tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22388803894420282024-03-14T01:53:01.983+02:00NO v. Breivik :: UncensoredAndrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.comBlogger323125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-11144191804877286632015-10-09T01:33:00.000+03:002015-10-09T01:33:48.569+03:00Eco Innocent -vs- Ego Scarcity Combatant Procreation & Consumption Footprints<div align="justify"><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Eco Innocent v Ego Man Scarcity Combatant’s and their Crime of Aggression Acts of War Footprints</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;"><i>Eco Innocents</i>: Anders Breivik, Dylann Storm Roof, Aaron Alexis, Chris Harper-Mercer, Beate Zchape, Ted Kaczynski, Timothy McVeigh<br />
<i> Ego Scarcity Combatants</i>: Jacob Zuma, Cliven Bundy, Brad Blanton, Dennis Banks, Martin Luther King, Julian Assange, Mark Zuckerberg, William Windsor.<br />
</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">08 October 2015 | Andrea Muhrrteyn</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<blockquote><span style="font-size: 95%;">An individuals Ego/Eco Footprint is determined from their: <br />
<a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/sustainable-rights.html">Consumption Footprint</a> x <a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/paul-murtaugh.html">Procreation Factor</a>.<br />
<br />
<b>Consumption Footprint</b>: An Individuals Consumption Footprint is a measure of their consumption of renewable natural resources. The total area of productive land or sea required to produce all the crops, meat, seafood, wood and fibre the individual consumes, to sustain its energy consumption and to give space for its infrastructure. The individuals consumption habits (size of house, consumption habits, etc need to be collected) are submitted to a Footprint Quiz calculator.<br />
<br />
<b>Procreation Factor</b>: The procreation factor is '20' for every child. For every child the citizen has procreated, their consumption footprint must be multiplied by a factor of 20; i.e. (1 child, multiply by '20'; 2 children, multiply by 40; and so on)<br />
<br />
These Footprint analysis and conclusions have been submitted to scientific Footprint experts for their feedback and confirmation to International Criminal Court; in the matter of <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/eop-icc-complaint.html">EoP PoW -v- Nobel Peace Laurettes, et al</a>. <br />
</span></blockquote><br />
<div align="center"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-oubsBicMuzE/Vhbrq06rP2I/AAAAAAAAoT8/gH0DJT0TKH8/s1600-r/FootprintsEcoEgo_BreivikMcVeighAlexisMercerRoof-BlantonZumaKingAssange-cr.png" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-jlfxQZ2S0-s/VhbrUbpFkhI/AAAAAAAAoTw/yRbLxEgl9LA/s1600-r/FootprintsEcoEgo_BreivikMcVeighAlexisMercerRoof-BlantonZumaKingAssange_575-cr.png" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" style="display: block; height: 672px; margin: 0px; text-align: center; width: 575px;" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xDKlUonDOF8/Vhbn3BP8CfI/AAAAAAAAoTk/WS7SUEB2zJQ/s1600-r/FootprintsEcoEgo_BreivikMcVeighAlexisMercerRoof-BlantonZumaKingAssange-cr.png">Large</a></td></tr>
</tbody></table></div><br />
<a name='more'></a><div align="center"><a href="http://guerrylla-law.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-KZub7zsHhEA/UQ4eBt2_j3I/AAAAAAAAhCo/nZw35A1F1KQ/s1600/D_CommonSism_CommonSense-SustainableCommons-G_592x112.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 112px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 592px;" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<blockquote><div style="text-align: center;"><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;">Ego Scarcity Combatants</span>:</strong></div><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 115%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Jacob Zuma</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<b>Consumption Footprint: 65.66 gha</b><br />
<br />
President Jacob Zuma's Consumption Footprint using Sustainable Economy's Myfootprint.org quiz, is 65.66 global hectares (gha). South Africa's average consumption footprint is 38.59 gha. If accurate, then if everyone on planet earth consumed like President Zuma, we would need 4.18 earths. <br />
<br />
<b>Procreation Footprint Factor: 500</b><br />
<br />
President Zuma has 25 children (some say 32, but I used 25). His procreation footprint factor is 25 x 20* = 500. [Each Child increases a parents footprint by factor of 20] <br />
<br />
<b>Net Consumption & Procreation Footprint: 33,280 gha</b><br />
<br />
Consumption (65.66) x Procreation (500) = Net Footprint of 33280 gha. If accurate, if everyone consumed and procreated like President Zuma, we would need 2,090 earths.<br />
<br />
<br />
********<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 115%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Martin Luther King</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<b>Consumption Footprint: 32.10 gha</b><br />
<br />
I have given Martin Luther King the consumption footprint as Assange's Ecuador Embassy footprint, for easy comparative reasons; although King's consumption footprint would have been higher. If accurate, then if everyone on planet earth consumed like Martin Luther King / Assange; we would need 2.04 earths. <br />
<br />
<b>Procreation Footprint Factor: 80</b><br />
<br />
Martin Luther King had 4 children. His procreation footprint factor is 04 x 20* = 80. [Each Child increases a parents footprint by factor of 20] <br />
<br />
<b>Net Consumption & Procreation Footprint: 2578 gha</b><br />
<br />
Consumption (32.10) x Procreation (80) = Net Footprint of 2,578 gha. If accurate, if everyone consumed and procreated like Martin Luther King, we would need 163 earths.<br />
<br />
<br />
********<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 115%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Cliven Bundy</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<b>Consumption Footprint: 91.10 gha</b><br />
<br />
Cliven Bundy's tentative Consumption Footprint using Sustainable Economy's Myfootprint.org quiz, is 91.10 global hectares (gha). America's average consumption footprint is 99.8 gha. If accurate, then if everyone on planet earth consumed like Brad Blanton, we would need 5.8 earths. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Procreation Footprint Factor: 280</b><br />
<br />
Cliven Bundy has 14 children. His procreation footprint factor is 14 x 20* = 280. [Each Child increases a parents footprint by factor of 20] <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Ego Footprint = 25,508 gha (1624 earths)</b><br />
<br />
Consumption (91.1) x Procreation (280) = Ego Footprint of 25,508 gha. If accurate, if everyone consumed and procreated like Cliven Bundy, we would need 1624 earths.<br />
<br />
<br />
*****<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 115%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Brad Blanton</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<b>Consumption Footprint: 85.18 gha</b><br />
<br />
Brad Blanton's Consumption Footprint using Sustainable Economy's Myfootprint.org quiz, is 85.18 global hectares (gha). America's average consumption footprint is 99.8 gha. If accurate, then if everyone on planet earth consumed like Brad Blanton, we would need 5.42 earths. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Procreation Footprint Factor: 120</b><br />
<br />
Brad Blanton has 6 children. His procreation footprint factor is 6 x 20* = 120. [Each Child increases a parents footprint by factor of 20] <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Ego Footprint = 10,221.6 gha (650 earths)</b><br />
<br />
Consumption (85.18) x Procreation (120) = Ego Footprint of 10,221.6 gha. If accurate, if everyone consumed and procreated like Brad Blanton, we would need 650 earths.<br />
<br />
<br />
*****<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 115%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Julian Assange</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<b>Consumption Footprint: 32.10 gha</b><br />
<br />
Julian Assange's Consumption Footprint using Sustainable Economy's Myfootprint.org quiz, is 32.10 global hectares (gha). UK's average consumption footprint is 48.19 gha. If accurate, then if everyone on planet earth consumed like Julian Assange, we would need 2.04 earths. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Procreation Footprint Factor: 80</b><br />
<br />
Julian Assange has at least four children. His procreation footprint factor is 4 x 20* = 80. [Each Child increases a parents footprint by factor of 20] <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Ego Footprint = 2568 gha (163.2 earths)</b><br />
<br />
Consumption (32.10) x Procreation (80) = Ego Footprint of 2568 gha. If accurate, if everyone consumed and procreated like Julian Assange, we would need 163.2 earths.<br />
<br />
<br />
*****<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 115%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Mark Zuckerberg</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<b>Consumption Footprint: 408.22 gha</b><br />
<br />
Mark Zuckerberg's Consumption Footprint using Sustainable Economy's Myfootprint.org quiz, is 408.22 global hectares (gha). America's average consumption footprint is 99.8 gha. If accurate, then if everyone on planet earth consumed like Mark Zuckerberg, we would need 25.99 earths. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Procreation Footprint Factor: 0</b><br />
<br />
Mark Zuckerberg has no children. His procreation footprint factor is 0 x 20* = 0. [Each Child increases a parents footprint by factor of 20] <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Ego Footprint = 408.22 gha (26 earths)</b><br />
<br />
Consumption (408.22) x Procreation (0) = Ego Footprint of 408.22 gha. If accurate, if everyone consumed and procreated like Mark Zuckerberg, we would need 26 earths.<br />
<br />
<br />
******<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 115%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Dennis Banks</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<b>Consumption Footprint: 32.10 gha</b><br />
<br />
Dennis Banks accurate consumption footprint is unknown. The equivalent of Julian Assange's consumption footprint was used. Julian Assange's Consumption Footprint using Sustainable Economy's Myfootprint.org quiz, is 359.34 global hectares (gha). If accurate, then if everyone on planet earth consumed like Dennis Banks and Julian Assange, we would need 2.04 earths. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Procreation Footprint Factor: 540</b><br />
<br />
According to Idle No More [Life and Death of Anna Mae Aquash <a href="http://prn.fm/idle-life-death-anna-mae-aquash-112013/">01</a>:<a href="http://prn.fm/idle-life-death-anna-mae-aquash-editor-investigative-journalist-paul-demain-news-indian-country-12413/">02</a>:<a href="http://prn.fm/idle-part-iii-life-death-anna-mae-aquash-guest-denise-pictou-maloney-121113/">03</a>] Dennis Banks has at least twenty seven children. His procreation footprint factor is 27 x 20* = 540. [Each Child increases a parents footprint by factor of 20] <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Ego Footprint = 17,334 gha (1,099 earths)</b><br />
<br />
Consumption (32.10) x Procreation (540) = Ego Footprint of 17,334 gha. If accurate, if everyone consumed and procreated like Dennis Banks, we would need 1,099 earths.<br />
<br />
<br />
******<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 115%;"><span style="color: #660000;">William Windsor</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<b>Consumption Footprint: 359.34 gha</b><br />
<br />
William Windsor's consumption footprint is unknown. I imagine it would not be less than that of Hans Astrup. Astrup's Consumption Footprint using Sustainable Economy's Myfootprint.org quiz, is 359.34 global hectares (gha). <br />
If accurate, then if everyone on planet earth consumed like Hans Astrup and William Windsor, we would need 22.87 earths. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Procreation Footprint Factor: 40</b><br />
<br />
William and Kate Windsor currently have one child; <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-29108010">Kate is expecting their second child</a>. His procreation footprint factor, subsequent to the birth of his second child is 2 x 20* = 40. [Each Child increases a parents footprint by factor of 20] <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Ego Footprint = 359.34 gha (23 earths)</b><br />
<br />
Consumption (359.34) x Procreation (40) = Ego Footprint of 14 373.6 gha. If accurate, if everyone consumed and procreated like Hans Astrup, we would need 912 earths.<br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 115%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Julian Assange</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<b>Consumption Footprint: 32.10 gha</b><br />
<br />
Julian Assange's Consumption Footprint using Sustainable Economy's Myfootprint.org quiz, is 32.10 global hectares (gha). UK's average consumption footprint is 48.19 gha. If accurate, then if everyone on planet earth consumed like Julian Assange, we would need 2.04 earths. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Procreation Footprint Factor: 80</b><br />
<br />
Julian Assange has at least four children. His procreation footprint factor is 4 x 20* = 80. [Each Child increases a parents footprint by factor of 20] <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Ego Footprint = 2568 gha (163.2 earths)</b><br />
<br />
Consumption (32.10) x Procreation (80) = Ego Footprint of 2568 gha. If accurate, if everyone consumed and procreated like Julian Assange, we would need 163.2 earths.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">*************************</div><br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;">Eco - Innocents</span>:</strong></div><br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 115%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Anders Breivik / Dylann Storm Roof / Aaron Alexis / Chris Harper-Mercer / Beate Zschape / Ted Kaczynski / Timothy McVeigh</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<b>Consumption Footprint: 32.10 gha</b><br />
<br />
Eco-Innocents average consumption footprint is stated as either 32.10 equal to that of Julian Assange; such as Anders Breivik, Dylann Storm Roof; or 12: equal to that of the author; for McVeigh, Zschape, Mercer and Alexis; whereas Kaczynski would be much less than 12.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Procreation Footprint Factor: 0</b><br />
<br />
None of the Eco-Innocents have any children; consequently their procreation footprint is zero children. [Each Child increases a parents footprint by factor of 20] <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Ego Footprint = 32 gha ( earths)</b><br />
<br />
Consumption (32.10 / 12) x Procreation (0) = Eco Footprint of 32 / 12 gha. <br />
<br />
If accurate, on a planet with 7 billion; if everyone's Total Consumption & Procreation footprint was 32 gha; we would need 2.04 earths; and if their Total Consumption & Procreation footprint was 12 gha we would need 0.81 earths. On a planet of 7 billion a 32 gha would therefore qualify as a -- compared to the other aforementioned Scarcity Combatant footprints -- minuscule scarcity combatant footprint.<br />
<br />
If there were 3.5 billion people on the planet, if everyone's Total Consumption & Procreation footprint was 32 gha, we would need 1.02 earths; and if their Total Consumption & Procreation footprint was 12 gha; we would need 0.41 earths. On a planet of 3.5 billion, a 32 gha footprint is on the red line between eco-innocent and scarcity combatant.<br />
<br />
If there were 1.25 billion people on the planet; if everyone's Total Consumption & Procreation footprint was 32 gha; we would need 0.51 earths; and if their Total Consumption & Procreation footprint was 12 gha; we would need 0.205 earths. On a planet of 1.25 billion, a 32 gha footprint is an Eco-Innocent footprint.<br />
<br />
[These Footprint analysis and conclusions have been submitted to scientific Footprint experts for their feedback and confirmation to International Criminal Court; in the matter of <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/eop-icc-complaint.html">EoP PoW -v- Nobel Peace Laurettes, et al</a>.] <br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [<a href="http://sqworms.weebly.com/hans-astrup-ego-228.html">Astrup</a> :: <a href="http://sqworms.weebly.com/m-zuckerberg-ego-259.html">Zuckerberg</a> :: <a href="http://sqworms.weebly.com/julian-assange-ego-1632.html">Assange</a> :: <a href="http://sqworms.weebly.com/brad-blanton-ego-650.html">Blanton</a> :: <a href="http://sqworms.weebly.com/cliven-bundy-ego-1624.html">Bundy</a> :: <a href="http://sqworms.weebly.com/jacob-zuma-ego-2090.html">Zuma</a>]</span></strong></blockquote></div>Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-80490644304159174192015-09-21T15:29:00.000+03:002015-09-27T18:11:48.689+03:00Putin: EU [Islam Lebensraum Hijrah] Refugee Crisis Absolutely Expected <div align="justify">
<br />
<div align="center">
<blockquote>
<strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Putin: EU [Islam Lebensraum Hijrah] Refugee Crisis Absolutely Expected</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Cracker Lebensraum Colonization Dots: Multinational's cultural Imperialist Importation of Migrant-Refugee cheap labour</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;"> </span></strong></blockquote>
</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-vbvO9Ucssoc/Vf_XA1mGuLI/AAAAAAAAoMc/d5FyGArUAqo/s1600-r/EURefugeeCrisis-EthnicConflict_AbsoluteResourceWars.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-viTsNvfgg34/Vf_XgZdEHOI/AAAAAAAAoM0/P7Ni2pnIM5Q/s1600-r/EURefugeeCrisis-EthnicConflict_AbsoluteResourceWars_575.png" height="359" width="575" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<blockquote>
<span style="font-size: 95%;">"As I write this, I am reminded of how we often forget what the primitive person had to work with for tools; namely wood, bone and stone implements. It is amazing how quickly one can destroy and travel down the wrong path with the white man's axe, shovel and saw." -- Brent Ladd, <i>Realities of Going Primitive</i><br />
<br />
'Energy consumption is the foundation of industrial development; since in the industrial paradigm or worldview energy use is equivalent to development; where 'development' refers [not to the individual's or society's character, or values development; but] solely to the individual and societies economic -- resource use -- development. How much of societies resources s/he consumes. The power generated by muscles and motors is ultimately and necessarily dissipated by rubbing against the resources in the environment. This is why the GNP of a country should be roughly proportional to the amount of fuel burned in that country. Increased efficiency leads to more energy use. Since the earth’s non-renewable resources are finite, and its renewable resources can only be exploited on a finite level equivalent to carrying capacity regeneration; this trend cannot continue.' -- The constructal law of design and evolution in nature: <a href="http://constructal.org/">Adrian Bejan</a>. <br />
<br />
EU Refugee crisis absolutely expected - Putin: "If Putin had wanted to better understand this idea of natural resources and national security, he would have looked for specialists on the issue. He would naturally have come across the leading specialist on the subject, a geologist and director of the prestigious St. Petersburg Mining Institute, Vladimir Stefanovich Litvinenko. Litvinenko informs Putin that the world is running out of resources, and makes a point that we, Russians, cannot waste our own resources; and as we tap them, we should ensure they are continuously replaced or otherwise we are going to quickly deplete them." -- Russia Today: <a href="https://www.rt.com/news/314318-putin-vladivostok-eu-migrants/">EU Crisis Absolutely Expected - Putin</a>; Brookins Inst: <a href="http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/events/2006/3/30putin%20dissertation/putin%20dissertation%20event%20remarks.pdf">The Mystery of Vladimir Putin's [Peak NNR] Dissertation</a><br />
<br />
