claim so consistently and in such numbers to be Muslims,
are identified as such by many other Muslims, who can point to the artifacts,
rituals and text which develop and reinforce a shared view their behaviour of
terror against Other and misogynistic behaviour is valid within an Islamic
construct are not Muslim begs the question. Where is the completely distinct,
unconnected, separate 'culture' from Islam/Muslims 'artifacts, rituals and text' which have
framed their terrorist and/or misogynistic behaviour? You cannot provide this
alternative 'culture' can you? Therefore Islam/Muslims are directly responsible
for these crimes against humanity and must be held accountable and a remedy
enforced with prejudice if Muslims do not accede to do so themselves.
Why should one more child have to die to provide comfort to multiculturalists
who believe if we all sit down and have a chat over a can of beans everything
will be OK? Is it, has it ever been? Why not? It is because there are no
potential ethical conflicts inherent in a can of beans. Wishful thinking will
not stop two diametrically opposed ethical constructs causing terror.
As Lincoln rightly points out either one or the other will in the end take over
the Public Square. Humanity sees this so clearly when Islam and genocide
constructs like it as the Nazi ideology takes political control - does Other
remain with Liberty, Equality and Fraternity within the Public Square? In
understanding nothing stays the same, strategic inflection points are just as
applicable to cultures, Romans, Egyptians, Persians, Greeks, Chinese,
Indians,.... as they are to any other facet of life.
Surely experience must dictate a new approach. A culture which informs via its
foundation codex your justified 'grievous harm' and severest penalty' with
actual burning buildings, broken bodies and lives across time and space over
more than a thousand years proving such foundation codex are not merely words
strung together for no purpose must be treated with extreme caution as to its
claims of wanting to share equitably political power and have respect for
Others cherished values, when history even in our own time demonstrates so
clearly these words will as they always have been in the past be proved to be
You cannot force Other to convert because as the Qur'an (Muhammad Man) points
out this is Gods job but you can impose 'grievous harm' or 'severest penalty'
or if Other are lucky subservience to an inequitable tax regime and restriction
upon ideological practice - not much of a choice really is it. And what happens
to those who are outside the two 'allowable' religions Christianity and
Judaism? Such as Atheists etc., I believe Islam determines them Hypocrites what
happens to Hypocrites - tea and biscuits?
Islam determines Muslims must not kill other Muslims this is wrong. Has some
significant Other been left out of this protective determination? This has no
affect? Has not does not inform Muslim behaviour?
Cultural 'education' (Cultural
Foundation Codex) the core problem and solution.
A significant change
has come from the recent stated views of two Western political leaders regards
'Religion' as a driver of 'major schism' rather than a rote proclamation such
as David Cameron – "Islam Is
Peaceful and Compatible with Democracy" and Hillary Clinton "The
suggestion that faithful Muslims cannot thrive in a democracy is insulting,
dangerous and wrong,".
Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Libya, Turkey, Iran, London, Boston, Bali,
Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Philippines, Sudan, Kenya, Nigeria, Somalia,...
appear to statistically rationally determine David Cameron and Hillary Clinton's
views as so false as to be incredulous.
Yet Hillary Clinton by courtesy of Wiki leaks revealed just the opposite in
"In a December 2009 cable, leaked
by WikiLeaks in 2010, then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton confirmed that Saudi
Arabia remained a "critical financial base" for terrorism and that
Riyadh "has taken only limited action" to stop the flow of funds to
the Taliban and other such groups."
"..the kingdom's immense oil wealth has been used to underwrite the export
of an extreme, intolerant and violent version of Islam preached by its Wahhabi
Go anywhere in the world--from Germany to Indonesia--and you'll find Islamic
centers flush with Saudi money, spouting intolerance and hate. In 2007, Stuart
Levey, then a top Treasury official, told ABC News, "If I could snap my
fingers and cut off the funding from one country, it would be Saudi
How is it, it can be determined "export of an extreme, intolerant and violent version of
Islam" is occurring from the religious center
of Islam, Sunni Saudi Arabia, (A study conducted by the Pew Research Center in
2010 and released January 2011 found that there are 1.62 billion Muslims around
the world, and it is estimated that the Sunni population is between 75% and 90%)
that this 'version' does not represent the 'true' nature of Islam? It is the
same as claiming '.the Papal States immense wealth has
been used to underwrite the export of an extreme, intolerant and violent
version of Christianity preached by its Catholic clerics.' And '.
Rome remained a "critical financial base" for terrorism'.
Saudi Arabia is the source in time and
space of the 'true' Islam since the seventh century unbroken, the (Sunni
Muslims representing 75%-90% of all Muslims) it is from where Mohammad and his
ethical construct of Other originated. It is to where the faithful Muslim
returns en masse. If Saudi Arabia's Sunni version of Islam is so 'extreme,
intolerant and violent' why is it accepted at all if it is claimed to be so
unconnected to the 'true' Islam? It has to be connected ethically otherwise it
could be clearly shown to be unconnected and there would be no adherents
external to Sunni Saudi Arabia- yet alas there are.
"In his interview with FRANCE 24,
Maliki said Saudi Arabia and Qatar were seeking to destabilise Iraq by
supporting terrorist groups and providing them with financial support.
Maliki, an Iraqi Shiite politician, said the two Sunni majority Gulf countries
were also “supporting terrorism” in Syria and “around the world”."
"Saudi Arabia has declared the
Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization and banned it and other
organizations effective from March 8, according to an Interior Ministry
The ministry issued a list of banned organizations that includes the ‘Saudi
Hezbollah’ movement, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, the Al-Nusra Front,
Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, Al-Qaeda in Yemen, Al-Qaeda in Iraq, and the
Houthis in Yemen, the Saudi Press Agency reported, quoting the ministry."
The Saudi are justified to believe
themselves subject to Islamophobia? Or is it the reverse? This appears to me to
be another Muslim of one major sub-class determining another major sub-class of
Muslims are terrorizing them. Now which side is suffering from Islamophobia?
Which side has an unjustified fear, in fact a mental illness in determining the
other Muslim side a clear threat to their survival, peace and security?
The Sunni Saudi Muslims are Moderates?
Then what about the other side of the Islamic coin, the Shiite Muslims are not
informing terror somewhere on the globe even in Iraq itself? The Shiite Iraqi
Muslims are the Moderates? Unjustified even irrational fear of what fellow
Muslims can and will do?
This is exactly the same fear Other has
regards various Muslim sects yet it is determined a mental illness, Muslims can
justifiably fear each other yet Other cannot rationally fear Muslims as a whole
as Muslims clearly fear each other, unless Other wish to be determined an
"For months, the area has been
terrorized by raids blamed on semi-nomadic Fulani herders attacking Hausa
farmers. Both are Muslim.
Most Fulani—related violence in Nigeria is concentrated around central Plateau
state, where Muslim herders are pitted against Christian farmers.
Thousands have been killed in recent years."
14 Mar.2014, Nigerian Tribune Hassan Ibrahim
and Johnson Babajide with Agency Report
If this Muslim terror and schism was
confined simply between tribes in time and space one may argue this is tribal
not ideological but as Muslim attacks against Other are a global phenomenon which
recognise no Nation nor cultural border therefore such an argument is void.