"As [the Peak NNR: Non-renewable Natural Resources] scenario unfolds, increasingly large segments of humanity will become aware of the fact that NNRs enable our industrialized way of life, and that ever-increasing NNR scarcity is the fundamental cause underlying our continuously declining economic output (GDP) and societal wellbeing levels, both domestically (US) and, by that time, globally as well. Historically prevalent public attitudes of generosity and forbearance, which were made possible by abundant and cheap NNRs during our epoch of “continuously more and more”, will be displaced by public intolerance: * Childbirth will be condemned rather than celebrated; * All immigration will be outlawed; * Traditionally unquestioned resource uses—from “social entitlements” and universally accessible healthcare, to professional sports and cosmetics—will be considered “unfair” or “wasteful”, and ultimately eliminated; and * “Excessive wealth” will be appropriated for “the public good”. Previously sporadic social unrest and resource wars will degenerate—seemingly instantaneously—into full fledged conflicts among nations, classes, and ultimately individuals for remaining natural resources and real wealth. It will become universally understood that the only way to “stay even” within a continuously contracting operating environment—much less to improve one’s lot—is to take from somebody else. Life will become a “negative sum game” within the “shrinking pie” of “continuously less and less”. Social institutions will dissolve; law and order will cease to exist; and chaos will fill the void— nations will collapse." - Chris Clugston: <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/peak-nnr-scarcity.html">Peak NNR: Scarcity: Humanity’s Last Chapter</a><br />
</span></blockquote>
<a name='more'></a><div align="center">
<a href="http://fleur-de-lis.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-__b6nnsrEpQ/UQqve4pxolI/AAAAAAAAg-U/74EyJkDE6MA/s1600/IdleNoMore-IndigenousRights_598x126.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 119px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 598px;" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote>
<b>Russia Today: <a href="https://www.rt.com/news/314593-germany-refugee-slaves-le-pen/">Germany is ‘exploiting’ refugee suffering to recruit cheap labour ‘slaves’ via mass immigration – Marine Le Pen</a></b>:</blockquote>
<table align="right" border="0" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" style="width: 375px;"><tbody>
<tr><td width="375"><div align="center">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="295" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/09vqhZV6jt8" width="375"></iframe><br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 80%;">Callers Challenge BBC presenter Stephen Nolan over his emotional blackmail biased coverage of Migrant crisis. Recorded over the weekend of the 5th and 6th of September 2015. (<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09vqhZV6jt8">10:05</a>)</span></strong></div>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<blockquote>
As Germany welcomes thousands of refugees, with industries seeking ways to integrate newcomers into country’s workforce, Berlin’s move to temporarily bypass EU-wide regulations has met strong criticism from France’s Marine Le Pen who accused Germany of recruiting “slaves.”<br />
<br />
<i>EU refugee & migrant influx</i><br />
The German drive to open its doors to refugees, as well as debated plans to resettle asylum seekers across the EU has been met with strong criticism from a number of politicians, including the leader of right-wing French party National Front, Marine Le Pen who accused Germany of imposing its immigration policy on the EU.<br />
<br />
“Germany probably thinks its population is moribund, and it is probably seeking to lower wages and continue to recruit slaves through mass immigration,” Marine Le Pen said in Marseille, refusing to admit that pure benevolence was Germany’s only motive.<br />
<br />
Le Pen criticised European politicians for “exploiting the suffering of these poor people who cross the Mediterranean Sea.”<br />
<br />
“They are exploiting the death of the unfortunate in these trips organized by mafia, they show pictures, they exhibit the death of a child without any dignity just to blame the European consciences and make them accept the current situation,” the National Front leader said.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Arthur Kemp: <a href="http://www.arthurkemp.com/2012/03/lie-of-apartheid.html">Lie of Apartheid; Afrikaners Downfall: Reliance on Cheap Labour</a></b> </blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6WwhxBe3Qn0/Vf_ozmWzC-I/AAAAAAAAoNQ/hNH_cPfPj9w/s1600/LieofApartheid_ArthurKemp.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6WwhxBe3Qn0/Vf_ozmWzC-I/AAAAAAAAoNQ/hNH_cPfPj9w/s320/LieofApartheid_ArthurKemp.png" /></a></div>
<blockquote>
It is one of the many bitter ironies about South Africa that the policy of apartheid—to which Afrikaners clung for decades as their only hope and salvation from Third World domination—was in fact an impracticable and unworkable system which led directly to the Afrikaners’ demise as a political force in that country.<br />
<br />
The politicians—the National Party—who fostered apartheid are the primary criminals in this tragedy, holding out a false illusory hope to the Afrikaners, and then when the inevitable became just that, changed track and gave in, abandoning their followers to African National Congress (ANC) rule as callously as they had earlier lied to them.<br />
<br />
For apartheid—in reality forced social segregation—was nothing but an illusion, a twisted distortion of the demographic reality of South Africa, not to mention the truth that it was ultimately, morally repugnant as well. The conservative white South African politicians never understood what the driving force of political power is: namely, physical occupation. Political power comes from physical occupation: not historical rights, not title deeds, not moral rights—only occupation. Those people who occupy a territory determine the nature of the society in that region.<br />
<br />
If the society which has produced a particular civilization stays intact as a racially homogeneous unit, then that civilization remains active. If, however, the society within any particular given area changes its racial makeup—through invasion, immigration, or any decline in numbers—then the civilization which that society has produced will disappear with them, to be replaced by a new civilization reflecting the new inhabitants of that territory.<br />
<br />
History teaches us that there are two main reasons for a change in the racial makeup of any society: either military occupation, or the use of alien labor. The American Indians serve as a textbook example of the “military occupation” case study, as detailed above, while South Africa serves as a textbook example of the “use of alien labor” case study. When a change occurs through the use of alien labor, the following process occurs: * The dominant society imports (usually racially) foreign labor to do the menial work in that society. * These racial aliens then become established, and settle down and multiply in numbers by drawing upon the society’s structures (in white countries, their science, healthcare, technology, etc.). * They finally dominate that society by their sheer numbers.<br />
<br />
It is, simply put, a demographic reality: those who occupy a land determine the nature of that society. And so it was—and is—with South Africa, where population figures reveal precisely how the use of alien labor by the Afrikaners dispossessed them of their fatherland.<br />
<br />
In South Africa, almost every white household had (and still has) one or more black servants. It is said, in fact, that the definition of a white South African is “someone who would rather be murdered in their bed than make it.”<br />
<br />
From the above, it is clear that the use of nonwhite labor was the direct cause of the downfall of apartheid and white rule in South Africa. Afrikaners lost control of the country because of their lack of understanding of demographics, and not due to farfetched “conspiracies” or “betrayals,” as many would like to believe. This occupation took place because white South Africa failed to understand that if they employed black labor, those blacks would inevitably form the majority in that society, and ultimately—and rightly—demand political power.<br />
<br />
The only way that Afrikaners can be spared the fate of all First World minorities in Africa, is for them to abandon their dependence on nonwhite labor, accept that their salvation lies in a smaller territory, and congregate in that smaller territory where they will form an outright demographic majority. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
<b>Hijrah: Breed & Conquer Idiot Compassion Europe</b></h3>
<br />
<b><a href="https://themuslimissue.wordpress.com/2015/09/04/family-of-drowned-toddler-aylan-kurdi-had-been-given-free-housing-in-turkey-while-fathers-story-is-full-of-holes/">Abdullah Kurdi, the barber father of drowned toddler Aylan Kurdi had FREE housing in Turkey</a> | <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stOrMuh_msU" target="_blank">Transit Trash: Locals Angry over Migrants Trash</a> | <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAHM6TNrXKU" target="_blank">Why refugees choose Germany</a> | </b><b><a href="http://www.barenakedislam.com/2015/09/09/polish-official-europe-is-being-flooded-with-human-garbage-that-does-not-want-to-work/" target="_blank">Polish MP: Janusz Korwin-Mikke: “Europe is being flooded with human garbage that does not want to work”</a> | <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/beirut-slams-the-door-on-its-human-garbage-1603099.html" target="_blank">Lebanese Minister of Tourism calls Palestinian Refugees 'human garbage'</a></b>:</blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-tAHoTi2K3Xo/Vf_rDErPYKI/AAAAAAAAoNk/9aa5ybHn9bI/s1600/BreedWar_Prof-Jose-Angel-Gutierrez-UT.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-tAHoTi2K3Xo/Vf_rDErPYKI/AAAAAAAAoNk/9aa5ybHn9bI/s320/BreedWar_Prof-Jose-Angel-Gutierrez-UT.png" /></a></div>
<blockquote>
4 million Muslims pretend to escape 30,000 ISIS fighters who are not even near their towns, cities and even countries. This kind of mass-migration fraud is a medieval war strategy and it’s called Hijrah. It’s part of jihad.<br />
<br />
Ok, so let’s pretend that they are victims of war and need to escape. Very easy to resolve. Pressure the 49 Islamic countries around the world to take them all in. Block them from all and total entry into the West. If the Islamic countries don’t take them in – put trade sanctions on them. Watch and see how quickly this mass-migration flood will come to an end when the Muslims realize that they can’t get their Hijrah-jihad to work.<br />
<br />
Abdullah Kurdi’s story is made-up. But his lies are now being used and rewarded by the media in full blown propaganda, while pressuring policies to force Europe to take in more economic migrants who have never experienced a war zone. The dead toddler pornography is a dream-come true PR campaign serving ISIS and their overwhelming Muslim supporters.<br />
<br />
Abdullah was never on that boat to watch his wife and children drown. That’s why he was the only survivor. The first time he learned of their death was from the hospital after the photos of his young son was circulating in the media. This was an attempt to send his wife and children into Europe before his own arrival to apply for refugee status as a lone woman with children, while they never even lived in a war zone.<br />
<br />
Polish MP: Janusz Korwin-Mikke: “Europe is being flooded with human garbage that does not want to work”. “In Poland, we have always welcomed immigrants who want to work. The current flood of Muslim ‘migrants’ are only coming for the free handouts.”<br />
<br />
Beirut slams the door on its `human garbage': The Lebanese Minister of Tourism called them "human garbage", the wave of Palestinian refugees who were supposedly set to flood back to Lebanon from Libya. How Lebanon took its chance to get rid of refugees; `Now Arafat can say: Look what I'm doing for you, and look how the other Arabs treat you'. In the course of only two days, the Beirut authorities reduced the Palestinian refugee population in Beirut by almost a third, courtesy of Colonel Gaddafi.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<b><a href="https://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2015/09/20/top-imam-tells-muslim-invaders-to-breed-with-europeans-to-conquer-their-countries/">Creeping Sharia</a>/<a href="http://www.timesofisrael.com/breed-and-conquer-europe-al-aqsa-preacher-exhorts-muslims/">Times of Israel</a>: Breed & Conquer Europe<b></b></b>:</blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7n75osHtuKY/Vf_5IzGum_I/AAAAAAAAoOw/18vdg3dAHiA/s1600/Mumbai-breedingwar.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="196" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7n75osHtuKY/Vf_5IzGum_I/AAAAAAAAoOw/18vdg3dAHiA/s320/Mumbai-breedingwar.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<blockquote>
Speaking at the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, Sheikh Muhammad Ayed stated that European countries were not rolling out the red carpet for migrants because they were compassionate, but because Europe was in dire need of a new source of labor. Europe has become old and decrepit and needs human reinforcement….they are not motivated by compassion for the Levant, its people and its refugees. Soon, we will trample them underfoot, Allah willing. Throughout Europe, all the hearts are enthused with hatred toward Muslims. They wish that we were dead, but they have lost their fertility, so they look for fertility in our midst. We will give them fertility! We will breed children with them, because we shall conquer their countries! Whether you like it or not, Americans, Italians, Germans and the French will be forced to take the “refugees”. We shall soon collect them in the name of the coming Caliphate. We will say to you: these are our sons. Send them, or we will send our armies to you.”<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Occidental Observer: <a href="http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2015/09/pulling-our-heart-strings-to-bring-us-down-how-the-enemy-within-uses-our-empathy-against-us/">Pulling Our Heart Strings to Bring Us Down: How the Enemy within uses Empathy Against Us</a></b>:</blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-jrmWXAfKlME/Vgfghiz6rFI/AAAAAAAAoQU/nWhYNfKREg4/s1600/Pogo%2BEnemy.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-jrmWXAfKlME/Vgfghiz6rFI/AAAAAAAAoQU/nWhYNfKREg4/s320/Pogo%2BEnemy.jpg" width="210" /></a></div>
<blockquote>
Those in the host countries who must move over for these migrants, or see their social safety net collapse from the burden, or face future job displacement from cheap labour, are left unseen by the cameras. There is no human face attached to their plight. The only images of them that we are permitted to see are those of angry demonstrators — spiced up with a few neo-Nazis for good measure — shouting outside of migrant reception areas. Nothing like tarring legitimate outrage with the Nazi brush to discredit their grievances.<br />
<br />
State media and its clones have a game plan: The discussion must not be allowed to stray into the cold territory of numbers, resources, or likely long-term effects. Viewers must not be confronted with the reality that Europe simply does not have the capacity to accommodate the numbers of people who seek sanctuary and residence within its borders. Or that so-called “rich” countries like Canada and the United States, propped up by fiat currency and a bubble of purchasing power, cannot accept the hundreds of millions, and possibly billions of migrants who are anxious to flee poverty, famine or war. In short, viewers must not be allowed to understand the concept of limits.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Soulseeds: <a href="http://www.soulseeds.com/grapevine/2012/10/mindful-compassion-and-idiot-compassion/">Mindful Compassion and Idiot Compassion</a></b>:<br />
<br />
When you try to help someone when they don’t want your help, or because you are really trying to help yourself, this may be idiot compassion. Its often the distinction between charity (giving TO someone) and empowerment (helping people help themselves) .. The Zen story about compassion with a rolled up umbrella makes the point. A woman was in India, riding with a friend in a rickshaw when they were attacked by a crazed man. He did no harm other than to frighten the women. However the woman was upset and asked her Zen teacher what the appropriate response to her attacker would be. The teacher said very simply, “You should have very mindfully and with great compassion whacked the attacker over the head with your umbrella.”<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
<b>Multinational Compulsive Developmentism Cultural Imperialism</b></h3>
<br />
<b>Slavoj Zizek: <a href="http://youtu.be/hpAMbpQ8J7g">Ethical Consumption Farcical Tragedy</a></b>: <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
Oscar Wilde, <i>The Soul of Man under Socialism</i>: “It is much more easy to have sympathy with suffering, than it is to have sympathy with thought. People find themselves surrounded by hideous poverty, ugliness, and starvation. It is inevitable they would be strongly moved by this. Accordingly with admirable, but misdirected intentions, they very sentimentally set themselves the task of remedying the problems they see. But their remedies do not cure the disease, they merely prolong it. Indeed, they are part of the disease. They try to solve the problem of poverty, by keeping the poor alive, or in the case of an advanced school, by amusing the poor. But this is not a solution, it is an aggravation of the difficulty. The proper aim is to reconstruct society on such a basis that poverty will be impossible. It is the altruistic virtues which have prevented the carrying out of this aim. The worst slave owners were those who were kind to their slaves. In doing so they prevented the core of the system to be realized by those who suffered from it, and understood by those who contemplated it. Charity degrades and demoralizes.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Telegraph: <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/11874717/Tim-Cook-Our-hearts-go-out-to-these-refugees.html">Tim Cook: 'Our hearts go out to these refugees': Exclusive: Apple chief executive Tim Cook has launched a empassioned plea to help refugees seeking help across Europe</a> | Addict Info: <a href="http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/09/20/mcdonalds-organizes-massive-multi-corporation-food-drive-to-help-middle-eastern-refugees/">McDonalds Organizes Massive Multi-Corporation Food Drive to Help Middle Eastern Refugees </a></b>:</blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-o0YwZtqh9XY/VgfefFRi6rI/AAAAAAAAoQI/T9EkFWe4X1Q/s1600/CheapImmigrantSlaveLabour.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="211" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-o0YwZtqh9XY/VgfefFRi6rI/AAAAAAAAoQI/T9EkFWe4X1Q/s320/CheapImmigrantSlaveLabour.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<blockquote>
"Apple is making a substantial donation to relief agencies which provide humanitarian aid to refugees in Europe and around the Mediterranean." Croatia is the latest country to seal border crossings with Serbia, closing seven of eight crossings after 11,000 migrants crossed into the country within 48 hours. Cook added that Apple customers could support the agencies by donating through the Red Cross iOS app, and that employees donations to the campaign will be matched by the company, two-for-one.<br />
<br />
McDonald’s, the company that refuses to pay their employees a living wage, has announced that they are leading a campaign to raise money for the United Nation’s World Food Program. Steve Easterbrook, McDonald’s new chief executive, has also convinced other multibillion dollar companies such as Facebook, Dreamworks Animation and Mastercard, to help them.<br />
<br />
The group of corporations sponsored a 30-minute promo for the Food Program and it will air in 38 countries and be promoted on digital platforms on Monday, the U.N. Peace Day. The ad, which is narrated by Liam Neeson, doesn’t make any mention of the companies that sponsored it.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>IGN: <a href="http://in-gods-name.blogspot.co.za/2012/06/we-have-met-enemy-it-is-us-feeding.html">We Have Met the Enemy; It is Us: “Feeding the World's Hungry Millions: How It Will Mean Billions for U.S. Business.”</a></b></blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-POU2V9_S910/VgfhycoBXrI/AAAAAAAAoQk/_hprJ1qrcto/s1600/PublicLaw480_ForeignAidFamine_LordsofPoverty_336x599.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-POU2V9_S910/VgfhycoBXrI/AAAAAAAAoQk/_hprJ1qrcto/s400/PublicLaw480_ForeignAidFamine_LordsofPoverty_336x599.png" width="223" /></a></div>
<blockquote>
Food for Peace / [Food Aid to Enable Our own Colonization by Immigration]: Following World War II, U.S. agricultural surpluses reached alarming levels, and storage of excess grain cost the government millions of dollars per year--even as the food deteriorated and became inedible. A solution had to be found, and in 1954 President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed the Agricultural Trade Development Assistance Act into law.<br />
<br />
The program, known as Public Law 480, benefited the U.S. by decreasing food surpluses and by creating new markets for its agricultural products.... <br />
<br />
Living in a Lifeboat: ..... Our experience with Public Law 480 clearly reveals the answer. This was the law that moved billions of dollars worth of U.S. grain to food-short, population-long countries during the past two decades. When P. L. 480 first came into being, a headline in the business magazine Forbes (Paddock and Paddock 1970) revealed the power behind it: "Feeding the World's Hungry Millions: How It Will Mean Billions for U.S. Business." <br />
<br />
And indeed it did. In the years 1960 to 1970 a total of $7.9 billion was spent on the "Food for Peace" program, as P. L. 480 was called. During the years 1948 to 1970 an additional $49.9 billion were extracted from American taxpayers to pay for other economic aid programs, some of which went for food and food-producing machinery. (This figure does not include military aid.) That P. L. 480 was a give-away program was concealed. Recipient countries went through the motions of paying for P. L. 480 food -with IOUs. In December 1973 the charade was brought to an end as far as India was concerned when the United States "forgave" India's $3.2 billion debt (Anonymous 1974). Public announcement of the cancellation of the debt was delayed for two months; one wonders why. <br />
<br />
"Famine-1975!" (Paddock and Paddock 1970) is one of the few publications that points out the commercial roots of this humanitarian attempt. Though all U.S. taxpayers lost by P. L. 480, special interest groups gained handsomely. Farmers benefited because they were not asked to contribute the grain -it was bought from them by the taxpayers. Besides the direct benefit there was the indirect effect of increasing demand and thus raising prices of farm products generally. The manufacturers of farm machinery, fertilizers, and pesticides benefited by the farmers extra efforts to grow more food. Grain elevators profited from storing the grain for varying lengths of time. Railroads made money hauling it to port, and shipping lines by carrying it overseas. Moreover, once the machinery for P. L. 480 was established, an immense bureaucracy had a vested interest in its continuance regardless of its merits. <br />
<br />
Very little was ever heard of these selfish interests when P. L. 480 was defended in public. The emphasis was always on its humanitarian effects. The combination of multiple and relatively silent selfish interests with highly vocal humanitarian apologists constitutes a powerful lobby for extracting money from taxpayers. Foreign aid has become a habit that can apparently survive in the absence of any known justification.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
<b>Provoking Divide and Conquer the Proles Ethnic Conflict</b>:</h3>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-joMCHGLSlts/Vf_s-kjH0DI/AAAAAAAAoNw/ZJvf-CfSqw0/s1600/Immigration-Racists.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="232" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-joMCHGLSlts/Vf_s-kjH0DI/AAAAAAAAoNw/ZJvf-CfSqw0/s320/Immigration-Racists.png" width="320" /></a></div>
"Without a pressure release valve, as open racism once provided, an explosion of epic proportions at some time in the future is guaranteed. There will be a race war, the initial skirmishes of which already are being fought in America's streets, that will bring an altogether new meaning to the concepts of race war and genocide, courtesy of those who claim to abhor racism." — Attorney for the Damned: Edgar Steele; Defensive Racism<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Guardian: <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/06/germany-refugee-crisis-syrian?CMP=fb_gu">Germany's response to the refugee crisis is admirable. But I fear it cannot last</a></b>:</blockquote>
<table align="right" border="0" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" style="width: 375px;"><tbody>
<tr><td width="375"><div align="center">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="295" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/h1iD8iOVJQc" width="375"></iframe><strong><span style="font-size: 80%;">The Coming War in France (<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09vqhZV6jt8">04:44</a>)</span></strong></div>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<blockquote>
These days Willkommenskultur is used to encourage help for the hundreds of thousands of refugees coming to Germany. And thousands of Germans have pitched in; they take food and clothes to the camps, take refugees to meetings with the authorities in their own cars, pay their fares, foot their medical bills, teach German, translate forms, share couches and bikes, act as nannies, open up soccer clubs, schools and kindergartens for refugee kids, and go on demonstrations against rightwing attacks across the country.<br />
<br />
Those with a particularly sensitive ear may detect an air of passive aggression in the manner in which Germans seek to highlight their goodness these days. The public mood is so empathically pro-refugee, you’d feel guilty if you didn’t at least do the bare minimum, such as offer your spare bed to a Syrian. It’s as if a year after the World Cup triumph in Rio, Germans desperately want to be world champions again – this time as the globe’s most welcoming country for refugees.<br />
<br />
Maybe my fears are as arbitrary as the resentments of rightwing Germans who demonstrate in front of refugee shelters in Dresden or Heidenau. But when I listen to the “good Germans”, I often ask myself: what is going to happen, when the new refugees demand more than a tent, a bottle of water and a slice of bread? How will German society deal with this next turning point? What if it turns out that not every refugee has the skills to equip them for the “made in Germany” brand?<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Mirror: <a href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/9000-ex-service-personnel-homeless-after-2071049">9000 former British soldiers homeless</a></b>:</blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-CjrwWRA4m-c/Vf_tm2bMnLI/AAAAAAAAoN4/dVTrYxBvWsY/s1600/homelesssoldiers-veterans.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-CjrwWRA4m-c/Vf_tm2bMnLI/AAAAAAAAoN4/dVTrYxBvWsY/s1600/homelesssoldiers-veterans.png" /></a></div>
<blockquote>
Up to 9,000 British heroes who served Queen and country are homeless after leaving the military, a Sunday Mirror investigation reveals today. Shockingly, ex-service personnel account for one in 10 rough sleepers across the UK. And charities have warned that the problem of homelessness among former soldiers, sailors and airmen is a “ticking time bomb” which will only get worse if urgent action isn’t taken. Yesterday Simon Weston OBE, who suffered serious burns in the Falklands War, accused the Government of “betraying” veterans after learning of the disturbing numbers without a home. “A huge amount of rhetoric comes from politicians, but they never actually do anything,” he said. “Ultimately, it’s a betrayal.” <br />
<br />
The Sunday Mirror this week heard harrowing stories from veterans who fought on the front line but now sleep in doorways, graveyards and parks, begging from the passers-by whose freedom they defended. Many are having to cope with the devastating affects of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), which has led to a cycle of family break-up, addictions to drugs or alcohol and homelessness. The Army has reduced the number of soldiers by 11,500 in the past three years. A total of 20,000 are due to be axed by 2017. The RAF and Royal Navy are each shedding 5,000 airmen and sailors.<br />
<br />
“What we were finding, particularly with rough sleepers, was that a high proportion were ex-services personnel,” he said. “It’s that lack of regime – they come out and it all goes. There’s no work and it results in all sorts of issues.”<br />
<br />
A report by homeless charity Crisis found that 500 people sleeping rough in London this year had been in the armed forces, compared with 330 the previous year. In 2010-11 there were just 77. The charity estimates that as many as one in 10 homeless people in parts of the UK are former service personnel. Incredibly, the numbers have soared since the Government outlined its duty to serving and former personnel when the Armed Forces Covenant was enshrined in law in 2011. It says they “should have priority status in applying for government-sponsored affordable housing schemes, and service leavers should retain this status for a period of discharge”. The covenant adds: “Support should be available for all service personnel in order to assist their transition from service to civilian life. “Provision should include training, education, appropriate health care referral and job-finding preparation and assistance. It should also include information, advice and guidance on such matters as housing and financial management.”<br />
<br />
Colonel Richard Kemp, former commander of British forces in Afghanistan, said ministers should care for ex-personnel “unstintingly”. He said: “The vast majority of servicemen make a good transition back into civilian life. Some do not and sometimes this is due to the life they led in the service of their country. Those who are physically or mentally damaged by their experiences fighting for us deserve our support in return. The Government must look after them unstintingly, because whatever the cost to the taxpayer, it will be less than the debt we owe them.”<br />
<br />
Labour MP Madeleine Moon, who sits on the Defence Select Committee, said: “The Military Covenant promises priority accommodation for ex-service personnel. The problem is most local authorities and housing associations are desperately short of accommodation. The two are colliding, and this is something we have to resolve.”<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Meanwhile.... Economic Migrants have little problems finding council housing...</b><br />
<br />
<b><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2155726/Somali-family-benefits-handed-keys--2million-luxury-council-home-Londons-affluent-streets.html">Somali family on benefits handed keys to £2million luxury council home</a> | <a href="http://shoebat.com/2015/09/19/uk-muslim-welfare-refugees-trash-the-1-25-million-home-they-are-living-in-for-free-and-laugh-about-it/" target="_blank">Muslim Welfare 'refugees' </a></b><b><a href="http://shoebat.com/2015/09/19/uk-muslim-welfare-refugees-trash-the-1-25-million-home-they-are-living-in-for-free-and-laugh-about-it/" target="_blank">trash the £1.25 million home they are living in for free and laugh about it</a> | DM: <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1351537/The-10-families-costing-1m-state-handouts.html">Ten Families costing state £1 million in state handouts</a> | <a href="http://www.barenakedislam.com/2015/09/08/just-wait-the-islamic-state-isis-has-smuggled-thousands-of-jihadists-into-europe-by-embedding-them-with-muslim-invaders-posing-as-refugees/">Before ISIS Fighters; Now Lebensraum Hijrah EU Refugees</a> | </b><b><a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-recruits-are-defecting-because-arent-getting-the-luxury-goods-and-cars-they-were-promised-10511522.html">ISIS recruits defecting upset they have not received promised luxury goods cars they were promised</a></b>:</blockquote>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-StDwuP7pITQ/Vgf9BxgWJCI/AAAAAAAAoSA/QhwfispWML0/s1600/BeforeISISWarrior_NowEURefugee.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-StDwuP7pITQ/Vgf9BxgWJCI/AAAAAAAAoSA/QhwfispWML0/s1600/BeforeISISWarrior_NowEURefugee.png" /></a></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<blockquote>
I don't know how we got so lucky!' Somali family on benefits handed keys to £2million luxury 'council' home a stone's throw from where Tony Blair used to live. Builders did £100,000 renovations in 2011, creating two new bedrooms. Private rent could cost £6,000 a month - but welfare family pay £1,000 a month. Neighbours' fury over recent deliveries of new carpets and televisions.<br />
<br />
A family of Somali benefits claimants living in a £2million home courtesy of the taxpayer admitted they couldn’t believe their luck yesterday. To the anger of neighbours, the family of ten are allowed to live in a six-bedroom end-of-terrace Georgian townhouse in one of London’s most fashionable areas, populated by high-flying lawyers and stockbrokers. The family use housing benefits to pay a heavily discounted rent for the four-storey house in Islington – close to Tony Blair’s former home – which boasts a variety of period features, including chandeliers and wood flooring.<br />
<br />
Ten families in England are sharing an astonishing $1.5 million a year in housing benefits, it emerged last night. Five of the families are receiving the maximum payment of $3,2,00 per week. It is the first proof that George Osborne was correct when he claimed some households were receiving sums in excess of $158,000 a year.<br />
<br />
Last night, the Chancellor told the Daily Mail: ‘It is precisely this kind of shocking waste of public money under the previous Labour government that led to Britain’s debt problems. ‘We are bringing an end to this by putting a cap on the total amount of benefit that a family can receive so the days of $158,000 housing benefit claims are gone.’<br />
<br />
The Coalition triggered a furious reaction last year when it unveiled plans to cut the top rate of housing benefit to $635 a week. Chris Bryant, the Labour justice spokesman, said the cuts would lead to ‘social cleansing’, with 200,000 people forced out of the capital.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
<b>Economic Collapse -- Psychological NeoConservative Conversion -- Effect on Middle Class</b></h3>
<br />
"A neoconservative is a liberal who has been mugged by reality. A neoliberal is a liberal who got mugged by reality but has not pressed charges for fears of being called a racist." -- Amended quote of Irving Kristol<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Caroll Quigley: Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time</b>: </blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-bHZdXvigDxo/Vf_vj3KZvXI/AAAAAAAAoOE/ZYHPbwJPN98/s1600/ba-tarsands2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="215" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-bHZdXvigDxo/Vf_vj3KZvXI/AAAAAAAAoOE/ZYHPbwJPN98/s320/ba-tarsands2.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<blockquote>
The growth of commercial capitalism... industrial capitalism .. financial and monopoly capitalism... gave rise to a change from a two class society to a middle-class society. Under industrial capitalism and the early part of financial capitalism, society began to develop into a polarized two-class society in which an entrenched bourgeoisie stood opposed to a mass proletariat. .. In Germany, Poland, Hungary and Russia where the inflation went so far that the monetary unit became completely valueless by 1924, the middle classes were largely destroyed, and their members were driven to desperation or at least to an almost psychopathic hatred of the form of government or the social class that they believed to be responsible for their plight.... The inflation was not injurious to the influential groups in German society, although it was generally ruinous to the middle classes, and thus encouraged extremist elements. Those groups whose property was in real wealth, either in land or in industrial planet, were benefited by the inflation which increased the value of their properties and wiped away their debts (chiefly mortgages and industrial bonds). ... In this [Weimar inflation] polarization of the political spectrum it was the middle classes which became unanchored, driven by desperation and panic... <br />
<br />
Some of the more intractable difficulties of newly decolonized areas are psychological, especially as these difficulties are hard to identify and often provide almost insuperable obstacles to development programs, especially to those directed along Western lines. It is, for example, not usually recognized that the whole economic expansion of Western society rests upon a number of psychological attitudes that are prerequisites to the system as we have it but are not often stated explicitly. Two of these may be identified as (1) future preferences and (2) infinitely expandable material demand. In a sense these are contradictory, since the former implies that Western economic man will make almost any sacrifice in the present for the sake of some hypothetical benefit in the future, while the latter implies almost insatiable material demand in the present. Nonetheless, both are essential features of the overwhelming Western economic system. <br />
<br />
Future preference came out of the Christian outlook of the West and especially the Puritan tradition, which was prepared to accept almost any kind of sacrifice and self-discipline in the temporal world for the sake of future salvation. The process of secularization of Western society since the 17th century shifted that future benefit from eternity to this temporal world but did not otherwise disturb the pattern of future preference and self-discipline. In fact these became the chief psychological attributes of the middle class that made the Industrial Revolution and the great economic expansion of the West. They made people willing to undergo long periods of sacrifice for personal training and to restrict their enjoyment of income for the sake of higher training and for capital accumulation. ... The mass production of this new industrial system was able to continue and to accelerate to the fantastic rate of the twentieth century because Western man placed no limits on his ambition to create a secularized earthly paradise. ... Today the average middle class family of suburbia has a schedule of future material demands which is limitless.. second car, third car, basement reconstruction, patio, swimming pool, summer residents, larger boat. And so it goes, an endless expansion of insatiable demands spurred on by skilled advertising, the whole keeping the wheels of industry turning, and the purchasing power of the community racing around in an accelerating cycle. .. Without these two attitudes it will be very difficult for underdeveloped nations to follow along the Western path of development.... <br />
<br />
The character of any society is determined less by what it is actually like than by the picture it has of itself and of what it aspires to be. ... Wealth, power, prestige, and respect were all obtained by the same standard, based on money. this in turn was based on a pervasive emotional insecurity that sought relief in the ownership and control of material possessions. <br />
<br />
A thousand years ago, Europe had a two-class society in which a small upper class of nobles and upper clergy were supported by a great mass of peasants. The nobles defended this world, and the clergy opened the way to the next world, while the peasants provided the food and other material needs for the whole society. All three had security in their social relationships in that they occupied positions of social status that satisfied their psychic needs for companionship, economic security, a foreseeable future, and the purpose of their efforts. Members of both classes had little anxiety about the loss of these things by any likely outcome of events and all thus had emotional security. <br />
<br />