With Islam the nature of the means by
which every individual 'true' Muslim have been given a God derived ability as
detailed in the Quran to determine Other, means each in turn Other and Muslim
adherent alike, are justifiably subject to the Quran genocide construct for
'grievous harm' and 'severest penalty'. We are not talking about fringe groups
enabling terror and major schism, either through direct funding and/or refusal
to institute appropriate cultural blockers to terror we are talking about
Nation States from Saudi Arabia to Indonesia (even in Indonesia Government
Ministers given tacit public support for extremist Islamic organisations).
But truth as they
say will out, Obama I believe has been forced (I assume because it is so
obvious) to make two interconnecting statements and politically he had to make
the first to make the second. For Obama could not be seen as being prejudiced
against a particular religion. This
would have been planned long before Obama stepped on his Air-Force 1 to go to Ireland
and Africa to make the relevant speeches.
In Ireland: "OBAMA OFFENDS IN IRELAND, SAYS CATHOLIC AND PROTESTANT
SCHOOLS CAN ENCOURAGE 'FEAR' AND 'DIVISION'"
In Africa: "UNITED States’ President, Barrack Obama, on Saturday, linked
growing terrorism in Africa to bad governance but insisted that, "in the
case of the Boko Haram sect, there is (also) the religious rationale for what
they are doing."
It is a clear recognition by Obama 'religion' as with 'secular' codex can and
does inform major schism and keeping silent is not an option if you really are
interested in peace and Harmony in the long run. Thinking for the sake of
preserving sacred cows 'Freedom of Religion' and 'Cultural relativism-We all in
essence suffer from sociocentric bias so we must not judge Other cultures
harshly and if you do so your suffering from a mental illness - phobia."
will not stop major schism in fact it enables it to occur.
It is not 'quantum
physics' Kublai Khan (1215 – 1294) according to Marco Polo had no doubt
Islamic/Muslim foundation text (doctrine) enabled atrocities by Muslims against
Other without any sense of guilt.
As"Mr Blair said: "There is not a problem
with Muslims in general. Most in Britain will be horrified at Lee Rigby's
murder."the question for humanity is as with the Nazi at
what point does Humanity act before or after the inevitable (statistically
given scientific evidence) major schism occurs. There comes a time when it is
too late, as many empires, cultures and societies have found to their terrible
When will the apologists, as there were countless for the Nazi, as there are
for Islam stop putting their ethical nihilistic jackboot on the throat of
reason, which they simultaneously proclaim as their domain, and finally accept
'Critical Thinking' will not deliver peace and harmony when you are dealing
with an irrational construct as the deductive base for dialogue - it is simply
not going to happen - at the edges yes (but the cultural 'spectrum' dictates
this will be the case so one must not take any joy from such a state) - to
utilise this as proof the culture as a whole in time and space is amenable to
notions of a pluralistic society which promotes equality of opportunity of
power and flourishing for all inclusive of women is a dangerous fallacy.
The key disagreement as I perceive is no longer, as Tony Blair said with the
view there is or is not an inherent ‘problem with Islam', that is statistically
verifiable on many societal levels, one simply has to reflect on the dollars
and cents the world is currently spending on security services to protect
ourselves and even adherents themselves from the actions Islam as a codex
informs. If there was no cultural risk from Muslims, reflect what is the
probability the amount of resources now assigned to the task would exist.
The key disagreement is can, given the Islamic codex is it possible to change
the Islamic codex itself to such a degree it will inform a Muslim 'spectrum'
which no longer informs 'major schism' and equal status for women across that
spectrum, Ed Husain and Razi Azmi believe it can be. Razi Azmi believes given
the 'submission' of Christianity to the notions of pluralism and equality it is
possible - I disagree.
I believe it is impossible for the Islamic codex to be changed or as Ed Husain
proposes not changed but reinterpreted, because the Islam codex is so
fundamentally riven with derogatory construct of Other and integral to its core
benefit to Men is the submission of women to Mans (Muslim Mans) will.
Both the extensive core constructs of Other (as proving the veracity of belief
and rewards in relative contrast to what is in store for Other on earth and in
hell for not being a 'true believer) the necessary outcome the justified
'willing' subservience of Other to Muslims, and women being sexually and
materially subject to Man Muslim, as well as the proscribed reinforcement
Islamic societal mechanisms for enforcing these beliefs as true - the
psychological/time costs in aligning to these enforcement mechanisms and
therefore psychological need to justify such costs as rational simply makes in
my view Islam completely beyond redemption for it does not contain any ethical
codex blockers regards Other which are so qualified as to cancel out their
effect not only logically but also on the ground in space and time.
So Razi Azmi's view Islam can submit to the rational as Christianity has is a
false hope because of the Islamic codex messianic templates of justified
violence against Other inherent in Mohammad's actions (of being directly
involved in the slaughter of Other and joking around when informed of the
murder of those who ridiculed him) as opposed to Jesus' behaviour, as well as
the complete absence of Islamic standalone unqualified ethics which are
supportive of Other which exist in the New Testament.
Islam needs to be removed from informing the 'spectrum' of cultural war and
subjugation of women it consistently constantly actions against Other and
How do you go about it?
You must attempt
this non-violently otherwise what’s the point you simply try and suppress a
genocide construct with another, but I am not sure cultures of genocide
constructs of Other take any notice of such niceties. Tony Blair said it would
not be easy I agree. I expect there is going to be violence if you keep silent
or you speak up.
Firstly you do the
math, research to establish if there is a cultural link - i.e. if humanity
should be much more concerned in time and space regards a culture as a whole
rather than individuals.
Such research needs
to be based across cultures secular and religious - Islam should not be simply
the focus as Islam is not the only genocidal construct (my perception doing the
psychological research on the link between foundation codex (genetics, (con)
textual constructs, exemplar-leadership (messianic) templates) construct of
Other inclusive of women, relative individual, group and State responses.
prejudice age 0-, relative ability for State to change once set.
Statistics on growth
of extremism with cultural population growth which enables greater scope for
setting feedback mechanisms, -growing numbers relatively as elsewhere of
enforcers via fundamentalist groups.
Establish if it
really matters under a 'freedom' democratic construct or not - Indonesian
experience would say no (but needs to be confirmed)
State by State
analysis current an historic of growth of Muslim population and correlation
·cross and inter
statements regards Other (i.e. Sydney Mosque fatwa against Christmas) and women
which may flag negative ethical movement.
violent statements regards Other
public/private enforcement of Islamic norms
non-violent/violent. i.e. attacks in streets/homes against Muslim women
and men to enforce adherence.
terror actions successful and thwarted
longitudinal surveys of inter-cultural views
growth in extremist organisations /groups/
individuals (linkages back through time and space)
growth in Muslim terror organisations /groups/
individuals (linkages back through time and space)
growth in Muslim teaching organisations/
schools/ correlated to fundamentalist views and action.
diminished of rights of Other and women.
cultural visibility of women's subservience to
Man-linkages to rise in fundamentalism and terrorist related activities,
and diminished political rights of Other and women - i.e. is such growing
visibility rather than an indication of growing 'Freedom' quite the
reverse in reality.
calls for Other and women to accept Islamic
law to be the basis for Muslim law.
increased statements for women to be pure
otherwise they deserve what they get (meat), or are the actual cause of natural
increasing calls for inclusion of cultural
laws into the societal legal framework and connection to increasing
fundamentalism and terrorist related activities.