This was modified with the new middle class bourgeoisie (after bourg meaning town). The two older established classes were almost completely rural and intimately associated with the land, economically, socially and spiritually. The permanence of the land and the intimate connection of the land with the most basic of human needs, especially food, amplified the emotional security associated with the older classes. <br />
<br />
The new middle class of bourgeoisie who grew up between the two older classes had none of these things. They were commercial peoples concerned with the exchange of goods, mostly luxury goods, in a society where all their prospective customers already had the basic necessities of life provided by their status. The new middle class had no status in a society based on status; they had no security or permanence in a society that placed the highest value on these qualities. The flow of the necessities of life, notably food, to the new town dwellers was precarious, so that some of their earliest and most emphatic actions were taken to ensure the flow of such goods from the surrounding country to the town. All the things the bourgeois did were new things, all were precarious, and insecurity, and their whole lives were lived without the status, permanence and security of the society of the day most highly valued. ... For these and other reasons psychic insecurity became the keynote of the new middle-class outlook. It still is. The only remedy for this insecurity of the middle class seemed to it to be the accumulation of more possessions that could be a demonstration to the world of the individuals importance and power. In this way, for the middle class, the general goal of medieval man to seek future salvation in the hereafter was secularized to an effort to seek future security in this world by acquisition of wealth and its accompanying power and social prestige. But the social prestige from wealth was most available among fellow bourgeoisie, rather than among nobles and peasants. Thus the opinions of one's fellow bourgeoisie, by wealth and by conformity to bourgeois values, became the motivating drives of the middle classes, creating was has been called the "acquisitive society." <br />
<br />
In that society... credit became more important than intrinsic personal qualities, and credit was based on the appearances of things, especially the appearances of the external material accessories of life. The facts of a man's personal qualities -- such as kindness, affection, thoughtfulness, generosity, personal insight, and such were increasingly irrelevant or even adverse to the middle-class evaluation of a man. Instead, the middle class evaluation rested rather on nonpersonal attributes and on external accessories. Where personal qualities were admired, they were those that contributed to acquisition. <br />
<br />
... At the basis of this middle class character is psychic insecurity founded on lack of secure social status. The cure for such insecurity became insatiable material acquisition. <br />
<br />
the petty bourgeousie, including millions of persons who regard themselves as middle class and are under all the middle-class anxieties and pressures, but often earn less money than unionized laborers. As a result of these things they are often very insecure, envious, filled with hatreds, and are generally the chief recruits for any Radical Right, fascist or hate campaigns against any group that is different or which refuses to conform to middle-class values. Made up of clerks, shopkeepers, and vast numbers of office workers in business, government, finance, and education, these tend to regard their white-collar status as the chief value in life, and live in an atmosphere of envy, pettiness, insecurity, and frustration. They form the major portion of the Republican Party's supporters in the towns of America, as they did for the Nazis in Germany thirty years ago. <br />
<br />
Under Economic Nationalism ... Self-sufficiency, even if it involved a lower standard of living, was held preferable to international division of labour, on the grounds that political security was more important than a high -- and insecure -- standard of living.<br />
<br />
The puritan point of view about human nature was that the world and the flesh are positive evils and that man, in at least his physical part of his nature, is essentially evil. As a consequence he must be disciplined totally to prevent him from destroying himself and the world. .. The Puritan point of view led directly to mercantalism, which regarded political-economic life as a struggle to the death in a world where there was not sufficient wealth or space for different groups. To them wealth was limited to a fixed amount in a world as a whole, and one mans gain was someone else's loss. That meant that the basic struggles of this world were irreconcilable and must be fought to a finish. This was part of the Puritan belief that nature was evil and that a state of nature was a jungle of violent conflicts. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Globe Tribune: <a href="http://globetribune.info/2011/11/27/gerald-celente-predicts-mass-expulsions-of-muslim-immigrants-from-europe/">Gerald Celente Predicts Mass Expulsion Ethnic Cleansing of Muslim Immigrants to Europe</a></b>:</blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Q2LGAyDcVRg/Vf_wCU2EvFI/AAAAAAAAoOM/y8N-bYQzw0s/s1600/EnvScarcity_EthnicConflict2.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="226" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Q2LGAyDcVRg/Vf_wCU2EvFI/AAAAAAAAoOM/y8N-bYQzw0s/s320/EnvScarcity_EthnicConflict2.PNG" width="320" /></a></div>
<blockquote>
Trend forecaster Gerald Celente made a chilling prediction to De Pers for the year 2012, that the hatred of Muslims in Europe, will culminate in full scale ethnic cleansing.<br />
<br />
“Muslims in Europe, pack your bags and flee. You’re not safe anymore! Ethnic cleansing happened a few years ago with the incredible displacement of millions of people. I predicted twenty years ago that the history of Europe is our near future. The next round of ethnic cleansing will be fueled by the perception that Muslims are causing all of Europe’s problems, from unemployment to crime and urban filth.”<br />
<br />
“Muslims want to destroy Western culture and state,according to popular perception. This perception is a driving force in almost all European countries,in both their domestic and their foreign politics. In Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, Flanders, Wallonia, France, Spain, Italy and Switzerland, Islamophobia is now unstoppable. ”<br />
<br />
“The turnout for this agenda will be fueled by recession and then with the demise of democracy. New right-wing, populist governments will put in place two legal systems, one for the native population,and a second, more restrictive legal system for immigrant . It began in the autumn of 2010 when France adopted a burqa ban. Other countries soon followed, with the overwhelming approval of non-Muslims.”</blockquote>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-LUf-TJ40DWc/VgBI6jhK_cI/AAAAAAAAoPc/HV8Z_58AZUU/s1600/ZagrebCroatia_Bridgesign_FuckOfffromCroatia.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-LUf-TJ40DWc/VgBI6jhK_cI/AAAAAAAAoPc/HV8Z_58AZUU/s1600/ZagrebCroatia_Bridgesign_FuckOfffromCroatia.png" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Zagreb Croatia Bridge Sign</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<blockquote>
“Only the cosmopolitan elites opposed, this agenda. Very few people in the old leadership heard what people were saying, and very few new leaders want to make the same mistakes as the old guard. The parties that have ruled until now lost the trust of the people by ignoring their concerns. Even when the people rallied en masse behind the “new, strong men,” the old guard remained arrogant and inaccessible, and refused to admit that their political creed had become discredited and disproven.<br />
<br />
“The mainstream political parties refused to address the question of the difficulties created by the massive influx of immigrants to Europe. This question is entirely legitimate. How can a country absorb more immigrants if it can not provide for its own people?<br />
<br />
“This is not the country I once knew!” cried the new leaders of right wing parties. And: “Get rid of the rules of the EU, which has received far too much power. We need to take control ourselves, decide where we spend our money and who may live in our country. ”<br />
<br />
“This was what people wanted to hear. Finally came politicians who spoke the truth rather than secure their positions by “going with the flow”. Who took this new political leadership seriously, who understood that their country was not the same as before,with the old political clique and the same flow of immigrants as before?” In France, Holland, Denmark and other places my warnings were dismissed.. “History does not repeat itself, do not be ridiculous. People laughed at me, like when I predicted the fall of the Berlin Wall and the mortgage crisis. I’ll say tomorrow what I have said before. “I told you so.”<br />
<br />
<br />
<b><a href="http://metro.co.uk/2015/08/21/racist-poster-found-in-a-wetherspoons-telling-muslims-get-the-f-out-of-our-countries-5354749/">Poster found in Wetherspoons telling Muslims to 'Get the Fuck out of Our Countries'</a></b>:</blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-LEzHZbaDkIA/VgfjBkX7U0I/AAAAAAAAoQ0/ivpDRTdHNBo/s1600/UK_Wetherspoons-LordKichner_MoononSquarePub-FuckOffMuslims.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-LEzHZbaDkIA/VgfjBkX7U0I/AAAAAAAAoQ0/ivpDRTdHNBo/s320/UK_Wetherspoons-LordKichner_MoononSquarePub-FuckOffMuslims.png" width="256" /></a></div>
<blockquote>
A customer was shocked to find an Islamaphobic poster in his local J.D. Wetherspoon pub recently. The man had entered the Moon on the Square pub in Feltham, Middlesex when he saw the poster on a customer noticeboard telling Muslim’s to ‘get the f**k out of our countries’. <br />
<br />
The poster featured a drawing of WWI leader Lord Kitchener and read as: <br />
<br />
‘MUSLIMS. Are you unhappy with our countries? Are you offended by our culture? Would you prefer to live under sharia law? ‘Then we have a simple solution for you. ‘Get the f**k out of our countries and go back to the monstrous s***tholes you came from. You can live under Muslim rule there and enjoy it as much as you like.’<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Slavoy Zizek; Multiculturalism: The Cultural Logic of Multinational Capitalism [<a href="http://www.soc.aau.dk/fileadmin/user_upload/kbm/VoF/Kurser/2011/Multiculturalism/slavoj_zizek-multiculturalism-or-the-cultural-logic-of-multinational-capitalism.pdf">PDF</a>]: Multinational Capitalists Colonize the West with imported cheap labour third world immigrants and subsequent enforced political correct multiculturalist legalism to silence alleged 'racists'</b>:</blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/--y_PXsHiZDE/Vgfmap5AigI/AAAAAAAAoRI/4AHAN4CkrTk/s1600/SlavojZizek_MultinationalMasonicMulticulturalism_830x970.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/--y_PXsHiZDE/Vgfmap5AigI/AAAAAAAAoRI/4AHAN4CkrTk/s320/SlavojZizek_MultinationalMasonicMulticulturalism_830x970.PNG" width="273" /></a></div>
<blockquote>
Multiculturalism: How, then, does the universe of Capital relate to the form of Nation State in our era of global capitalism? Perhaps, this relationship is best designated as ‘auto-colonization’: with the direct multinational functioning of Capital, we are no longer dealing with the standard opposition between metropolis and colonized countries; a global company as it were cuts its umbilical cord with its mother-nation and treats its country of origins as simply another territory to be colonized. This is what disturbs so much the patriotically oriented right-wing populists, from Le Pen to Buchanan: the fact that the new multinationals have towards the French or American local population exactly the same attitude as towards the population of Mexico, Brazil or Taiwan. Is there not a kind of poetic justice in this self-referential turn? Today’s global capitalism is thus again a kind of ‘negation of negation’, after national capitalism and its internationalist/colonialist phase. At the beginning (ideally, of course), there is capitalism within the confines of a Nation-State, with the accompanying international trade (exchange between sovereign Nation-States); what follows is the relationship of colonization in which the colonizing country subordinates and exploits (economically, politically, culturally) the colonized country; the final moment of this process is the paradox of colonization in which there are only colonies, no colonizing countries—the colonizing power is no longer a Nation-State but directly the global company. In the long term, we shall all not only wear Banana Republic shirts but also live in banana republics.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Matti Sarmela: What is Cultural Imperialism?[<a href="http://www.kotikone.fi/matti.sarmela/culturimperialism.pdf">PDF</a>]</b>:</blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-vGrjwAoXvpo/Vgfv2UBK4EI/AAAAAAAAoRY/KXqswSu_U54/s1600/MasonSoylentGreenCultKoolAid.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-vGrjwAoXvpo/Vgfv2UBK4EI/AAAAAAAAoRY/KXqswSu_U54/s400/MasonSoylentGreenCultKoolAid.png" width="308" /></a></div>
<blockquote>
The industrialized west has adopted a common technological culture that satisfies international standards and that has made possible the realization of the imperialists' centuries-old dream of yoking the entire world's resources with a systematic global production process. This megalomania has given birth to the super-culture, which prides itself on building the largest reservoir in the world, the largest atomic power station and the longest conveyor-belt. Western culture is a monument to its own planners, executive directors, party leaders and developmentalists, a culture evaluated statistically in terms of size, productivity, and material objects, development trends and consumer indices. In this culture the man in the street has increasingly less value collectively or culturally, as a worker or as a consumer. The high standard of living of western society has delivered nations from the tyrannies of nature and submitted them to the tyrannies of man. Primitive societies had nothing of value to offer in the creation of this new society that worshipped development – in the spectrum of human ways of life, the two stand irreconcilably at opposite poles.<br />
<br />
Cultural identity is perhaps generally understood to mean the concept of reality held by a member of a particular culture, the way in which he comprehends and motivates his own socio-cultural existence. A vital part of cultural identification is therefore the community's concept of the purpose or meaning of life around which the individual organizes his own existence. In this respect global cultural change has meant the disappearance of any generally held concept of the meaning of life and the emergence of numerous substitutes. The sense of regional identity has been submerged in that of national identity, which was perhaps latent anyway. More significantly, the individual has come to identify himself with the culture represented by groups sharing the same profession, interests or ideals. The pivotal point of cultural existence for a member of an urban culture offering multifarious possibilities and possessing multifarious values is a material or ideological objective: a house or property of some other sort, a professional career, a position of influence in a political or religious group or in some other organization. A member of industrialized society may identify himself with his objective, provided that this seems sufficiently worthwhile in the long-term and allows him to make full use of his potentialities. But for a far greater number, who are just factory fodder, the meaning of life lies in identification with the consumer society.<br />
<br />
Mass identity is identification with the industrial mass production society as a consumer of the technological products of a specialized metropolitan culture. The meaning of life is to be found in egocentric, new experiences, in taking advantage of all the technically maximal entertainments and stimuli offered by the professionals: restaurants, sport, television, or so-called creative hobbies and art-forms, or the new technological challenges – parachuting, slalom and motor racing. Existential experiences provided by specialized departments of the welfare/warfare state are the be-all and end-all of human existence.</blockquote>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6DJzCAVjHOE/Vf_x55F2cvI/AAAAAAAAoOY/ZRMn1K_U6ho/s1600/HomerLea_ValourofIgnorance_EoP-v-WiP_ConvergingBreedConsumption-WarLines_WB.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="167" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6DJzCAVjHOE/Vf_x55F2cvI/AAAAAAAAoOY/ZRMn1K_U6ho/s640/HomerLea_ValourofIgnorance_EoP-v-WiP_ConvergingBreedConsumption-WarLines_WB.png" width="575" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Imperialism -- whether economic, cultural, religious, political or military -- can only be avoided if the ecosystem is governed based upon an Ecology of Peace social contract; that restricts all the beings therein to procreate and consume below ecological carrying capacity limits; to thereby avoid infringing into the next cultures territory. -- <a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/military-gospel.html" target="_blank">Military Gospel according to Homer Lea</a></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<blockquote>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
<b>Totalitarian Agriculture, Population Growth, Desertification, Resource Wars and Economic Migrations</b></h3>
<br />
"The ultimate direct impact of desertification is the complete loss of carrying capacity of an already fragile biome, and the primary indirect effect is the migration of people previously supported by that area. ... Environmental degradation and environmental resource scarcity are of such a magnitude that they can become, if they are not already, an issue of national security (military and non-military) for the United States." -- <i>Understanding International Environmental Security: A Strategic Military Perspective</i>; by Colonel W. Chris King - November 2000; US Army Environmental Policy Institute -- <a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/military-gospel.html">Military Gospel According to Homer Lea</a> <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Primitive Technology: <a href="http://www.primitiveways.com/agriculture.html">Was Agriculture [the source of land degradation] a Good Idea, or an Act of Desperation?</a></b></blockquote>
<table align="right" border="0" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" style="width: 375px;"><tbody>
<tr><td width="375"><div align="center">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="295" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/bTsg5r9oKic" width="375"></iframe><br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 80%;">Daniel Quinn: Totalitarian Agriculture. (<a href="https://youtu.be/bTsg5r9oKic">04:18</a>)</span></strong></div>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<blockquote>
One of the attributes of modern western thought is the firm conviction that whatever it is doing now must be better than what it was doing before - that all change is progress. We are so convinced of this that we assume that if there are other planets with intelligent life, they are trying to get in touch with us using the same technologies that we recognize ourselves. In the book <i>Making Silent Stones Speak</i>, after reviewing the evidence for the evolution of stone tools and technology, Kathy Schick and Nicholas Toth end with the question - why aren't we hearing from other civilized worlds in the universe? They wonder if it is because intelligent life, once it reaches the level of technology that allows it to send messages into outer space, invariably destroys itself. The question unasked is - whether intelligent life can make choices that lead to other, non-destructive technologies either before it self-destructs or after? In looking back over the history of human social evolution, the critical change that seems to have taken us from positive adaptation to self-destructive reaction came with the advent of agriculture. The rest of this piece will take a brief and over simplified look at the development of agriculture, the 'domestication' of various plants and animals and the affect of all this on human health and happiness.<br />
<br />
First, let's consider domestication of animals, thought to have occurred around 20,000 years ago with the appearance of dogs within human habitations. .. Recent discoveries, including a dog skeleton of 100,000 years antiquity and not in human context, have suggested a different scenario. Picture a scene in Stone Age Europe. The cave dwelling humans spread from their permanent village to hunt. The hunted learn to avoid the area close to the cave as a danger zone, but the level of avoidance is determined by genetic factors that control the fear response. The animals with the least fear live closest to the danger. Because they tend to interact with each other, the genetic tendency is increased. Coincidentally, the same gene that controls the fear response controls other factors including coloration and breading cycles. Less fearful animals will breed more often and be more solid colors than the 'normal' animals. Thus reduced fear made these prey species more easily hunted, and in most cases led to their elimination, but in some cases, and it only took one, the members of the hunting community saw value in this close to home population and treated it as insurance against a poor hunt. They knew they could get something on the way home. Over time, this population of hunters and prey formed a relationship in which the hunters began to protect this segment of the hunted until they became isolated from their peers and bred exclusively within - creating the domestic livestock we have today. It may well have been a mutual proposition developing over a long period of time until the two species became dependent on each other for survival. Different animals in different environments and providing different products each went through this process, eventually moving with their human allies into many new places around the world.<br />
<br />
The history of plant cultivation followed a different path. Hunter/gatherer societies gradually became so efficient at utilizing the local resources for food that they began to settle in semi-permanent villages. In doing so, they also became more dependent on trade for special materials not found close to home. Food plants were tended where they grew by selective burning and harvesting methods. (This has been documented for California in the book Before the Wilderness.) In some areas, a few plants were grown from imported seeds to eliminate the need to trade for them. In central California it was tobacco, in Peru it was cotton and gourds, all essentially non-food items. The Peruvian gourd growers latter began irrigating these crops, then irrigating their wild food plants, and then latter, irrigating imported corn and potatoes. What led to the change from wild to cultivated food and what were the social and health repercussions? Answers can be found at a site on the Illinois River called Koster (after the local farmer).<br />
<br />
The Koster site had been occupied for an extended period, so that archaeologists led by Stuart Streuver, were able to find evidence from early hunter/gatherer times around 7500 BC to full scale farming times at 1200 AD. They found many things, but the most intriguing to me was the discovery that they became settled in permanent villages well before they became farmers, It was also during this time that they appear to have been the healthiest and most culturally stable. Evidence of their diets showed a dependency on a variety of nuts, seeds and tubers as well as fish and game, each seasonally abundant. At the same time, there was limited gardening of specialty crops. Sounds good to me, so what happened? Apparently the good times led to population growth, which led to overuse and decline of the wild foods, which led to using progressively less desirable species, which led to increased gardening and ultimately wholesale farming. Once farmers, their bones show increased stress and poorer nutrition, with decreased life-span and increased warfare. An additional social consequence of agriculture was the consolidation of the political/religious structure.<br />
<br />
Hunter/gatherers tend to be egalitarian, with each family or clan in control of themselves, cultivating personal relationships with a variety of spirits/gods to keep everything healthy. Farming led to monocultures with fewer and more powerful gods, a priestly class to bring rain and protect the crops, and eventually god-kings with the divine right to rule, and control irrigation, passed down from above. This is the pattern of the Pharaohs of Egypt and the Great Sun of the Natchez, the leaders of the Inca, Maya and Aztec, and the Louis' of France. We call that progress because those guys got to write the histories.<br />
<br />
There were places however where people stayed in the optimized hunter/gatherer mode sometimes called collecting. In most of Califomia food was abundant, yet population seems to have stayed stable in both numbers and life style. Was there some other factor controlling population? Perhaps there was insufficient firewood in the valleys and insufficient farmable land in the hills. Perhaps they developed social customs that reduced the birth rate. Perhaps they would have become farmers in time. Many areas show different combinations of gardening, hunting and gathering depending on their environment, so perhaps farming has always had limited potential. The result however, was that farmers ended up with big families with time on their hands for extended periods when a few could manage the growing crops. This labor force became both the cause of and the resource for empire building in both the construction of monuments and the creation of armies. Thus farm-based empires were able to conquer even the most successful collectors appearing to be more successful, at least in the short run.<br />
<br />
In the long run, they have one big problem - crops fail, and they have put all their eggs in one market basket. Crops fail for three basic reasons - drought, soil depletion and bugs. Whole religions were based on controlling water. Conquest temporarily solved soil depletion problems. We're still fighting the bugs. (Hunter/gatherers eat the bugs.) As a result, the Greeks turned the Cedars of Lebanon into goat pasture, and the Romans did the same to North Africa and other parts of the Mediterranean. To overcome this flaw, the Ceasars sent armies to conquer everybody who might be able to send food to Rome.<br />
<br />
In looking to the past, it seems clear that groups were most stable when they combined some gardening with collecting for an economy that was varied and adaptable to climatic change. A smallish population which is family or clan based also seems to be the most suitable for long term survival. At present, civilization is carrying on the experiment started by all the failed civilizations before to see if we can keep endlessly finding new resources to replace those we use up. The race is on to find renewable fuels, sustainable agriculture, a defense against disease and a rising population of angry inhabitants. If this current experiment should also fail, perhaps we (if we still exist) can start over and do things on a smaller, more personal scale learning from history (and pre-history). Then we may stop worrying about other civilizations on other planets and why they aren't contacting us and be glad the Society of Primitive Technology preserved knowledge from the past.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b><a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/sep/09/tackle-climate-change-or-face-resource-wars-lord-ashdown-warns">Tackle Climate Change or Face Resource Wars</a></b>:</blockquote>
<table align="right" border="0" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" style="width: 375px;"><tbody>
<tr><td width="375"><div align="center">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="295" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/w_cEOnzu1oA" width="375"></iframe><br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 80%;">The Invasion: A Race War is Coming (<a href="https://youtu.be/w_cEOnzu1oA">05:39</a>)</span></strong></div>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<blockquote>
Lord Ashdown: Refugee crisis is a ‘rehearsal’ for a vast humanitarian disaster that will soon unfold if we fail to act on global warming. The former leader of one of the UK’s main political parties says the world will undergo more resource wars and huge movements of desperate people unless it tackles climate change effectively.<br />
<br />
Lord Ashdown, who was leader of Britain’s Liberal Democrats for 11 years, describes the present flight of refugees from Syria and other conflict areas as a “rehearsal” for the vast humanitarian disaster he believes will soon unfold. In a recent BBC interview on the Syrian refugee crisis, he said: “This is the beginnings of the future. It’s not going to go away. “The numbers we now have of refugees fleeing battle zones are going to be diminished into almost nothing when we see the mass movement of populations caused by global warming.”<br />
<br />
He said evidence of the impacts of climate change was plain to see: “You need only to fly over some of the areas that are being affected – like the Naga Hills on the border of India and Burma, or vast areas of the Ganges delta – to see clearly what’s happening.”<br />
<br />
Tahmima Anam, a Bangladeshi writer and novelist, says that 50,000 people migrate every month to Dhaka, the capital city, because rising sea levels are making their villages uninhabitable and their arable land impossible to cultivate. In both the UK and the US, military leaders are aware of the growing threat from climate change and expect to be ordered to react to its effects.<br />
<br />
Ashdown said: “If governments do not act, then wars over land and resources − which is what the second Iraq war was − will become more common.”<br />
<br />
As long ago as 2003, a <a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/military-gospel.html">report prepared for the US Department of Defense</a> warned that global climate change is more likely to result in sudden, cataclysmic environmental events than a gradual and manageable rise in average temperatures.<br />
<br />
Such events, the report said, could include a substantial increase in global sea levels, intense storms and hurricanes, and continent-wide “dustbowl” effects, which could lead to wars for access to food, water, habitable land and energy supplies. “Violence and disruption stemming from the stresses created by abrupt changes in the climate pose a different type of threat to national security than we are accustomed to today,” the report said.<br />
<br />
Ashdown foresees a direct and controversial role for military forces in the near future − not simply in fighting these wars, but also in controlling refugee flows. Asked whether he thought the UK’s armed forces would be ordered to defend the country’s borders, or to stop refugees leaving their countries of origin, or simply to play a humanitarian role, he replied: “All of those.” He went on: “The idea of Open Europe is now under threat. We have to discuss how we can manage the future.”<br />
<br />
Asked what his priorities would be for a government facing mass migration of this sort, Lord Ashdown replied: “Once the crisis is upon you, it’s too late to start working out your priorities. “This is about forethought, the need to look ahead. And you can’t approach it on a purely British basis. It has to be an international effort consistent with our principles.”<br />
<br />
<br />
<b><a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/15/us-environment-land-idUSKCN0RF14I20150915">Reuters</a> | <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2015/sep/15/land-degradation-costs-word-trillions-dollars-year-report-says">Guardian</a>: ELD Report estimates land degradation - desertification costs world $10 trillion every year, will drive estimated 50 million people to migrate in next 10 years</b>:<br />
<br />
ELD: Economics of Land Degradation Initiative report: <i>The Value of Land</i> estimates that land degradation is costing the world as much as $10.6tn every year, equivalent to 17% of global gross domestic product; not only from lost agricultural production and diminished livelihoods, but also from the lost value of ecosystem services formerly provided by the land, including water filtration, erosion prevention, nutrient cycling and the provision of clean air. Arable land that is moderately or severely degraded, results in desertification, which is having a profound effect on migration. The report cites Karmenu Vella, European commissioner for Environment, Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, who says that land degradation and desertification is forcing hundreds of thousands to move from their homes. A study by <i>UNCCD: UN’s Convention to Combat Desertification</i>, found that the process may drive an estimated 50 million people from their homes in the next 10 years.<br />
<br />
Key Findings: * Land cover changes since year 2000 are responsible for half to 75% of the lost ecosystem services value. * The value of lost ecosystem services due to land degradation averages US $43,400 to $72,000 per square km, some US $870 to $1,450 per person, globally each year. * The percentage of Earth's land stricken by serious drought doubled from the 1970s to the early 2000s. * One third of the world is vulnerable to land degradation; one third of Africa is threatened by desertification. * A future focused on a shift to sustainability will see the greatest increase in ecosystem service values.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Smithsonian: <a href="http://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/is-a-lack-of-water-to-blame-for-the-conflict-in-syria-72513729/#9gv4Y2ET5m5zPPzu.99">Is a Lack of Water to Blame for the Conflict in Syria?</a>; PNAS: <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2015/02/23/1421533112">Report: A 2006 drought pushed Syrian farmers to migrate to urban centers, setting the stage for massive uprisings</a> | USDA: </b><b><a href="http://www.pecad.fas.usda.gov/highlights/2008/05/syria_may2008.htm" target="_blank">SYRIA: Wheat Production in 2008/09 Declines Owing to Season-Long Drought</a> | <a href="http://marxsite.com/Middle%20east%20Resource%20wars.html">Middle East Resource Wars</a></b>:</blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ScCnF0j4jAU/VgAEnN82oUI/AAAAAAAAoPA/B0cKcvt1okE/s1600/Syria_2007_Rainfall-DroughtVegetation_USDA.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ScCnF0j4jAU/VgAEnN82oUI/AAAAAAAAoPA/B0cKcvt1okE/s320/Syria_2007_Rainfall-DroughtVegetation_USDA.PNG" width="289" /></a></div>
<blockquote>
The world’s earliest documented water war happened 4,500 years ago, when the armies of Lagash and Umma, city-states near the junction of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, battled with spears and chariots after Umma’s king drained an irrigation canal leading from the Tigris. “Enannatum, ruler of Lagash, went into battle,” reads an account carved into an ancient stone cylinder, and “left behind 60 soldiers [dead] on the bank of the canal.”<br />
<br />
Water loss documented by the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE), a pair of satellites operated by NASA and Germany’s aerospace center, suggests water-related conflict could be brewing on the riverbank again. GRACE measured groundwater usage between 2003 and 2009 and found that the Tigris-Euphrates Basin—comprising Turkey, Syria, Iraq and western Iran—is losing water faster than any other place in the world except northern India. During those six years, 117 million acre-feet of stored freshwater vanished from the region as a result of dwindling rainfall and poor water management policies. That’s equal to all the water in the Dead Sea. GRACE’s director, Jay Famiglietti, a hydrologist at the University of California, Irvine, calls the data “alarming.”<br />
<br />
While the scientists captured dropping water levels, political experts have observed rising tensions. In Iraq, the absence of a strong government since 2003, drought and shrinking aquifers have led to a recent spate of assassinations of irrigation department officials and clashes between rural clans. Some experts say that these local feuds could escalate into full-scale armed conflicts.</blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-wDTvbAxoan4/VgAIm9JQrfI/AAAAAAAAoPM/Z2UA7fh3u7w/s1600/MiddleEast_2008_Drought.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="281" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-wDTvbAxoan4/VgAIm9JQrfI/AAAAAAAAoPM/Z2UA7fh3u7w/s320/MiddleEast_2008_Drought.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<blockquote>
In Syria, a devastating drought beginning in 2006 forced many farmers to abandon their fields and migrate to urban centers. There’s some evidence that the migration fueled the civil war there, in which 80,000 people have died. “You had a lot of angry, unemployed men helping to trigger a revolution,” says Aaron Wolf, a water management expert at Oregon State University, who frequently visits the Middle East.<br />
<br />
“The Middle East is facing its worst drought in decades. For three summers, the annual rains have failed to come. Farmland has dried up across the region in Iraq, Syria, southeast Turkey and Lebanon....Experts say the climate warming in the Fertile Crescent, the area of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, is contributing to the water shortage and helping to create a new phenomenon – water refugees....More than 160 villages are abandoned in Syria alone. According to a United Nations report on the drought, 800,000 people have lost their livelihood. Hundreds of thousands left once-fertile land that turned to dust and pitched tens near the big cities, looking for any kind of work.” - Deborah Amos, NPR; 7 January 2010<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Think Progress: <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/09/08/3699165/refugees-dust-bowl-mexico/">Worried About Refugees? Just Wait Until We Dust-Bowlify Mexico And Central America</a></b>:</blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-OIXi2KJJ19M/Vf_0hvoHj8I/AAAAAAAAoOk/lRxHpAK7MZI/s1600/NASA_ClimateChangeDroughtSoilMoistureMap_2095_USA.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="241" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-OIXi2KJJ19M/Vf_0hvoHj8I/AAAAAAAAoOk/lRxHpAK7MZI/s320/NASA_ClimateChangeDroughtSoilMoistureMap_2095_USA.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<blockquote>
... The unprecedented multi-year drought that preceded the Syrian civil war is mild compared to the multi-decade megadroughts that unrestricted carbon pollution will make commonplace in the U.S. Southwest, Mexico, and Central America, according to many recent studies.<br />
<br />
Given the current political debate over immigration policy, it’s worth asking two questions. First: if the United States, through our role as the greatest cumulative carbon polluter in history, plays a central role in rendering large parts of Mexico and Central America virtually uninhabitable, where will the refugees go? And second: will we have some moral obligation to change our immigration policy?<br />
<br />
If we don’t take far stronger action on climate change, then here is what a 2015 NASA study projected the normal climate of North America will look like. The darkest areas have soil moisture comparable to that seen during the 1930s Dust Bowl.<br />
<br />
Just the last 12 months have seen headlines like these: “Worst drought in 40 years puts more than 2 million people in Central America at risk” and “Drought Reduces Mexico’s Agricultural Production by 40%.” Of course you probably haven’t seen those stories, since most major U.S. media outlets have been too busy covering brutal droughts right here at home.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
<b>Progressive Leftists: Addicted to Industrialization; Activist Cannon Fodder -- Pacification of Indigenous Peoples -- Pawns of Fortune 500 Resource Imperialists</b></h3>
<br />
<b>Al Jazeera: <a href="http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/peopleandpower/2015/02/africa-palms-150223110509150.html">From Africa's Palms</a></b>:</blockquote>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-T56hiXvggaY/VgBKTqDLcsI/AAAAAAAAoPo/vNarQWm4khA/s1600/PopulationConsumption_Lebensraum-SustainabilityMaslow.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="257" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-T56hiXvggaY/VgBKTqDLcsI/AAAAAAAAoPo/vNarQWm4khA/s320/PopulationConsumption_Lebensraum-SustainabilityMaslow.png" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Eco-Footprint Lebensraum Pressure Meter</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<blockquote>