no go zones for Other and/or women,
Muslim clusters numbers and size linked to
socioeconomic and defined Islamic indoctrination levels
growth in dogma centric criminal gangs linked
to extremist groups
definition changes over time of median notion
of Liberal/Moderate/Fundamentalist/ Extremist/Terrorist/ 'True believer'
work has been done on percentage population
required to support insurgency (relative external support with
globalization) if this is appearing related to population growth.
what historically and currently constitutes a
'True believer' and what this means for the status of Other and women in
examine the rise of the 'Right' as this will be a red flag the
current political constructs are failing to rationally deal with the cause
cultural foundation codex and the 'Right' inevitably rises with increasing
societal support to protect what they see as 'cherished values' because
cultural relativist in seeking to maintain Peace at any cost, Peace is the
Develop research particularly the methodology of linking cultural codex (textual and exemplar (messianic) templates) 'rational' model to establish reflected relative levels of status and power for cultural altruistic enforcers authenticity, authority within changing context as this will establish if indeed there is such a thing as Is/Not Islam. For it enables firstly a test for if the dualism of Is/Not can in fact exist and why and also the relative authenticity and authority of Is and Not (if one can even define Is or Not in the first place). It will establish how and why the Islamic/Muslim cultural behavioral variance changes over time and space i.e. appearance of Islamic schools, mosques, demands for acceptance of Sharia law, the link between Lakemba Sydney Australia jihad again Christmas, increasing wearing of Muslim women cultural clothing and the relative severity of (for Muslim women by wearing such cloths deem themselves cultural altruist enforcers), citizens being murdered in the streets, and increasing development of terror cells of greater numbers targeting internal and external Other. In other words the resource and political thresholds at which the Islamic/Muslim culture will inform terror.
Violence begets counter violence in equal measure or worse. Simply holding
hands prancing around the camp fires with moderate liberals and cups of
tea, inhibit communications and create martyrs on both sides simply delays
the inevitable genocide in both directions.
Cultural relativist have to be removed from political power and the
quicker the better.
The fact the Right is actually rising is proof you are failing in your
current strategy you are not facing the reality cultures be they religious
or secular can be dangerous entities 'Freedom of Religion' is simply
enabling schism not preventing it.
The Right rises to face off against what is societally perceived as
exactly the same construct in the opposite direction- the trouble is
neither side accepts they are the cause of the resultant terror in this
case Islam/Muslims and the Right facing it, each determines they are the
pristine their ethical values 'good' rather than 'evil'.
My view is the Right would not rise if Islam/Muslims did not inherently
have the same attributes of repression and violence. You want to stop the
Right rising remove the cause do not play around with the symptoms and
think you are achieving anything. Cultural movements are seen over
hundreds of years, what may appear to be a success measured in months or a
few years is an illusion/delusion.
slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish
thoughts". I doubt that he was referring to writing on religion, though
this might warrant his strictures today."
Logicians, linguists and psychologists purposefully go through the
Quran and Mein Kampf and construct Other are they the same in both texts
(if they are explain why the cultural outcomes will be different), are the
ethical blockers that inform a notion of Islam of peace actually able to
be logically derived without being a self-serving conscience assuaging
Logicians, linguists and psychologists purposefully go through the
the Quran and construct women does it inform a 'Free State' of equality of
power and access to a flourishing life in comparison to Muslim Man are the
notions of Islam informing women liberation actually able to be logically
derived without being a self-serving conscience assuaging device.
A slave may enjoy being a slave but
does this mean the rest of us have to enjoy the spectacle of the public display
of such a heinous state of subservience to master Man in our Public Square.
Participants at the annual conference
of radical Muslim group Hizb ut-Tahrir at Lidcombe, in Sydney's west, yesterday
(November 17, 2013). Picture: Ross Schultz Source: The Australian
For those who did, "punishment will
come and seize you at a time you never expected"
The Muslim veil, hijab, niqab and burqa are the outward political
signs of Muslims women’s subjugation to Muslim Mans Control, Muslim Mans
Ownership, and Muslim Mans Power. These states of dress I believe will be
found through research to inform diminished states of relative liberty,
equality and justice of Muslim women to Muslim Men within a Muslim
community and also inform outward signs of the degree 'major schism' is
under way in any pluralistic society.
Far from being a 'good' from my perspective such states inform
'evil' particularly for the status of women and must be removed from the
It appears to me a possible connection exists between the relative
subservience of women, degree of textual construct, public displays of subservience
to Man and a correlation to cultural growth of fundamentalism, feeding
into Muslim violence internal/external, given these varying degrees of
public displays of Muslim women’s subservience within any society - I have
a feeling there is going to be a more than significant connection between
the relative degree of publicly displayed subservience and
attempted/actual violence against Other.
It is important to determine how true wearing the Muslim veil,
hijab, niqab and burqa is a 'free choice' devoid of cultural pressure to
conform and the various psychological states and relative power states
each relatively inform for women - also the impact on the relative level
of acceptance of the subjugation of women and lessening of respect for
women's equality which may be associated with such states and if the
feminist construct and derived relative power of women means such
depictions of subservience should be banned from the Public Square to
prevent new citizens from believing such a state is acceptable.
"“You know, I wasn’t always
wearing the hijab. At first I was harassed every time I went out,
sometimes it was awful and just too much to bear. Then I wore the hijab
and thought now that I’m a bit covered and more modest in the way I
dressed, harassment would stop or at least diminish, but it didn’t. Then,
I felt all guilty about it and was wondering maybe it’s me, maybe I’m not
well covered and maybe I’m still a source of “fitna” and I felt very bad
about it. I decided to wear the full niqab, no more colors (very dark
colors, mostly black), and no more clothes that shows the figure. I felt and still feel very good and at
peace with my decision, but I would lie if I say that harassment stopped
because it didn’t. I still get the harassing gazes and the harassing words
about my eyes (though my face is covered). But at least, I feel that it’s
not my fault.”" Sexual harassment in Moroccan streets, who is to blame?
Thursday 14 February 2013 - 22:42 Moroccan World News
So completely opposite to the cultural relativist and freedom of
religion paradigm of ‘Freedom’ wearing the veil, hijab, niqab and burqa,
it is my view research will find not only that the relative numbers of
these garments worn, interconnected to garment type of political public
displays of affiliation to Islam will be a reliable gauge and reflective
of major schism in train in any society and measure of the attempted and
successful subjugation of Other and women, but will also find wearing such
garments are not really a ‘free choice’ at all. A price women have to pay,
public displays of submission to Man’s determination, to stay safe and be
accepted as a 'true believer'.
No cultural pressure to conform? If this was truly the case
statistically Other would be wearing the same garments in the same
proportion - are they? Therefore? It is a lie.
An important question is there a cultural link between levels of
violence internal/external (be it against Other and/or women) and a
cultures construct of women. If this can be statistically verified by
comparing the ethical construct in codex and/or codex informed pressure
for women to mark themselves separate from Men this may provide the proof
required to clear such constructs from the Public Square (this is not only
a Muslim question).
appears on the streets and what is right beside it - peace and security?
"THREE years ago Carnita Matthews
made headlines for refusing to remove her burka after she was pulled over by
NSW police, in a move that sparked new laws.
Yesterday it was her husband, Hamdi
Alqudsi, in the spotlight after he and another man were arrested for allegedly
recruiting fighters to train and fight with al-Qa'ida affiliates in
The Muslim veil, hijab, niqab and burqa
appearing in any pluralistic society’s streets are the outward signs of
cultural schism, not cultural cohesion and in non-pluralistic streets a sign
Other and women have been crushed. You seriously believe in peace and a flourishing
life particularly for women and you allow this Islamic cultural construct
anywhere near the Public Square you will have neither.
"Most include a few words, for
example: "I loathe the hijab. I too like the feel of the sun and the wind
on my hair. Is this a big sin?"
Ever since the Islamic Revolution
35 years ago, it has been illegal for a woman to leave the house without
wearing a headscarf. The punishment ranges from a fine to imprisonment.
"My hair was like a hostage to the government," says Masih Alinejad,
an Iranian political journalist who lives in the UK and who set up the Facebook
page. "The government still has a lot of hostages," she adds."
Freedom of choice? All
you need is just one culturally derived action to prove the notion of women are
Free to choose as false to determine the argument Islam enables Free choice as
false because you cannot have in the same time and space Tyranny and Liberty
and claim Tyranny does not exist. Islam either informs Tyranny or Liberty it
cannot inform both at the same time and be determined as informing Liberty. It
is the same as determining a cobra's tail is non-venomous therefore the cobra
You may determine your culture as
liberal moderate and surround yourself with the same but do not think in the
end you yourself nor your friends will not in the end conform to cultural
authority and participate in actions at this point of time you would abhor. I
advise you read up on Milgrams experiment.
There comes a time when it is too late.
When saying there are only a ‘handful’ of extremists and we are mostly a
liberal moderate culture loses all meaning particularly for Other and in this
case for women as well. You have ignored a truth as with outliers in statistics
the extremists ‘handful’ have a disproportionate effect on the ethical cultural
mean, have you not seen this before in other cultures? The Islamic Defenders Front
(Indonesian: Front Pembela Islam/FPI) a socio-religious organization group in
Indonesia, notorious for hate crimes and violence is not having an affect now
in Indonesia out of all proportion to its perceived numbers? FPI is not being
given tacit support from Indonesian Government Ministers and influencing
politicians in the Indonesian Provence's as well, to follow their direction -
Also you hide from yourself a terrible
truth your own cultural foundation codex actually justifies and authorizes the
very existence of these extremist groups – there is no ethical schism between
you and the extremists as has been found in Indonesian research on the supposed
quantum leap between Islamic fundamentalist and terrorist.
Societies should be allowed to choose,
based on scientifically derived evidence, whether or not a culture is to be
allowed into the Public Square, particularly cultures whose codex contains a
genocide construct of Other and subjugation of women thrown in.
If the analysis indicates a strong
correlation between growth numbers of a culture or derived from a culture
violence, push for or actual political diminution of rights of Other
particularly women then I believe other cultures who determine violence is
unacceptable and the diminution of political rights of all inclusive of women
have to be enhanced and protected have a right to act. Why? Because my view
ignoring in space and time such genocide constructs is a mistake - they will
not simply disappear under the weight of the so obvious benefits of
togetherness. Major schism will be inevitable as Tony Blair rightly pointed
Then once established the probability
of schism is as is reflected on the ground historically and currently is very
high and it is scientifically verified the Islamic cultural foundation codex
means having Muslims anywhere near the Public Square ensures schism is
inevitable in time and space:
1.Remove all institutional support, political,
educational, for cultures defined as containing genocide constructs and
advancing diminution of Other and women's rights.
2.Make sure new generations of citizens are not
exposed to genocide constructs.
3.Ban public displays of affiliation as you would for
any genocide construct that is set to destabilize and terrorize your societies.
4.Support ongoing research and researchers into
culturally derived schism emanating from culture codex and set up the legal and
enforcement frameworks to remove such codex from the Public Square.
5.Remove the cultural entity from any control or
influence of entities which may provide any financial and organisational
6. Confiscate all assets and prevent new assets from being obtained which would enable the culture to be able to sustain itself and promote its political agenda. Particularly control of charities, health services and other cultural services which are utilised to maintain cultural hold and means of sustaining and promoting cultural aims. Money is power from whatever source it comes from or goes to. Under a genocide construct the so called charity is a means to an end not the end itself. And will be invariably directed to assist like-minded if not in the main totally.
Yes it moves away
from the cultural relativist ethical nihilist paradigm if we all hold hands
everything is going to be OK. Has it worked, is it working is the security risk
diminishing or increasing?
The argument is do
nothing as it will only be the actual cause of schism. I believe all this does
is enable a major schism in time to occur which fails to recognize the real
cause as specific cultural construct of Other and simply leads to a cultural
genocide in both directions. Where we see fascist constructs on both sides
trying to negate each other out.
I believe humanity
has to recognize the root cause of internal/external cultural violence are our
cultural foundation codex and the ever present existence of liberal moderates
simply makes no difference to the endgame. The point is to scientifically
determine what are the key constructs in codex which will inevitably inform
'major schism' over time and be honest about this otherwise humanity simply
lurches from one genocide to the next.
If seeking security,
harmony and a flourishing life One should not judge a person, a community, a
Nation by the colour of their skin, the level of their intellect nor their
physical dexterity but One must certainly judge them by the character of ALL
their "insulting, dangerous, and wrong" cultural foundation codex
regards Other, particularly as it relates to the status of women relative to
men. For only after complete examination by oneself (not taking anyone else’s
subjective word for it) of the cultural Foundation codex regards Other and
Women, and ignoring demonstrative pious claims utilizing select abridged
versions of the cultural Foundation codex to hide the truth, will you be able
to conclude such a person, such a community, or such a Nation will eventually
cause you more harm than good and is really not worth having anything to do
with, and must be excluded from the Public Square for the sake of attaining
security, harmony and a flourishing life.
Future Bias: If it is true Islam is a culture which informs peace why is
it in time and space 'danger' and 'hate' informs the ultimate nature of
Islam/Muslim culture wherever it resides? As pointed out - 19 years ago was
security, hate and danger less, is there a connection between the numbers of
any culture and the capacity to enforce the move to the cultural foundation
codex norm of the 'true believer' and enable the full realisation of the
'spectrum' of cultural behaviour inclusive of terror (cultural war) and subjugation
problems at the moment Muslim population wrestling with in Australia?
A: We actually have problems with Wahhabis at the moment. Wahhabis are very
much in control. We have many problems with them. They are too dangerous for
Sunni and Shia brothers. Their ideology I mean, they say we are all from
the Sunni. They taking a way the Sunni sects, they dismiss Hanafi, Hambeli and
Maleki. They dismiss it. And they say we should be together, Sunni. Through
such way they try to teach you their ideology. B the first thing in their
ideology is to hate Shia and this is the danger.
Q: Can you tell us a gist of what you tackle and highlight in your article?
A: What I just said was what was happening in Australia. There are a lot of new
Muslims in Australia. There is a growth of Islam in Australia. But the fact
that, one the Wahhabis have a lot of control. So, 19 years before, there was
a lot of unity between Shia and Sunni. But because of the Wahhabism now
it’s very separate like Sunni won’t come to Shia communities anymore because
they are taught that we are like something else."
What therefore is the Future? Should not citizens have a choice which
culture it interacts with given statistically scientifically it can be
determined (proved beyond reasonable doubt) having Islam/Muslims anywhere near
the Public Square, despite the ever present so called liberal/moderates, is a
tragedy in the making? Have we not the right to have societies where fellow
citizens are not intent on destroying our cherished values and very lives?