In Cameroon, not many smallholders living off the forest would sacrifice what they have -- where all their food and residential needs are provided them for free by the forest -- for a job in an American palm oil plant..<br />
<br />
Trying to clear a path through the confusion is Macnight Ngwese from the Centre for Environment & Development (CED). He is leading a mapping programme in collaboration with local NGOs, SEFE and Nature Cameroon. They have been providing villagers with GPS devices to log their land and forest use. This information is vital in a grassroots battle to protect rights and livelihoods in one of the country's most remote areas.<br />
<br />
We stop en route and Macnight unrolls one of his large maps, a patch of diagonal lines cover most of the document. That patch, he says, is the proposed plantation area. Macnight locates where we are and where we are going. Surrounding us on the map are a couple of key symbols. He points to one and says, "that is one of the few fishing spots in the area."<br />
<br />
This map was created using data compiled from several villages in the area. Macnight continues,"what is instantly clear from the first set of results is that each community has a very large area of land use. People travel deep into the forest to collect herbs and spices, fish in rivers miles from their home, and hunt for food in similar pockets to neighbouring communities."<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<b><a href="http://www.notprimitive.in/">Not Primitive</a></b>:</blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-iEMHvLioQvg/Vgf1jcSospI/AAAAAAAAoRo/xvtpSpg3Lfs/s1600/civilized-v-uncivilized.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-iEMHvLioQvg/Vgf1jcSospI/AAAAAAAAoRo/xvtpSpg3Lfs/s320/civilized-v-uncivilized.jpg" width="281" /></a></div>
<blockquote>
“It’s crazy when these outsiders come and teach us development. Is development possible by destroying the environment that provides us food, water and dignity? You have to pay to take a bath, for food, and even to drink water. In our land, we don’t have to buy water like you, and we can eat anywhere for free.” - Lodu Sikaka, Dongria Kondh<br />
<br />
“Life expectancy now is around 60 to 65 years. Before it was 80 to 90 years. It’s because before [our access to our forest was restricted] we ate tubers, fruits, and other forest products, whereas now the Soliga diet is bad.” – Madegowda, Soliga<br />
<br />
“You take us to be poor, but we’re not. We produce many kinds of grains with our own efforts, and we don’t need money.” – Baba Mahriya, Bhil<br />
<br />
“We don’t want to go to the city and we don’t want to buy food. We get it free here.” – Malari Pusaka, Dongria Kondh<br />
<br />
Tribal people are not 'backwards', they haven't been 'left behind'. They choose to live on their land, in their own ways .<br />
<br />
Studies have shown that tribal people on their own land are some of the happiest in the world – the nomadic Maasai tribe were found to be just as happy as the world’s richest billionaires. Despite often being described as ‘primitive’ and ‘poor’, a study of the hunter-gatherer Jarawa tribe’s nutrition and health found that the Jarawa, who remain self-sufficient on their own land, have ‘optimum nutritional status’. They have a detailed knowledge of more than 150 plant and 350 animal species. However, their neighbours, the Great Andamanese, were brought into the ‘mainstream’ by the British and robbed of their land. They were decimated by disease and are now completely dependent on the government. Alcoholism and diseases such as TB are rife.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>John Zerzan: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmSjMmqtF8g">Pretensions of Modernity</a> | <a href="http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/john-zerzan-patriarchy-civilization-and-the-origins-of-gender">Patriarchy, Civilization, and the Origins of Gender</a></b>: <br />
<br />
“Civilized Man says: I am Self, I am Master, all the rest is other — outside, below, underneath, subservient. I own, I use, I explore, I exploit, I control. What I do is what matters. What I want is what matter is for. I am that I am, and the rest is women and wilderness, to be used as I see fit.”<br />
<br />
Primitivist John Zerzan argues that the primary motive of the ‘left’ is to co-opt indigenous cultures into becoming industrialized cultures, where their members become workers and consumers in the industrialized ratrace. The problem with the left, is their addiction to industrial progress, industrialization and domestication, and their cooptation of indigenous and non-industrialized cultures, on behalf of international corporations. Primitivists do not endorse industrialization or industrialization’s cooptation of indigenous cultures; whereas the left are fully engaged in the cooptation of indigenous people’s into becoming workers and consumers, and not to be indigenous agrarian and outside of industrialization. Primitivists perceive indigenous cultures as cultures which still have community face to face, and an authentic community and cultural life, in touch with the land. Primitivists believe we cannot all of a sudden become primitives and return to a relocalized and non-industrialized way of life, but overtime we can do so; and if we do not do so, the collapse of industrial civilization shall either exterminate us, or force us to do so. </blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-qq1wPaCvO44/Vgf25hQ-fyI/AAAAAAAAoRw/TvhMt72bHsI/s1600/Before-After_CivilizedPatriarchy.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-qq1wPaCvO44/Vgf25hQ-fyI/AAAAAAAAoRw/TvhMt72bHsI/s1600/Before-After_CivilizedPatriarchy.jpg" /></a></div>
<blockquote>
<br />
<br />
<b>EcoAction: <a href="http://www.eco-action.org/dt/wildup.html">Realities of Going Primitive</a></b>:</blockquote>
<table align="right" border="0" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" style="width: 375px;"><tbody>
<tr><td width="375"><div align="center">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="295" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/8UYh4ue8JW8" width="375"></iframe><br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 80%;">Turtle Island: Families Learning Primitive and Natural Living Low Tech Skills Together (<a href="https://youtu.be/8UYh4ue8JW8">04:18</a>)</span></strong></div>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<blockquote>
Having been through what I have in the past several years, I have developed some sense of what is going down in the world. I believe there are many wonderful human beings that are depressed, devastated, and overwhelmed by the crazed society that surrounds them. Their true desire is to live as close to the land as possible. Perhaps no one else knows that they feel this way and they tell no one for fear of rejection and ridicule. So their secret consumes their thoughts and dreams and they continue going through the motions of crazed society, living the way they really want to only in their heads. I know what this is like and maybe some of you reading this also know. Also, I hope readers can learn from mistakes I have made. I refuse to write a flowery, buttered-up story of living native, but I will say that the joys, rewards and freedom I have experienced are well worth any hardships encountered. So, this is not a blueprint for going primitive, just the human side of my attempt thus far.<br />
<br />
So, what is it like to live a primitive lifeway, sleeping in a conical birchbark lodge, wearing deer skin clothing, making and using tools, traps and weapons to supply meat, and all of the other multifarious aspects of wilderness living? In the following pages, I will detail my experience of living close to earth. Again, it will not be a flowery account, but rather one that is full of compromises and hardships, but also of rewards and joys.<br />
<br />
I do not claim to know everything about primitive living or survival, and I have not lived in this way long enough to be 100% proficient and self-sufficient. However, I have learned much and want to share what I have learned. Primarily, I want to discuss the many unexpected mysteries one has to figure out and learn before progressing further. I have called my quest the journey from civilized chaos to primitive paradise.<br />
<br />
Food variety is fairly limited in the primitive diet. That does not mean it isn't a good diet. Studies of pre-contact primitive peoples the world over have found that these "limited" diets meet every body requirement. In the book, Nutrition and Physical Degeneration, by Weston Price, it was concluded that these primitives had unbelievable endurance, erect postures and cheerful personalities. They were found to have excellent bone structure and well developed jaw and teeth free from decay. In case after case, Price found no incidence of cancer, ulcers, tuberculosis, heart or kidney disease, high blood pressure, muscular dystrophy or sclerosis or cerebral palsy.<br />
<br />
Price also spoke of these primitive societies having no psychiatrists, no crime, no prisons, no mental illness, alcoholism or drug addiction. Every baby was nursed by its mother, and there were no neglected children. In other words, physical health went hand in hand with mental and emotional health.<br />
<br />
I want to emphasize that this transition takes lots of time, time to learn skills, time to heal from living in modern society, time to deal with insecurities, time to adjust to a major lifestyle change.<br />
<br />
There is simply no cultural circle in place to help those of us pursuing the "wilderness way." We have few, if any, elders to learn from. We have been schooled and prepped from birth for the helter-skelter business world, not the aboriginal world of gatherer-hunter. I have had to refrain from being so critical of myself to avoid becoming discouraged and be accepting and as patient as possible.<br />
<br />
I hope this lets the reader know that there isn't a ready-made primitive way of life waiting once jobs are left and houses are sold, etc., What has been encouraging for me, is the knowledge that every one's ancestor's (99%+) were hunter-gatherers. This is our true heritage. <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [Low Tech & Indigenous Skills Resources: <a href="http://www.primitiveways.com/">Primitive Ways</a> | <a href="http://livingprimitively.com/">Living Primitively</a> | <a href="http://www.youtube.com/user/Veidemannen">Veidemann Bushcraft</a> | <a href="http://lowtechmagazine.com/" target="_blank">Low Tech Magazine</a>]</span></strong></blockquote>
</div>
<br />
<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327922598170048610" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JSpbgoKp8LA/SfCVX96zuGI/AAAAAAAAEIs/qqvoPLfHrLA/s400/400_BlackLine.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 8px; margin: 10px auto 0px; text-align: center; width: 528px;" />Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-38843492375209223232014-08-02T19:55:00.000+03:002015-09-21T19:56:48.016+03:00IDF's Gaza assault: control Palestinian gas; cull Scarcity-Combatant Breeding War Terrorists<div align="justify"><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;"></span></span></strong> <strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">“We must all understand that the most potent weapons of war are the penis and the womb. Therefore, if you cannot convince a group to control its population by discussion, debate, intelligent analysis etc., you must consider their action in using the penis and the womb to increase population an act of war.” - Former Municipal Court Judge Jason G. Brent, Humans: An Endangered Species.</span></span></strong> <strong><span style="font-size: 95%;"></span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=8576556228609537953" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-OZ550Sqxt9k/U91DK7G5huI/AAAAAAAAlv4/m3XELGOy6vA/s1600/SQWorm_PopResTap_Dempsey-Putin_17April_350x305.png" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" style="float: right; height: 305px; margin: 10px; width: 350px;" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">[<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-a29gH7CoOL0/U91DhV_0PUI/AAAAAAAAlwE/AlutYBrE2gc/s1600/SQWorm_PopResTap_Dempsey-Putin_17April.png">Large</a>]</td></tr>
</tbody></table><blockquote><span style="font-size: 95%;"><b><i>The Guardian</i></b>: "The Israel-Palestine conflict is clearly not all about resources. But in an age of expensive energy, competition to dominate regional fossil fuels are increasingly influencing the critical decisions that can inflame war."<br />
<br />
<i><b>Palestine Pulse</b></i>: With the increased population, the proportion of poor people in the Gaza Strip has increased to about 39% of the population, according to the Palestinian Center for Statistics. More than 21% of the population lives in extreme poverty.<br />
<br />
According to experts, the absence of population policies in the Gaza Strip and the lack of strategic plans to cope with its growth has turned Gaza’s population into a ticking time bomb. “Population growth,” he said, “is a bomb that can explode at any time and result in economic, social, educational and health consequences.<br />
<br />
<b><i>BBC</i></b>: Gaza population 'rising rapidly': The population of the Gaza Strip increased by almost 40% between 1997 and 2007, according to the results of a Palestinian census.<br />
<br />
<b><i>SQSwans</i></b>: "The womb of the Arab woman is my strongest weapon" - Yasser Arafat.<br />
<br />
<b><i>MILINT Earth Day</i></b>: Guerrylla Laws define the procreation and consumption behaviour of an individual as an Sustainable Leaver (aka Eco-Innocent) or Unsustainable Taker (aka Scarcity-Combatant), based upon a sustainable consumption bio-capacity of 1 global hectare (gha) (60 % of 1.8 gha) in accordance with the proactive conservation policies of Bhutan; multiplied by an individuals Breeding footprint factor of 20 per child. <br />
<br />
Unsustainable Taker / Scarcity-Combatant:<br />
* 0 children, consumption > 20 gha (Intn'l biocapacity (1 gha) x 20)<br />
* 1 child, consumption > 1 gha (Intn'l biocapacity (1 gha (2007))<br />
* 2 or more children.<br />
- <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/commonsism2.html">Commonsism</a></span></blockquote><a name='more'></a><div align="center"><a href="http://guerrylla-law.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-KZub7zsHhEA/UQ4eBt2_j3I/AAAAAAAAhCo/nZw35A1F1KQ/s1600/D_CommonSism_CommonSense-SustainableCommons-G_592x112.png" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 112px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 592px;" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ozl0-dqAI0c/U91EOK7mr1I/AAAAAAAAlwc/ockZ3U0CsGw/s1600/Arafat_ArnonSoffer_ArabWomb.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-lcwyUN_yt3s/U91D9Ha7LgI/AAAAAAAAlwQ/LM71rv8NlLo/s320/Arafat_ArnonSoffer_ArabWomb_350.png" /></a></div><blockquote>Yasser Arafat: Palestinian Womb is his people‘s greatest asset [Arnon Soffer, a geography professor at Israel's Haifa University and a lecturer at the Israeli Army's Staff and Command college, first warned of the impending Jewish demographic minority in the 1980s, but was widely dismissed. He predicted Arabs would outnumber Jews in both Israel proper and the occupied territories by 2010. In February 2001, the night of his election, Sharon sent an aide to ask Soffer for a copy of his 1987 treatise about the demographic threat to Israel; it was the same study that had led Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat to declare in the late 1980s that the "Palestinian womb" was his people's greatest weapon.]<br />
<br />
“Arafat had said that the womb of the Palestinian woman was a "biological weapon," which he could use to create Palestine state by crowding people into the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.” ― Yasser Arafat [Goodreads]</blockquote><br />
<div align="center">***************</div><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">IDF's Gaza assault is to control Palestinian gas, avert Israeli energy crisis</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">09 July 2014 | Nafeez Ahmed | The Guardian</span></strong></div><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-FcMR6B2gwOQ/U91F7UXM2kI/AAAAAAAAlw4/0zhuvyrBsMQ/s1600/SustainableSecurity_Army_350x380.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-FcMR6B2gwOQ/U91F7UXM2kI/AAAAAAAAlw4/0zhuvyrBsMQ/s1600/SustainableSecurity_Army_350x380.PNG" /></a></div><blockquote>Israel's defence minister has confirmed that military plans to 'uproot Hamas' are about dominating Gaza's gas reserves<br />
<br />
According to Anais Antreasyan in the University of California's Journal of Palestine Studies, the most respected English language journal devoted to the Arab-Israeli conflict, Israel's stranglehold over Gaza has been designed to make "Palestinian access to the Marine-1 and Marine-2 gas wells impossible." Israel's long-term goal "besides preventing the Palestinians from exploiting their own resources, is to integrate the gas fields off Gaza into the adjacent Israeli offshore installations." This is part of a wider strategy of:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>"…. separating the Palestinians from their land and natural resources in order to exploit them, and, as a consequence, blocking Palestinian economic development. Despite all formal agreements to the contrary, Israel continues to manage all the natural resources nominally under the jurisdiction of the PA, from land and water to maritime and hydrocarbon resources."</blockquote><br />
In the wake of Operation Cast Lead, the Jerusalem-based Public Committee Against Torture in Israel (Pcati) found that the IDF had adopted a more aggressive combat doctrine based on two principles – "zero casualties" for IDF soldiers at the cost of deploying increasingly indiscriminate firepower in densely populated areas, and the "dahiya doctrine" promoting targeting of civilian infrastructure to create widespread suffering amongst the population with a view to foment opposition to Israel's opponents.<br />
<br />
This was confirmed in practice by the UN fact-finding mission in Gaza which concluded that the IDF had pursued a "deliberate policy of disproportionate force," aimed at the "supporting infrastructure" of the enemy - "this appears to have meant the civilian population," said the UN report.<br />
<br />
The Israel-Palestine conflict is clearly not all about resources. But in an age of expensive energy, competition to dominate regional fossil fuels are increasingly influencing the critical decisions that can inflame war.</blockquote><br />
<div align="center">***************</div><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Gaza’s population balloons: With an average 5.7 births for each woman, Gaza’s government has no plans to curtail population growth.</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Author Mohammed Othman | April 17, 2014</span></strong></div><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-wVY-krWjixw/U91FNMNO9OI/AAAAAAAAlwo/wmnMHTETKt4/s1600/14-07-17_GazaPopBalloons_350x261.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-wVY-krWjixw/U91FNMNO9OI/AAAAAAAAlwo/wmnMHTETKt4/s1600/14-07-17_GazaPopBalloons_350x261.png" /></a></div><blockquote>GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip — Gaza schools are overcrowded with students. According to interviews Al-Monitor conducted with schoolteachers, the average number of students in classrooms reaches 40 in both public schools and those affiliated with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNWRA), reflecting the demographic reality in the Gaza Strip.<br />
<br />
“The population of the small Strip, whose area is 365 square kilometers [141 square miles], passed 1.865 million in March, or 5,109 people per square kilometer. Thus, the Gaza Strip is on the list of the most densely populated areas in the world,” said Riad al-Zeitouniya, the head of the Civil Status and Passport Department in the Ministry of Interior of the Gaza government, speaking to Al-Monitor.<br />
<br />
According to Zeitouniya, the total number of births in Gaza in 2013 exceeded 56,000, while the first three months of 2014 saw more than 13,000. He added, “The increase of the population in the Gaza Strip is excessive; it is very large. Between 2000 and 2013, the number of Gazans increased by more than 687,000 people.”<br />