Do you understand the ethical basis for the fatwa against Christmas proclaimed
from a Sydney Mosque and what such ethics actually informs for the future -
Doing nothing an option?
Mr Ali has been recorded saying that
over the course of seven years he had identified 240 'radicals Islamists'
within his community (Australian) centre, 120 of whom continue to have
extremist views and are seen to potentially be on a path to "extreme
acts". Mr Nawaz, who says he understands
extreme Islamist groups because he was once a true believer, thinks Mr
Ali's admission is a serious concern."
"..one of the members of the American group was strangled until his face
turned blue and that women in the group were threatened with rape, according to
witnesses to the attack that they say took place on October 16.
According to American Shiite cleric
Mothafar al-Qazwini, the group was confronted by as many as 200 men they later
learned to be Australians belonging to a Sunni sub-group known as
"HUNDREDS of Muslims attending a
community meeting in western Sydney were warned yesterday that they should
refuse to co-operate with Australian governments and their agencies, including
ASIO and the federal police....
Hizb ut-Tahrir, which operates internationally, calls for the creation of a
world caliphate to rule all Muslims according to traditional principles and
For those who did, "punishment will
come and seize you at a time you never expected"."
"This maintenance of a separate identity within Australia will be a
precursor to a big event that will happen at some yet-to-be-defined time. Then
the Muslim community in Australia will become part of a global caliphate,
governed not by Australian politicians but its own Muslim leaders, and
answerable not to Australian law but sharia."
If an outcome 'terror' is inevitably derived from a known series of events
surely the nature of those events justifies severe judicial societal penalty
being applied to prevent such acts being devoid of penalty - and therefore no
impediment to growing terror.
I believe it is time to institute laws
which enable the revoking of citizenship of any person involved in foreign
armed conflicts, either in front line or support roles, other than activity
specifically authorized by the State. The decision to revoke citizenship based
on a security service recommendation and overseen by State legislature review.
If it is ascertained by security services an individual citizen is
participating in the organisation of fighters for or directly in unauthorized
foreign armed conflict they must have their citizenship revoked. And if still
in the Nation to which their citizenship pertains be deported as quickly as
possible to a Nation which would appreciate their cultural mindset. Immigrants
signing a pledge not to be involved in such activities with the penalty the
cancellation of citizenship.
Enabling citizens to be trained in
tools of terror and allowing them to return from whatever side is not a ‘good’.
Citizens should be ‘Free’ to decide? And
when they get back what happens?
"Posting on Facebook on Monday
night, Shaheed, who has had his account shut down numerous times, wrote:
“Rolling out, make heaps of dua its gonna be a big one In’sha’allah.’’
The comments generated more than 30 “likes’’ and seven comments. One
asked, “Does that mean ur goin on an op?’’ prompting the reply, “Yeah,
In’sha’allah’’. Shaheed provided no details of what the “op’’ was."
"A MUSLIM leader has called for
Hizb ut-Tahrir to be banned in Australia, as exasperation within the community
grows over the extremist group and its spokesman Uthman Badar for drawing Islam
into another “stereotypical debate”.
It is statistically impossible for any Muslim leader to now claim Hizb
ut-Tahrir are extremists, outliers outside a consistent constant 'true' Muslim Behavioural
variance. The actions of violence and subjugation or espousing of the same by
Muslims not Mickey Mouse supporters happens so often and at such hierarchy
levels of leadership of 'groups' not just individual statements that it is
obscene in its audacity in face of the bloody reality.
"Khaled Sharrouf fired off the
tweets on July 14 from the Middle East
The Sydney resident fled Australia on
his brother's passport in December
He tweeted: 'I love to slaughter
[Australians]' and called the AFP 'cowards'
It came just before it was revealed
40-50 extremists were living in Australia"
By LOUISE CHEER Daily Mail PUBLISHED:
01:40 AEST, 17 July 2014
"AN Islamic State fighter known
only as Abu Bakr has become the second Australian to carry out a suicide
bombing in Syria and Iraq, killing five people in a Shia-dominated district
near the centre of Baghdad."
"KHALED Sharrouf, the convicted
terrorist who in recent weeks has tweeted a string of atrocities that he
and fellow jihadis have committed in Syria and Iraq, claims a second
Australian has become a suicide bomber."
"KHALED Sharrouf, the convicted
terrorist who in recent weeks has tweeted a string of atrocities that he and
fellow jihadis have committed in Syria and Iraq", "convicted terrorist"?
When will the pathological altruist Western policy makers basing their
decisions upon Freedom of Religion and multiculturalism realise, Islam is at
its core codex bent upon the destruction of Other and once power is attained as
we see constantly across history Liberty and Equality are destroyed?
Freeing these Muslim convicted terrorists without determining they have
'reformed' is the same as releasing recidivist paedophiles out into our streets
and therefore Muslim convicted terrorists must be treated in the same way.
This is cultural WAR you idiots not just ordinary societal crime - it is
cultural derived behavioural pathology. You either Change the Architect and
Builder or you will have repeat terror. It is not a question of if.
"The images show a beaming Elomar
holding the decapitated heads of two Syrian soldiers who appear to have been
killed during, or after, the fighting around Raqqa, which has seen some of the
bloodiest fighting of the war." Aussie terrorists send out warning by Mitchell
Nadin, Paul Maley, THE AUSTRALIAN JULY 30, 2014
"Australia's terrorism threat level
remains at medium - meaning an event "is likely and could occur."
"Anti-terror laws crucial: ASIO BY ANDREW DRUMMOND
AAP AUGUST 08, 2014 8:06PM
It is appalling when looking back over the years of the clear connection
between Freedom of Religion/Cultural relativism enabling a culture such as
Islam with a genocide construct access to the Public Square being the cause of
the major schism societies across the world are experiencing. Rather than
enabling flourishing societies what has Freedom of Religion/Cultural relativism
delivered in reality?
What I ask is the difference between the 'regular suburban kid' from one
culture and the 'regular suburban kid' from another culture which enables one
to stand consistently and constantly against terror and one stand consistently
and constantly for it? The cultural codex of one relative to the other. One
contains a genocidal construct of Other the other cultural codex does not.
Change the architect and builder or
"Mr Moroney said that the
conspirators in the Pendennis plot knew the police were watching them.
Police tried repeatedly to disrupt the group’s plans — arresting them for minor
offences, tapping their phones, even approaching them directly.
No the AFP cannot 'succeed' and the 'dad’s love failed' because the dad did not
understand 'love' to enable ones children to avoid being terrorists is not to
culturally educate them under the very codex which enables it to consistently
constantly occur within the cultures behavioural variance and be regarded
within that Islamic/Muslim behavioural variance as a good.
“I know how they think. I know how they
fight. There is no compromise possible.
“These long wars require long commitment to outlast radical ideas and provide
viable, meaningful alternatives which require a whole-of-government response,
rather than assuming the military can or should do it all.’’
It does not take a genius to know how
they think, it is how they get to think what they
think that really matters. If you cannot fight and destroy the latter in the
Public Square all that happens is you are being 'fought' by the Muslim culture,
your actions be that you personally perceive them as pre-emptive or not they
will always be reactive. You are dealing with symptoms not the cause.
To "provide viable, meaningful
alternative" when the major part of what is
determined 'sacred' text and exemplar (messianic) template behaviour comprises
the Islamic cultural codex which supports a genocide construct of Other really
is a cultural relativist absurdity masquerading as a viable public policy. This
again is a fallacious and totally unjustifiable view there can be a 'true'
Islamic/Muslim behavioural variance without terror, which means a significant
portion of the Islamic codex would have to be universally accepted by Muslims
as being necessary for deletion along with Mohammad as an exemplar (messianic)
template - can anyone seriously believe this can happen.
Therefore the 'truth' has to be faced if you cannot have Islam in time and
space without the terror and major schism why is it being allowed within the
Public Square at very great cost to Other? Is one Childs life really worth the
price? You really think so?
How quickly, when already supplied with the justification and authorization of
a cultural codex of a genocide construct of Other does an imbued/primed
girl" be turned to 'radical' adult given the
cultural codex itself frames authority consistently constantly to promote such
a genocide construct as a cultural 'good'?
No movement in the Australian Muslim Ethical mean to enable this
infant-child-adolescent-adult; framed by Muslim family-peer
group-community-exemplars; Muslim artifacts, rituals and text to become what
he/she is "commander of Iraqi Islamic State
in a hail of bullets in Syria", despite
being exposed to Others diametrically opposed counter ethics?
"It will be alleged the men were
involved in recruiting, facilitating and funding people to travel to Syria to
engage in hostile activities," the agencies said in a joint statement.
Mr Censori (Carpet Court owner whose
business was next door to the iQraa Islamic Centre) described staff at the
centre as "really quite friendly and pleasant".
If " really quite friendly and
pleasant" is the front and "engage in hostile activities" is the back at which point can Other supporters of "Freedom of
Religion"/Multiculturalism as well as so called other "really quite friendly and pleasant" Muslims guarantee to the rest of us when they say determining "really quite friendly and pleasant" Muslims as an inherent threat to society, any society within which
Islam is allowed into the Public Square is Islamophobic,
bigotry, racist etc.
reflects reality, rather than a desperate need to mask complicity by
blaming the victims rather than the perpetrators Muslim culture as a whole,
which consistently, constantly includes terror and major schism as a product of
the Muslim behavioural variance?
"A SMALL number of Islamic radicals
have “settled intentions” to conduct terrorist attacks in Australia, bolstering
the case for the nation’s spy chief to recommend an increase in the terror
threat level, which could happen as early as tomorrow."
I ask again No move in the ethical mean of the Muslim whole of culture to
enable this view above? No increasing support for such actions within the
Muslim community as compared to 20 years ago? Still the same? The same level of
threat emanates from the Muslim community as a whole as existed 20 years ago?
The continuing absurdity of ASIO director-general David Irvine and the Australian
Federal Police policy approach inferring only 'few' or 'SMALL number' to hide the fact it is only ever a
'few' or 'SMALL number' who become cultural altruistic enforcers. It is the same as claiming with the Nazi
terrorists in Germany targeting Other inclusive of the Jews only a 'few' or 'small number' of the Nazi culture are directly
involved so Nazism as an ideology cannot be held responsible. In fact this was
the argument utilised by the Nazi as well as Other supporters at the time - did
it alter the final outcome?
The real question ASIO director-general David Irvine and the Australian Federal
Police have to ask themselves does Islam provide the "artifacts, rituals and text to develop and reinforce a shared
sense of identity among 'altruistic enforcer' members". The Muslim altruist enforcers and well as many Other can detail the
"artifacts, rituals and text" which enable such Muslim terror and
major schism. Islam as a whole culture, as we clearly sheet home to Nazism as a
whole culture, is therefore responsible.
So many so called 'good'-'moderates' over so many years and still the statement
"Terror attack ‘plans’ in place — case to increase threat level
bolstered" is placed before us. When a strategy is clearly not working
what do you do?
"It was one flag that could evoke
horror. Yet it was put up for auction at a Sydney mosque, which was thronged
with people, even children. And it went for over $2000. Even a drawing of the
flag was bought.
The flag belonged to Islamic State members, who had allegedly murdered
thousands in Iraq and Syria, and beheaded two western journalists, James Foley
and David Sotloff. “IS
By Revathi Siva Kumar | September 10,
2014 11:06 AM
I ask again if the statement today by the Prime Minister in raising the Terror
alert level to high that Terror has nothing to do with religion - is the truth
- "Sydney mosque, which was thronged
with people, even children."
These “.people, even children" are of a religion, Islam, selling a Islamic religious symbol directly
connected to a religious based terrorist organisation IS, within a Islamic
religious meeting place. Muslim terror is not derived from Islamic codex it is
derived from criminals who simply turn up without motive to kill people? You
want to know how infant-child are turned in to terrorists this is part of the
'enculturation process' as Abbott would tell us, part of the process which is
Abbott informs us not connected in any way to religion constructs of Other.
Today tragically I record the first of many deaths to come on Australian
soil of Muslim and Other, today the first death is a Muslim and it is
merely by chance and hard work on the part of the Australian security services
that many more deaths have not been recorded before this.
Who knows there may be some deaths already taken place as a result of the
Islamic religious construct of Other determined under some other category of
which we are not aware, it would not surprise me.
If one looks simply through the newspaper links provided before this and the
commentary one will see how obscene, not merely fallacious, is the notion
"Not Religion"/Not Culture" is not the cause of this tragic
death and stabbings of two courageous policeman doing their duty to protect.
If it were so, it was "Not Religion"/Not Culture" which caused
this death and injury and the security policy utilised for the past twenty to
thirty years has been based upon this notion why has the policy failed? Why is
it the propensity of Muslims to kill Other has increased despite the proclaimed
majority of Muslims over this time being 'moderate' and it has made no
difference. Clearly the existence of any number of so called 'moderates' makes
no difference in time and space, it may slow but not stop terror and major
schism occurring in Australian streets. Clearly "Not
Religion"/"Not Culture" has not worked.
MONIQUE HORE, JON KAILA HERALD SUN
SEPTEMBER 30, 2014 3:10PM
"An Australian Muslim fighting in
Syria and who supports the recent beheadings by Islamic State has told of his
reasons for joining the conflict, and warned Australia against its
involvement." Islamic State 'is justified' MIKE DUFFY The West
Australian October 11, 2014, 3:27 am
The absurdity of the Australian Greens determining the Islamic 'problem' is to
do with the marginalized economic or otherwise ignores the fact the Islamic
cultural behavioural variance, as no other major culture on earth, informs such
violence emanating from it consistently constantly from generation to
generation. Not only from youth but adults as well. It is made out that these
Muslims are all on some sort of boy’s crusade nothing is further from the
truth. Yes on the battle front are men and women from the younger age group
that is always the way no culture fights with the elderly as shock troops. The
Muslims either change their cultural codex construct of Other or nothing
Such a cultural construct which enables consistently constantly such an ethical
outcome worthy of coexisting with Other in any Public Square?