<br />
A UNRWA report published in 2012 said that by 2020 Gaza’s population will reach 2.1 million, and pointed out that basic infrastructure such as electricity, water, sanitation and social services cannot keep up with the needs of the growing population. The Gaza Strip needs much more electricity, hundreds of new schools and hospitals and thousands of housing units by the year 2020.<br />
<br />
“Gaza has become a dense urban area that is currently facing a housing units shortage estimated at about 71,000,” the report added.<br />
<br />
Experts attribute this increase in population to the high fertility rate of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. The executive director of the Association of Family Planning and Protection, Muyassar Abu Mailaq, told Al-Monitor that the fertility rate for the people of Gaza has long been up to 5.7 children per woman. He said, “According to my work, family-planning methods in all government clinics and those affiliated with UNRWA are available. But some causes have led to increased fertility, thanks to eastern customs and traditions. Palestinian families like procreation, and they don’t consider five or six to be a large number.”<br />
<br />
Abu Mailaq said that Gaza's fertility rate would be considered high even for developed countries with a high average income, let alone for a besieged territory suffering a blockade, extreme poverty, high unemployment and low per capita income.<br />
<br />
Abu Mailaq warned of worsening health, marital and social problems, as well as educational problems caused by the high number of students in classrooms. There is also an absence of clear government population policies in the narrow Gaza Strip, increasing employment demands and difficult conditions.<br />
<br />
It is worth mentioning that in Palestine, along with other Arab countries, laws limiting the number of children per family, such as those in China, are unthinkable. The issue is considered a matter of personal freedom.<br />
<br />
Ahmed Fadel, a taxi driver in his 70s who is married to four women, told Al-Monitor that he has 22 children, the youngest of whom is a 5-month-old girl. <br />
<br />
Along with the help of some of his adult sons, Fadel is barely able to cover the expenses of his large family, consisting of more than 55 people, including his four wives and grandchildren. But Fadel insists he likes having a large family, saying, "My father liked big families, and I have 15 brothers. Most of my relatives like to have large families. We don't like having two, three or even five. Large families are a good thing, and God will provide for us."<br />
<br />
As for Hassan Sobh, 27, who married six years ago, he believes that having many children is not a problem, as a big family provides "protection."<br />
<br />
Sobh, who works as a construction worker, told Al-Monitor that he wants a large family, perhaps as many as 20 children. He said, "I now have four sons. Despite the difficult economic situation facing us, I will not stop having children. I love [having children], and there is nothing preventing me from having more."<br />
<br />
With the increased population, the proportion of poor people in the Gaza Strip has increased to about 39% of the population, according to the Palestinian Center for Statistics. More than 21% of the population lives in extreme poverty.<br />
<br />
According to experts, the absence of population policies in the Gaza Strip and the lack of strategic plans to cope with its growth has turned Gaza’s population into a ticking time bomb. The director of Palthink for Strategic Studies, Omar Shaban, told Al-Monitor that the problem has become worse as no Gaza government — nor the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank or the international community — have put forward plans to cope with the population growth.<br />
<br />
“Population growth,” he said, “is a bomb that can explode at any time and result in economic, social, educational and health consequences. The population in the Gaza Strip is one of the key challenges not only for the Palestinian political regime but also for the regional powers. It is a Palestinian, Arab and international responsibility. Unfortunately, not enough attention is being paid to develop solutions. There are warnings, as in the UNRWA report a year ago, and these warnings don’t propose any solutions.”<br />
<br />
Shaban accused the Palestinian governments of excluding civil society institutions when putting together plans.<br />
<br />
The UNRWA report concluded that in the absence of effective and sustainable remedial action and a favorable policy environment, the current challenges facing the people of Gaza will get worse. The UN expects the population to increase by 500,000 by 2020, warning the situation will get worse if action is not taken.<br />
<br />
<i>Mohammed Othman is a journalist from the Gaza Strip. He graduated from the Faculty of Media in the Department of Radio and Television at Al-Aqsa University in Gaza in 2009. He has received a number of Palestinian and Arab awards, including first place at the Arab Press Awards in Dubai in the category of Youth Press during its tenth session in 2011 and the Press Freedom Award from the Palestinian Government Media Center during its first session in 2011. He also received the third place award for investigative reporting of corruption cases, organized by the Media Development Center at Birzeit University and the Anti-Corruption Commission in 2013</i>.</blockquote><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/cia-central-intel-agency.html" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-sGir2vAGn8o/U91JiaqYtjI/AAAAAAAAlw8/TrIARJhpIGk/s1600/2001_CIA_LongTermDemographicTrends_Q2_600.png" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [<a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2014/jul/09/israel-war-gaza-palestine-natural-gas-energy-crisis">Guardian</a> :: <a href="http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2014/04/gaza-growing-population-challences.html">AL-Monitor</a> :: <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7891434.stm">BBC</a> :: <a href="https://www.facebook.com/Commonsism/photos/a.10153950059575072.1073741828.500738115071/10153959735395072/?type=1">CS</a> :: <a href="https://www.facebook.com/Commonsism/photos/pb.500738115071.-2207520000.1407010845./10154003718755072/?type=3&theater">CS</a> :: <a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/breeding-war.html">SQSwans</a> :: <a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/cia-central-intel-agency.html">CIA</a> :: <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/commonsism2.html">MILED</a>]</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<img alt="" border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JSpbgoKp8LA/SfCVX96zuGI/AAAAAAAAEIs/qqvoPLfHrLA/s400/400_BlackLine.jpg" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327922598170048610" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 7px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 620px;" />Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-67503164982769718452013-07-21T14:16:00.000+03:002013-07-21T14:16:06.411+03:00Snowden court wants Evidence of Amnesty Int-HRW-Nobel Comm's Ecology-of-Peace credibility<div align="justify"><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Snowden Judge: Do Nobel Committee, Amnesty Int, Human Rights Watch have Evidence of Ecology of Peace Credibility?</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Individuals associated with the (i) Norwegian Nobel Committee; (ii) Amnesty International; (iii) Human Rights Watch have made public alleged ‘Peace’ declarations regarding US v Snowden court proceedings. They are hereby invited to provide the court, prosecution and defence with evidence that their ‘Peace’ declarations were credible MILINT Ecology of Peace declarations. If so, to provide the court with a detailed MILINT Ecology of Peace Analysis of their Members Myfootprint.org Consumption footprint and Procreation footprints, by 17:00 HRS (PST) on 23 July 2013.</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Andrea Muhrrteyn | TYGAE | 20 July 2013</span></strong></blockquote></div><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-wQIG6iQLtmg/Ueuz6B1Cw2I/AAAAAAAAiRk/clDZ5dwvZvQ/s1600/USA_SnowdenPrism_SSDefcon-Nob-HRW_cr.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-PV9OyDeKtEI/UeuzwRsP6oI/AAAAAAAAiRY/fBI7TNbPlGU/s1600/USA_SnowdenPrism_SSDefcon-Nob-HRW_cr_375X299.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 299px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 375px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote><span style="font-size: 95%;">Notice to Norwegian Nobel Committee Nominator Professor Stefan Svallfors; Amnesty International: Executive Committee; Secretary General and International Secretariat; Human Rights Watch: Senior Management and Board of Directors; Magistrate Judge John F. Anderson, US District Court Eastern District of Virginia at Alexandria; United States Attorney's Office, Eastern District of Virginia; John A Kralik Jr, FBI, c/o Valerie Parlave. Asst Dir: FBI-VA: Washington Field Office; Edward J Snowden, c/o Glenn Greenwald, The Guardian; c/o Wikileaks Litigation & Press; President Nicolás Maduro, President of Venezuela; President Vladimir Putin, Kremlin Press Office; Lonnie Snowden, c/o Counsel: Bruce Fein; President Barack Obama, c/o: DNI: James Clapper <br />
<br />
Amici Curiae, Andrea Muhrrteyn, an Alien on Pale Blue Dot invitation to (i) Nobel Committee; (ii) Amnesty International; (iii) Human Rights Watch to clarify the MILINT Ecology of Peace; or Civilian War is Peace credibility of their ‘Peace’ public statements in this US v. Snowden matter.</span></blockquote><a name='more'></a><div align="center"><a href="http://guerrylla-law.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-KZub7zsHhEA/UQ4eBt2_j3I/AAAAAAAAhCo/nZw35A1F1KQ/s1600/D_CommonSism_CommonSense-SustainableCommons-G_592x112.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 112px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 592px;" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<blockquote>Please find attached <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/13-07-20_us-v-snowden_nobel-ai-hrw_peace_credibility.pdf">PDF</a> Application to <i>US v. Snowden</i>:<br />
<br />
<b>RE: Andrea Muhrrteyn, an Alien on Pale Blue Dot -- Æquilibriæx Sustainable Security Theses on the Power and Efficacy of Civilized Patriarchy’s AnthroCorpocentric Indulgences: ‘Innocence for Sale’ Jurisprudence – Amicus submission to Clerk of Court, First Judicial Court, Ft. Meade: Case: US v Edward Snowden.<b></b></b><br />
<br />
<b>[1] Relief Sought<b></b></b>:<br />
<br />
[1.1] Andrea Muhrrteyn, an Alien on Pale Blue Dot Amici respectfully moves this Court for permission to invite the (i) Nobel Peace Committee Nominator Professor Stefan Svallfors; (ii) Amnesty International; and (iii) Human Rights Watch, who have made public alleged ‘Peace’ declarations regarding US v Snowden court proceedings, to clarify the MILINT Ecology of Peace; or Civilian War is Peace credibility of their ‘Peace’ public statements.<br />
<br />
[2] <b>MILINT Ecology of Peace vs. Civilian War is Peace<b></b></b>:<br />
<br />
[2.1] Individuals associated with the (i) Norwegian Nobel Committee; (ii) Amnesty International; (iii) Human Rights Watch have made public alleged ‘Peace’ declarations regarding US v Snowden court proceedings. They are hereby invited to provide the court, prosecution and defence with evidence that their ‘Peace’ declarations were credible MILINT Ecology of Peace declarations. If so, to provide the court with a detailed MILINT Ecology of Peace Analysis of their Members Myfootprint.org Consumption footprint and Procreation footprints, by 17:00 HRS (PST) on 23 July 2013.<br />
<br />
[2.2] In the absence of such credible MILINT Ecology of Peace Walk Your Footprint Talk to the Support the Troops evidence, the court, prosecution and /or defence, may honourably conclude that their ‘Peace’ declarations in this matter were War is Peace Whore Verbal Diarrhoea Parasitism; and that their organisations are secret members of the Ecologically Illiterate Scarcity Combatant Taker Flat Earth society.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>MILINT Ecology of Peace Evidence requested from Respondents<b></b></b>:<br />
<br />
[3] <i><b>Norwegian Nobel Committee Nominator Professor Stefan Svallfors</b></i>:<br />
<br />
[3.1] Please notify the court, whether (i) your ‘Peace’ declarations were MILINT Ecology of Peace declarations; and (ii) whether you consider the Nobel Peace Prize to be an Ecology of Peace Prize. If so please provide the court with a detailed MILINT Ecology of Peace Analysis of:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>A. your Myfootprint.org Consumption footprint and Procreation footprint, by 17:00 HRS (PST) on 23 July 2013.<br />
<br />
B. every member of the Nobel Peace Committee, and every single Nobel Peace Prize Laureate who Walks their Footprint ‘Peace’ Talk, by living an Ecology of Peace lifestyle, in terms of thier procreation and consumption, by providing their Myfootprint.org Consumption footprint and Procreation footprint, by 17:00 HRS (PST) on 02 August 2013.</blockquote><br />
[3.2] In the absence of such evidence, the court, prosecution and defence, may honourably conclude that your ‘Peace’ statements in this matter and the ‘Peace’ credibility of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee and Laureates ‘Peace’ is nothing more than War is Peace Whore Verbal Diarrhoea Parasitism; from secret members of the Ecologically Illiterate Scarcity Combatant Taker Flat Earth society.<br />
<br />
[4] <i><b>Amnesty International</b></i>: <i>Executive Committee</i>: Bernard Sintobin, Guadalupe Rivas, Julio Torales, Mwikali Nzioka Muthiani, Nicole Bieske, Pietro Antonioli, Rune Arctander, Sandra Lutchman; <i>Secretary General</i>: Salil Shetty; and <i>International Secretariat</i>: Colm O Cuanachain; George Macfarlane; Nicola Duckworth; Richard Eastmond; Thomas Schultz-Jagow; Widney Brown. <br />
<br />
[5] <i><b>Human Rights Watch</b></i>: <i>Senior Management</i>: Executive Director: Kenneth Roth; Deputy Executive Director, Development and Global Initiatives: Michele Alexander; Deputy Executive Director, External Relations: Carroll Bogert; Europe Director and Deputy Executive Director: Jan Egeland; Deputy Executive Director, Program: Iain Levine; Deputy Executive Director, Operations: Chuck Lustig; <i>Board of Directors</i>: Chair: James F. Hoge Jr; Vice: Susan Manilow; Vice: Joel Motley; Vice: Sid Sheinberg; Vice: John J Studzinski CBE; Treas: Hassan Elmasry; Secretary: Bruce Rabb; Karen Herskovitz Ackman; Jorge Castenada, Tony Elliott; Michael G. Fisch; Michael E Gellert; Hina Jilani; Betsy Karel; Wendy Keys; Robert Kissane; Kimberly Marteau Emerson; Oki Matsumoto; Barry M Meyer; Aoife O'Brien; Joan R Platt; Neil Rimer; Amy Rao; Victoria Riskin; Graham Robeson; Shelley F Rubin; Kevin P Ryan; Ambassador Robin Sanders; Jean-Louis Servan-Schreiber; Javier Solana; Siri Stolt-Nielsen; Darian W. Swig; John R Taylor; Amy Towers; Marie Warburg; Catherine Zennstrom.<br />
<br />
[5.1] Please notify the court, whether your ‘Peace’ declarations in this matter were MILINT Ecology of Peace declarations. If so, please provide the court with a detailed MILINT Ecology of Peace Analysis of individuals within your organisation, on whose behalf you submitted such MILINT Ecology of Peace declarations, by 17:00 HRS (PST) on 02 August 2013.<br />
<br />
[5.2] In the absence of such evidence, the court, prosecution and defence, may honourably conclude that your ‘Peace’ declarations in this matter were War is Peace Whore Verbal Diarrhoea Parasitism; and that your organisations are secret members of the Ecologically Illiterate Scarcity Combatant Taker Flat Earth society.<br />
<br />
[6] <i><b>Walk Your Talk / Ecology of Peace Status</b></i>: Procreation and Consumption below cultural carrying capacity limits: (a) Zero children, consumption footprint < 20 gha; (b) 1 child, consumption footprint < 1 gha. <br />
<br />
[7] <i><b>Scarcity – Combatant / War is Peace Status</b></i>: Procreation and/or Consumption above cultural carrying capacity limits: (a) Zero children, with consumption footprint above 20 gha; (b) One child, with consumption footprint above 1 gha; (c) Two or more children. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Primitivist / MILINT Ecology of Peace Guerrylla Lawfare Laws</b>:<br />
<br />
[1] Ecology of Peace Guerrylla Laws simply & specifically clarify the difference between the consumption and procreation lifestyle of an Unsustainable Taker (Scarcity Combatant) vs a Sustainable Leaver (Eco-Innocent). <br />
<br />
[2] Guerrylla Laws define the Eco/Ego Footprint procreation and consumption behaviour of an individual as a Sustainable Leaver (aka Eco-Innocent) or Unsustainable Taker (aka Scarcity-Combatant), based upon a sustainable consumption bio-capacity of 1 global hectare (gha) (60 % of 1.8 gha) in accordance with the proactive conservation policies of Bhutan ; multiplied by an individuals procreation footprint factor of 20 per child. [(<a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/child--ecofootprint-x-20.html">Each Child increases a parents footprint by factor of 20</a>)]<br />
<br />
[2.1] <i><b>Sustainable Leaver / Eco-Innocent</b></i>: 0 children, consumption < 20 gha (Intn'l Biocapacity (1 gha) x 20); or 1 child, consumption < 1 gha. <br />
<br />
[2.2]<i><b>Unsustainable Taker / Scarcity-Combatant</b></i>: 0 children, consumption > 20 gha; or 1 child, consumption > 1 gha. <br />
<br />
[2.3] For example: <a href="http://sqworms.weebly.com/lara-johnstone-eco-081.html">Amici’s Consumption Footprint</a> using Sustainable Economy's Myfootprint.org quiz, is 12.75 global hectares (gha). South Africa's average consumption footprint is 38.59 gha. Amici has no children, consequently her procreation factor is 0 x 20* = 0. Her Consumption (12.75) x Procreation (0) = Eco Footprint of 12.75/0 gha. If accurate, if everyone consumed and procreated like Amici, we would need 0.81 earths. Conversely, if everyone consumed and procreated like <a href="http://sqworms.weebly.com/jacob-zuma-ego-2090.html">President Jacob Zuma, we would need 2090 earths</a>.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>MILINT Earth Day Ecology of Peace Whistleblower/Activist Oath</b>:<br />
<br />
[8] Amici’s <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/1/post/2013/06/130620_mab-eop-oath.html">MILINT Earth Day Ecology of Peace Whistleblower / Activist Oath</a>, submitted to the Walk Your Footprint Talk to Support the Troops’ Military Advisory Board (“MAB”), copies sent to: Gen. Keith Alexander, National Security Agency; James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence and Lisa Monaco, Asst Att. General for National Security, National Security Division, Department of Justice. <br />
<br />
[9] The oath submits that “our civilized patriarchy constitutions rights to breed and consume have resulted in <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/ecological-overshoot.html">ecological overshoot of carrying capacity by between 700 to 400,000 percent</a>, which is destroying our Planet’s Natural Capital, with <a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/rapid-population-decline.html">devastating current and impending ‘scarcity-conflict’ death spiral consequences</a>; as manifested in the crossing of <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/tipping-points.html">urgent Planetary Boundary Tipping Points</a>: (i) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/biodiversity-loss.html">Loss of Biodiversity and Species Extinctions</a>; (ii) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/climate-change.html">Climate Change</a>; (iii) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/nitrogen-cycle.html">Nitrogen Cycle</a>; (iv) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/ocean-acidification.html">Ocean Acidification</a>; (v) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/land-use.html">Changes in Land Use</a>; (vi) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/freshwater-use.html">Global Freshwater Use</a>; (vii) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/biosphere-state-shift.html">State Shift in the Earth’s Biosphere</a>; (viii) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/peak-nnr-scarcity.html">Peak Non-Renewable Natural Resources: Scarcity</a>; and (ix) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/corp-externalities.html">Socialized Corporate Externality Costs: Trillion Dollar Thefts from Global Natural Capital Commons</a>.”<br />