"On reflection, Alberici said she
hated that she didn't get the chance to ask this question:
"In his caliphate, in his ideal Islamic state would I, as a woman, have
the opportunity to sit opposite him as an equal and engage in a robust
discussion about these issues on the public broadcaster? I don't think he would
have answered," she told Fairfax Media." Lateline host Emma Alberici's only regret over Hizb
ut-Tahrir interview SMH Lucy Cormack October 9, 2014
I ask Shorten and Abbott at what point in Islamic codex belief and ethics which supports such Muslim notions of this so called radical Muslim cleric Ismail al-Wahwah are delineated from the liberal/moderate Muslim view, and importantly are these so called liberal/moderate Muslims as you define them (not as they define themselves as such) diminishing in number as would be expected given clearly the cultural altruist enforcers are able to move so freely within the Australian Public Square? "Al Qaedaism, the ideology, is stronger today than ever, thanks to the failure of the Arab spring and the battlefield has expanded from Mali to Pakistan and beyond to Australia and Europe," he writes. The world has misread the Middle East nightmare and our war without bordersThe Age October 11, 2014, Paul McGeough "In the recordings — dating back to 2011 and obtained by The Australian — Harun Mehicivic promotes fighting to establish an Islamic state and warns his followers against discussing certain issues openly. But he says they must know “the basic knowledge” of “how to wage jihad and against whom it must be waged”. He has also told his small, loyal group of followers that the conflict in Syria is a sign of an imminent final battle to be waged by Muslims. .... In April last year, Islamic State’s predecessor in Iraq was praised by Mr Mehicivic during a speech in which he also promoted the “mujahideen” in Somalia, Yemen and Nigeria for using violence to establish sharia.
Two months earlier, Mr Mehicivic said Muslims who denounced jihadist groups were on the wrong path. “You find that there are people of Tawhid (monotheism) and people of jihad — this is the people that go a different way, the right way,” he said." Aussie ‘emir’ preached jihad MARK SCHLIEBS THE AUSTRALIAN OCTOBER 14, 2014 12:00AM
Here we have above the perfect 'liberal/moderate' Muslim announcing "jihadist groups were on the wrong path".
Muslims and Other supporters of a clear cultural genocide proclaim - "See this is clear evidence Muslims are against violence Muslims leaders themselves say so!".
But the reality in this example of Mr Mehicivic is the Islamic cultural genocide construct manifest, lying justified and authorised by "Islam's doctrines of deception" to Other as to the 'real agenda'.
This is simply not the usual case look the 'out-group' cannot be trusted simply because their the out-group. Here is a foundation codex (textual and exemplar (messiniac) templates) construct of the acceptability by a culture to lie to another Culture.
Muslim cultural dishonesty an accepted means of interrelating to Other. It is not made up simply to determine an out-group cannot be trusted just for the sake of doing so, here is the proof not only in the Islamic codex but in the actions/words coming from the Islamic leadership itself in Australia. One therefore must not take the word of non-violence from the Islamic leadership as the final determination and utilise such statements to negate what is happening before our very eyes.
Taqiyya is authority for Islamic religious dissimulation (lying, to conceal the truth/intent).
"Quran 3:28 enjoins Muslims not to take the company of non-Muslims over Muslims unless as a means of safeguarding themselves. "Let not the believers take those who deny the truth for their allies in preference to the believers – since he who does this cuts himself off from God in everything – unless it be to protect yourself against them in this way…" Regarding 3:28, Ibn Kathir, a prominent authority writes, "meaning, except those believers who in some areas or times fear for their safety from the disbelievers. In this case, such believers are allowed to show friendship to the disbelievers outwardly, but never inwardly." He quotes Muhammad's companion, Abu Ad-Darda', who said "we smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them," and Al-Hasan who said "the Tuqyah is acceptable till the Day of Resurrection."
We must therefore take what we see not what we are told as the basis for our policy on having Muslims in our midst. For clearly Muslims cannot be trusted to tell us the truth, because their very doctrine informs us they have no duty to do so.
Purposefully lying is not authorised by Judeo-Christian ethics so to interpret the veracity of Islamic/Muslims culture through our own ethical view point 'lying is wrong' and therefore we expect Muslims to operate under the same 'norm' is a very dangerous act. As clearly this example above proves.
To deny this is the case, explain the above, how are Mr Mehicivic words actions consistent? If they are not what therefore provides him with the ethical justification for his act, is it culturally supported or not? If it is culturally supported what does this mean regards the worth of proclamations by the Islamic/Muslim leadership that Islam/Muslim culture is a culture of peace and love?
How many broken bodies and lives will you need before it becomes obvious - the words are not matching the outcomes on the ground?
The absolute absurdity is that the Quran accuses Other of dissimulation (lying, to conceal the truth/intent) and condemns them for such acts. Yet the same text the Quran justifies and authorises the exact same behavior as a Muslim good, it is hypocrisy manifest - the act of Other in being so duplicitous supports the imposition of grievous harm and severest penalty but the same mealy mouthed Muslim utilisation of the same behavior praise and cultural necessity - and is it any wonder given what Islam/Muslims as a culture inform in time and space for Other?
This is why it is so stupid for the Western political elite to even consider Islam/Muslims are not a danger in time and space when given the opportunity of unfettered access to any Public Square it is only those who point out such a view is terribly flawed who are the enemy. Security tightened at AIS after advice from ASIO, October 13, 2014, Henry Belot, Canberra Times Melbourne jihadist funding accused sees no crime in actionsTHE AUSTRALIAN OCTOBER 27, 2014 3:10PM Is the unfathomable grief of just one childs
loss worthy of the terrible price paid daily for having such a Cultural codex
freedom of access to any Public Square be they adherent or non-adherent?
“Terrorism knows no border and its
danger could affect several countries outside the Middle East. […] It is no
secret to you, what they have done and what they have yet to do. I ask you to
transmit this message to your leaders: ‘Fight terrorism with force, reason and
The reality of such a statement not only of what is said but by whom it is said
- the leader of Islam (Sunni) version, of a State which has been instrumental
in advancing the very ethical construct of Other across the world which forms
the foundation stones of the ethics of the 'Terrorism' of which the Saudi king
speaks. The 'rational' model to which Western Democracies ascribe which allows
this state to exist is tragic.
If 'reason' based upon an ideological model of facing the true source of
'Terrorism' was in place the Saudi king would not now exist to make such a
statement. For the whole codex upon which the Saudi king based his ethics would
have been swept into the dustbin of discredited ideological constructs along
with the Greek Gods and the rest.
Separation of Powers: Parliament,
Executive and Judiciary - a proven method of holding the other positions of
power accountable and in turn protecting the citizen from the excess of all
As Islam does not recognise such a separation it is of no surprise the Islamic
Government in Turkey has decided to make the Judiciary subject to the
Executive, the Law will now become whatever the Turkish Islamic Government
determines it to be - or off with their Judicial heads.
Such is what Islam informs in time and space really did you expect something
It is amazing is it not mere statements that Islam and Muslims are a threat to
society and have a clear political agenda of imposing their ethical notions on
Other and women has in Australia as elsewhere people hauled up before the
judicial courts accused of inciting hatred against a peaceful non-threatening
People coming forward saying there is a
growing potential of major cultural schism because Islam is a genocidal
construct with exactly the same construct of Other as Mein Kampf and clearly as
Islam/Muslims have done elsewhere since their beginning are in time and space
bent on destabilising and destroying your cherished values despite the ever
presentsocalled "moderates in the community .. cowed by the federal government and
its agencies into abandoning traditional and activist Islam.." are being branded as delusional criminal bigots,
Hira cave Mount Jabal an-Nour 7th Century to .Australia August 2013 - words and sentences are not strung together to inform no purpose,
inform no action in response - "creation of a
world caliphate to rule all Muslims according to traditional principles and
sharia" this as we know is integral to the
Muslim 'spectrum' yet humanity fails to act in self-defence. It is easier to
let our grandchildren suffer from the heinous nature Islam informs?
Did anyone seriously other than a very few understand what Islam would really
mean for Western Democracies if allowed to flourish external and internal 19
years ago? Does security improve with increased numbers of Muslims within a
society - what do the statistics tell us?
Should humanity therefore be concerned regards what a specific culture informs
in time and space and have a right to remove that culture from the Public Space
if it informs terror (cultural war) and/or subjugation of women?
A genocide construct is a genocide construct - Cultural foundation codex
(genetic, (con) textual authority, exemplar-leadership (messianic templates)),
creates the cultural behavioural variance 'spectrum' in time and space and will
continue to inform terror (cultural war) despite the ever present liberal
Being a patchwork 'true believer' and thereby assuaging your conscience as to
what exists consistently constantly on your own cultures 'spectrum' derived
directly from your own shared cultural foundation codex enables terror against
Other to continue.
Washing your hands does not change who is responsible.
If your culture has anywhere along it's cultural 'spectrum', cultural war
(terror) and it is historically a consistent, constant theme you are as an
individual adherent as culpable, even the so called liberal/moderate, for the
heinous crimes against the innocent as the bloody hands that pulled the trigger
or thrust the blade.
The absence within the Public Square of an enforceable agreed and empowering
definition of Other and women, between the secular and religious dogmas, even
within Western Democracies is a tragedy in the making – Democracy in itself
does not enable the maximized independence of all inclusive of women if the
cultural foundation codex remains the same, because cultural foundation codex,
unless forced to do so, overrides secular law in practice.
Western Democracies by enabling the Islamic cultural Foundation codex to
flourish, sometimes even with State support, within their borders not only now
have in situ Muslim terrorists but are exporting as well.
Change your Cultural Foundation Codex or nothing changes.
The following may
be a guide to enable as best we can a questioning mind - MindUP Program
Ratliff, Kate A.; Oishi, Shigehiro
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 105(4), Oct 2013, 688-702.
"This research examined the
influence of a romantic partner’s success or failure on one’s own implicit and
explicit self-esteem. In Experiment 1, men had lower implicit self-esteem
when their partner did well at a “social intelligence” task than when
their partner did poorly. Women’s
implicit self-esteem was unaffected by partner performance. Experiments 2 and 3 showed that Dutch men’s
implicit self-esteem was negatively affected by their romantic partner’s
success. In Experiment 4, we replicated Experiments 1–3 in both the academic
and social domains, and in Experiment 5, we demonstrated that men’s implicit
self-esteem is negatively influenced by thinking about a romantic partner’s
success both when the success is relative and when it is not.In sum, men’s implicit self-esteem is lower when a partner succeeds than
when a partner fails, whereas women’s implicit self-esteem is not." (Ratliff, Kate A.; Oishi, Shigehiro, 2013)
If these negative feelings of male
self-esteem are inherent regards the level of women’s relative status this
would possibly inform Mans actions to diminish women’s opportunities(even in
workplaces) and explain the basis for Mans propensity in ‘HIS’ religious and
secular codex construct of women as less and restricted to Man’s determination.
So as women, in say the Islamic culture, went along the different modes of
dress to the extreme this would be seen to lift Muslims Mans implicit
self-esteem as the women increased their visual adherence to subservience thus
relieving to a degree whatever threat may be derived from Muslim Mans negative
feelings of women possibly being equal in power or even seen and be 'better'
than Muslim Man.
This could be culturally accentuated by
cultural foundation codex supercharging Mans possibly innate propensity to
suffer from 'little man syndrome'. The greater the restriction and subjugation
of women informed by cultural foundation codex one would expect any deviation
or threatened deviation would incur are relative response from Males derived
directly from Mans need to ameliorate negativity and increase feeling of
self-esteem of keeping women in their place.
Given the women did not exhibit any
loss in self-esteem it could be women taking on signs of subservience do not
suffer diminished self-esteem relative to Mans increase - maybe an evolutionary
protection mechanism - not being able to 'feel' the true nature of their
relativity - challenging the stronger 'physically' Man as to equality perhaps
had such negative consequences overtime it informed such a state of inequity
being if not 'right' acceptable by women.
It would be interesting to see if the
'little man syndrome' can be culturally differentiated in specific cultural
contexts such as Muslim women’s clothing, if it is seen the Muslim Mans
implicit self-esteem rises as the extremes of Muslim women’s clothing are
reached one may be able to infer this has more to do with Muslims Mans ego and
women innately understand this and this is why women submit to such a state
rather than subservience to any God.
Of course this is not simply a Muslim
Man issue at all but may go some way in explaining why Man treats women so
badly and makes up pretend authority and fallacious justifications for keeping
women subject and why some women acquiesce to this most outrageous circumstance
'Fear of What Man Can and Does Do'.
This could go in some way to explaining
why education of females is not a high priority or completely opposed by male
dominated cultures such as Islam and also the segregation inherent in the
culture which places women at the back - increased male implicit self-esteem so
dearly paid for. All of humanity are paying the price for the type of world we
forego to enable this atrocity against women to continue.
Proof within the Islamic behavioural
variance 'spectrum' women being 'free' to choose their own clothing style is a
lie. Those women who support such a condition of 'freedom' exists within the
Islamic codex are the most heinous perpetrators of an obscenity on their fellow
"Both need to understand that
whatever the culture, the woman has the right to decide what she puts on her
body and the right to walk out wearing whatever she wants without being subject
to harassment.” We Must Put an End to Street Harassment, Morocco
World News Friday 13 June 2014 - 12:13 by Saba Naseem
I have just seen another article which
questions the veracity of the notion a woman actually freely chooses to wear
the "hijabs and niqabs". It is this article - Shariah Police Intensify Raids Prior to Ramadan
Jakarta Globe By Nurdin Hasan Jun 12, 2014.
Clearly from a relative psychological
position surely there has to be greater cultural pressure for women to conform
to a 'standard' not equally demanded of Man. This article proves this to be a
Also the shaming and blaming of women
for harassment even rape, even personal and other societal catastrophes for not
adhering to imposed cultural dress constructs would appear to revolve around
Mans control of women's sexuality and cultural ownership as one would brand a
cow or horse - Freedom to be subject to such a construct strikes me as rather
Yes in a culture a slave may argue
slavery is good and they are quite happy being a slave - it is a cultural
artifact but does this make it right, a 'good'?
All cultures build palaces based upon
an 'Architects' design (cultural foundation codex (textual and exemplar (messianic)
templates) some only have four walls within which women are able to realise their
'full' potential - Men have?
Simply stating 'it', harassment and
demeaning of women, happens elsewhere one has to be concerned how 'it' is
relative to a current women's cultural ethical circumstances within the whole
cultural behavioural variance not simply the so called 'good' end.
For women have to live under the whole
cultural Male behavioural spectrum derived from the cultural codex, to take
simply the 'good' end and say therefore everything is 'right' with the culture
is a dangerous lie under which women have to exist.
One must then ascertain although 'it'
happens in Other cultures is the spectrum under which women have to suffer
better or worse? Is another cultural codex offering a greater chance overall
for a women to achieve a flourishing life despite the fact 'it' has not been
completely eradicated in Other's culture?
If 'it' is much less in the Other's
culture a true test of the nature of your own culture is to attempt to change
cultures, move palaces - if this is relatively dangerous - you have your
Change the Architect and Builder or