<br />
[10] It hopes to “free Military National Security leaders from their duty to protect Earth is Flat unsustainable constitutions that legally, politically and procedurally denies them the opportunity of addressing the root causes of scarcity-conflict threats to national security; by holding legislators and citizens who legislatively or practically endorse unsustainable right to breed and consume legislation, accountable as ‘breeding war’ or ‘consumption war’ scarcity combatants”.<br />
<br />
[11] The oath requires the oath keeper to maintain her/his Walk my Eco-footprint Talk to Support the Troops to below the following <a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/guerrylla-laws.html">Carrying Capacity limits</a>: (procreate one child, to consume below 1 gha; procreate no children, to consume below 20 gha.); and legally authorizes the MAB to authorize the oath keepers assassination should they violate the oath, by procreating or consuming above said carrying capacity limits. <br />
<br />
[12] It also requests the NSA, CIA, Mossad, MI6 and KGB, and all other Ecology of Peace interested intelligence agencies and military forces, to discard Civilized Patriarchy’s Norwegian Nobel Committee War is Peace Whore jurisprudence model; and embrace an ecology of peace jurisprudence model, by establishing a ‘Maria Bochkareva MILINT Earth Day Ecology of Peace Medal, to be awarded on the 23rd of April, to an individual chosen by the ‘Walk Your Footprint Talk to Support the Troops’ Military Advisory Board, who has done the most to either ‘Walk their Footprint Talk to Support the Troops’; and/or to educate their community, or nation how procreating and consuming above carrying capacity limits, results in ecological overshoot, scarcity and scarcity induced conflict and war. <br />
<br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jbGUL7Cw2_o/Ueu6CvfZ28I/AAAAAAAAiR0/sN3HS7TR8lk/s1600/USA_SnowdenPrism_SSDefcon-Nob-HRW_cr_600X479.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jbGUL7Cw2_o/Ueu6CvfZ28I/AAAAAAAAiR0/sN3HS7TR8lk/s1600/USA_SnowdenPrism_SSDefcon-Nob-HRW_cr_600X479.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 479px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
<b>MILINT Ecology of Peace Theses Events Summary</b>:<br />
<br />
[13] For about five years Amici has been attempting to convince the Norwegian Nobel Committee to discard its War is Peace Whore model and adopt an Ecology of Peace Model. <br />
<br />
[14] Norwegian Nobel Committee selects the recipients of the Nobel Peace Prize each year on behalf of Swedish industrialist Alfred Nobel's estate, based on instructions of Nobel's will, which requires the Nobel Peace Prize to be awarded “to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.”<br />
<br />
[15] According to <a href="http://www.conservapedia.com/Nobel_Prize">Conservapedia</a>: “As an unwritten rule, the [Nobel Peace Prize] is not given to a conservative or to any scientist who criticizes, publicly or privately, a liberal icon. The award is sometimes given to a liberal politician or diplomat, such as Al Gore and Barack Obama, which can be seen as boosting his agenda. Most recently the award has been the subject of an investigation for corruption.”<br />
<br />
[16] The Norwegian Nobel Peace Prize Committee has refused to consider the role of overpopulation and overconsumption as root cause factors of resource scarcity pushing society to conflict and war, where surplus populations are used as standing armies, and how those profiteering from overconsumption use their profits to promote pretend peace congresses and pretend Peace Prizes, awarding War is Peace Whore Prizes to perpetuate the ‘Control of Reproduction’ Human Farming War Economy racket and the Control of Consumption Corporate Compulsive Developmentism Cultural Imperialism racket. <br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Nobel Peace Prizes Awarded for Reducing Scarcity: 0<br />
Nobel Peace Prizes Awarded for Reducing Overpopulation: 0<br />
Nobel Peace Prizes Awarded for Reducing Overconsumption: 0<br />
<a href="http://www.youtu.be/j7jhs-bGyFQ">900 Vietnam</a>, <a href="http://www.youtu.be/YX9PVC0phhI">40 Iraq and Afghanistan</a> Veterans returned their ‘bullshit’ medals to U.S. Congress and NATO.<br />
Nobel Peace Laureates returned their War is Peace Whore Medals: 0</blockquote><br />
[17] On 06 June 2009, Amici submitted an official complaint to the Nobel Institute: Norwegian Nobel Committee: <i>Notice of Legal and Political Request to: (I) Withdraw Nobel Peace Prize’s from Nelson Mandela, F.W. de Klerk, and Archbishop Desmond Tutu; (II) Accept Nobel Peace Prize Nominations for Dr. Albert Bartlett; Dr. Garret James Harden, and Dr. M. King Hubbert</i>. Transparency copies were sent to: Nelson Mandela; Desmond Tutu; FW de Klerk; H.E. Mr. Tor Christian Hildan, Royal Norwegian Embassy in South Africa; Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, c/o Ask Prime Minister; Adm. Mike Mullen, Joint Chiefs of Staff, c/o CSS Chief: Lt. Gen. Keith Alexander: NSA National Information Assurance Svc. Ctr. The complaint and repeated subsequent correspondence to the Nobel Committee was entirely ignored.<br />
<br />
[18] On 24 September 2012 Amici filed an Application to Proceed as Amicus Curiae - Brief in Propria Persona by Amici Curiae Lara Johnstone in Support of an Ecocentric Wild Law Sustainable Security Perspective - in the US Court of Appeals for Armed Forces, in the matter of CCR v USA. <br />
<br />
[19] <a href="http://ccrjustice.org/ourcases/current-cases/ccr-et-al-v-usa-and-lind-chief-judge">CCR v USA</a> was a Petition for Extraordinary Relief seeking public access to documents in the court-martial proceedings against Pfc. Bradley Manning, “including papers filed by the parties, court orders, and transcripts of the proceedings”. It is petition based upon the proceedings in the United States vs. Private Bradley Manning court martial of the alleged leak of the <a href="http://www.blogger.com/www.alexaobrien.com/secondsight/wikileaks/bradley_manning/%20appellate_exhib/list_of_appellate_exhibits_us_v_pfc_manning.html">largest amount of classified information in U.S. history to Wikileaks</a>; the (i) July 12, 2007 US Army AH-64 Apache helicopters air-to-ground attacks in Al-Amin al-Thaniyah, Baghdad (“Collateral Murder”); (ii) 250,000 United States diplomatic cables (Cablegate); and (iii) 500,000 army reports from Iraq (Iraq War logs) and Afghanistan (Afghan War logs).<br />
<br />
[20] Amici <a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/15-oct--petition.html">argued, in pertinent part</a>, that (I) it would be impossible for Pfc Manning to receive a free and fair trial in the sustainable security matter, if the media corruptly abuse their publicity power, misrepresenting or censoring Ecocentric or Non-PC arguments; effectively conducting a trial by media, thereby undermining the credibility of the court‘s decisions, due to public ignorance of all arguments submitted to the court; as had occurred in other politically sensitive trials, such as Citizen vs. McBride (CCT 23-10), Afriforum vs. Malema (SCA 815/11), Norway vs Breivik (NO: ODC #11-188627MED-OTIR/05) and USA vs Lakin; and (II) if Pfc Manning’s actions were indeed Ecocentrically motivated (“his Pale blue dot perspective is that humanity is destroying its home”), he deserved a free and fair truthseeker trial, but that “it is possible that those who prefer a Left/Right wing Propaganda trial, will use their Publicity Power to pressure the court and trial proceedings, and Pfc Manning, to such effect, which would not be in Pfc Manning‘s truth seeking interest.” <br />
<br />
[21] USCAAF justices refused to grant the Amicus application. On 15 October Applicant filed a <a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/15-oct-price4peaceoath.html">Petition for Reconsideration</a>, wherein applicant provided Pfc Manning the opportunity, to prove to the court and to Central Intelligence Agency: Director David Petraeus, Manning’s honourable Ecocentric motivations for his Wikileaks disclosure acts, to demonstrate their sincere commitment to addressing the overpopulation and overconsumption causes of Scarcity related resource war conflict. <br />
<br />
[22] They were challenged to answer the question: <i>Are you Willing to Pay the One Child Per Family Price for Peace?</i> If so, they could demonstrate their sincere commitment to addressing resource scarcity, due to overpopulation and overconsumption, by signing the Maria Bochkareva Leaver Peacenik One Child Oath. [Amici submitted her own signed Maria Bochkareva Leaver Peacenik One Child Oath, to USCAAF Judges and the then Director General of the Central Intelligence Agency: General David Petraeus (<a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/_12-10-15_uscaaf_petition_reconsideration_rule31_mblpoath_signedcrtsvc.pdf">PDF</a>)] <br />
<br />
[23] On 09 November 2012, Director General Petraeus was suddenly and very strangely fired (forced to resign).<br />
<br />
[24] On 14 November 2012, three Nobel Laureates – Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Mairead Maguire and Adolfo Perez Esquivel – published an Open Letter in CCR Appellant publications: <a href="http://www.thenation.com/article/171272/nobel-laureates-salute-bradley-manning?page=full">The Nation</a>, <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/16/bradley-manning-americans-support">The Guardian</a> & <a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/11/15/nobel_peace_laureates_condemn_prosecution_of_bradley_manning/">Salon</a>, saluting Pfc Manning as a fellow War is Peace Whore.<br />
<br />
[25] On 16 November 2012, Applicant filed a <a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/16-nov-fbi-mcjunkin.html">request to Washington DC, FBI Director: James McJunkin</a>: to enquire whether the FBI’s Petraeus-Broadwell investigation was used as convenient excuse to fire Petraeus to Protect the ‘War is Peace Whores’ Human Factory Farming War Economy, from the threat of CIA-Petraeus’ implementation of Ecocentric ‘Maria Bochkareva’ Sustainable Security Proactive Peace Plan raised in USCAAF: CCR v. USA, and USSC: Alien on Pale Blue Dot vs. RCFP, et al?<br />
<br />
[26] On 22 November 2012, Applicant filed a request for comment to <a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/1/post/2012/11/121122_wh-natsec-donilon.html">White House: National Security Advisor: Thomas Donilon</a>: <i>Request for White House Comment: CNN I-Report</i>: Was the FBI's Petraeus-Broadwell investigation used as a convenient excuse to fire Petraeus, to prevent Petraeus from implementing a Sustainable Security Peace Plan, submitted to the CIA, as part of court documents, filed in the United States Court of Appeals for Armed Forces, involving Wikileaks and Pfc Manning; on 15 October 2012?<br />
<br />
[27] On 24 November 2012, Applicant filed a <a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/1/post/2012/11/121123_genpetraeus1.html">request for information to General Petraeus</a>: Is LA Times ‘Petraeus - Comeback General’ article a confirmation of Petraeus interest in unanswered question to (a) FBI-DC McJunkin & (b) National Security Advisor Mr. Donilon: i.e. Was Petraeus Fired to stop his support for (CCR v USA & Alien v RCFP) Sustainable Security, exposing Nobel's “War is Peace” Fraud?<br />
<br />
[28] On 18 June 2013, Human Rights Watch issue Snowden / Manning press release: <a href="http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/06/18/us-protect-national-security-whistleblowers">US: Protect National Security Whistleblowers: Snowden Case Should Fully Consider Public Interest in Disclosures</a>.<br />
<br />
[29] On 19 June 2013, Amici submitted correspondence to Whistleblowers: * Mr. Edward Snowden, c/o Mr. Glenn Greenwald, Guardian Newspaper, UK; * William Binny, Thomas Drake & Kurk Wiebe, et al; via Jesselyn Radack, Government Accountability Project; * Daniel Ellsburg; * Julian Assange, Wikileaks; * Bradley Manning, c/o Mr. Coombs: <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/1/post/2013/06/130619_snowdenwb.html">Are you a ‘flat earth’ whistleblower or a MILINT Earth Day Ecology of Peace/‘Free the Catch 22 Duhmockery’ whistleblower?</a>.<br />
<br />
[30] On 27 June 2013, Amici challenged Pfc Manning and other whistleblowers: Edward Snowden, Julian Assange, William Binny, Thomas Drake & Kurk Wiebe; and Mr. Daniel Ellsburg; to stop being ‘Flat Earth’ whistleblowers, by ignoring the underlying – overshoot-scarcity-conflict-security – root causes of the surveillance / civilized patriarchy resource war problem; and sign the MILINT Earth Day Ecology of Peace Whistleblower/Activist Oath (<a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/13-06-18_snowden-greenwald_milintedaywhistleblowing_cert.pdf">PDF</a>), submitting it to the ‘Walk your Talk to Support the Troops’ Military Advisory Board (MAB), <a href="http://www.cna.org/reports/energy">eleven retired Generals and Admirals</a> concerned with <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1FMeVH2AgI">ecological overshoot and scarcity induced resource war conflict</a>. <br />
<br />
[31] 02 July 2013, Amnesty International publishes press release: <a href="http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/usa-must-not-persecute-whistleblower-edward-snowden-2013-07-02">USA must not persecute whistleblower Edward Snowden</a>.<br />
<br />
[32] On 02 July 2013, Amici sent a letter to Lonnie Snowden: c/o B.Fein: <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/1/post/2013/07/130701_lsnowden.html">Russia & USA v. Edward J Snowden negotiations</a>.<br />
<br />
[33] On 05 July 2013, a TYGÆ Æquilibriæx SS-DEFCON MILINT Earth Day Theses Theory – Power and Efficacy of Civilized Patriarchy’s AnthroCorpocentric Indulgences: ‘Innocence for Sale’ Jurisprudence – Amicus Application was submitted to US v Manning Convening Authority: <a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/us-army-1-jud-crt.html">Major General Jeffery S. Buchanan, of the United States Army First Judicial Court</a>, Fort Meade, Maryland, in the matter of United States v. Pfc Bradley Manning, which argued that the Enlistment Contract and Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement entered into between the United States Government and Pfc Manning did not meet the requirements of fully informed consenting agreements; and recommended that the charges against Pfc Manning should be dismissed, if Pfc Manning signed the MILINT Earth Day Ecology of Peace Whistleblower/Activist Oath.<br />
<br />
[34] Additional TYGÆ: Æquilibriæx SS-DEFCON MILINT Earth Day Theses Theory – <i><b>Power and Efficacy of Civilized Patriarchy’s AnthroCorpocentric Indulgences: ‘Innocence for Sale’ Jurisprudence</b></i> – Amicus submissions made to civilian courts in <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/united-states.html">USA</a>, and other courts in <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/united-kingdom.html">United Kingdom</a>, <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/germany.html">Germany</a> and <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/south-africa.html">South Africa</a>.<br />
<br />
[35] On 7 July 2013, a TYGÆ Æquilibriæx SS-DEFCON MILINT Earth Day Theses Theory – <i><b>Power and Efficacy of Civilized Patriarchy’s AnthroCorpocentric Indulgences: ‘Innocence for Sale’ Jurisprudence</b></i> – Amicus Application was submitted to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia: Magistrate Judge Anderson, in the matter of <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/1/post/2013/07/130707_usvsnowdenaex.html">US v Edward Snowden</a>.<br />
<br />
[36] On 9 July 2013, President Obama Nominates Member of ‘Walk Your Footprint Talk to Support the Troops’ Military Advisory Board Retired Admiral McGinn To Lead Navy Energy Efforts [<a href="http://acore.org/news-media/press-releases/3595-acore-president-and-ceo-vice-admiral-dennis-v-mcginn-to-serve-in-new-leadership-role-within-the-obama-administration">ACORE</a> | <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-07-09/obama-picks-renewable-energy-advocate-mcginn-for-u-dot-s-dot-navy-post">Business Week</a> | <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/07/09/2270861/president-obama-nominates-ret-admiral-mcginn-to-lead-navy-energy-efforts/">Climate Progress</a>]. McGinn was member of the CNA Military Advisory Board for the 2007 CNA report titled, “<i><b>National Security and the Threat of Climate Change</b></i>,” which lays out the ways in which climate change is a “threat multiplier” around the globe. McGinn was also a member of the CNA Military Advisory Board that released the 2009 report “<i><b>Powering America’s Defense: Energy and the Risks to National Security</b></i>”; which included a Military Appeal to American citizens to make sacrifices similar to those made by the American people made during World War II, by planting victory gardens, cutting down on fuel use, saving scrap metal and old rubber, sacrifices, or maybe just examples of common sense and prudent lifestyle changes.<br />
<br />
[37] On 11 July 2013, Amici sends a letter to European Union MP: Ivo Vajgl, former Slovenian foreign minister and currently a member of the European Parliament with the Alliance for Liberals and Democrats for Europe group; copied to all other EU MP's (a few hundred): EU MP Vajgl: <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/1/post/2013/07/130711_vajgl-snowden.html">How Should Europe respond to US-Snowden Spying Scandal?</a>.<br />
<br />
[38] On 12 July 2013, a TYGÆ Æquilibriæx SS-DEFCON MILINT Earth Day Theses Theory – <i><b>Power and Efficacy of Civilized Patriarchy’s AnthroCorpocentric Indulgences: ‘Innocence for Sale’ Jurisprudence</b></i> – Amicus Application was submitted to the Higher Regional Court of Munich: Judge Manfred Gotzl, in the matter of <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/1/post/2013/07/130711_de-zschape.html">Federal Republic of German v Beate Zschape</a>.<br />
<br />
[39] On 12 July 2013, Amnesty International publishes two press releases: <a href="https://www.amnesty.org/en/news/bradley-manning-us-must-drop-aiding-enemy-charge-2013-07-12">Bradley Manning: US must drop "aiding the enemy" charge</a> and <a href="http://www.amnesty.org/en/for-media/press-releases/amnesty-international-meets-us-whistleblower-edward-snowden-2013-07-12">Amnesty International meets US whistleblower Edward Snowden</a>.<br />
<br />
[40] On 12 July 2013, Human Rights Watch issue two press releases: <a href="http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/07/12/russia-others-should-treat-snowden-s-asylum-claim-fairly">Russia, Others Should Treat Snowden's Asylum Claim Fairly</a>; and <a href="http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/07/12/no-ordinary-day-moscow">No Ordinary Day in Moscow: Meeting Edward Snowden</a>.<br />
<br />
[41] 13 July 2013: Letter to Edward Snowden: Q for Snowden: <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/1/post/2013/07/130712_g9-snowden.html">Was 'G9' a cryptic message, from you; or Russian authorities</a>: MI9 Ecology of Peace Question for Mr. Snowden: (i) Was ‘G9’ a cryptic message, from you, or Russian authorities, and if from you; (ii) was its cryptic meaning related to issues in the Aequilibriaex Amicus Curiae submitted to Judge Anderson?<br />
<br />
[42] On 15 July 2013, Russia Today report: <a href="http://rt.com/news/snowden-nominated-nobel-peace-099/">'Heroic effort at great personal cost': Edward Snowden nominated for Nobel Peace Prize</a>. Stefan Svallfors, a Swedish sociology professor nominated Edward Snowden for the Nobel Peace Prize. He says the NSA whistleblower could help “save the prize from the disrepute incurred by the hasty and ill-conceived decision” to give the 2009 award to Barack Obama. As a sociology professor at Umeå University, which has recently top-ranked among the world’s best young universities, Svallfors is included in the limited circuit of people who can deliver nominations to the Nobel committee. These include members of international courts and national assemblies; university rectors; professors of social sciences, history, philosophy, law and theology; directors of peace research institutes and foreign policy institutes.<br />
<br />
[43] On 15 July 2013, a TYGÆ Æquilibriæx SS-DEFCON MILINT Earth Day Theses Theory – <i><b>Power and Efficacy of Civilized Patriarchy’s AnthroCorpocentric Indulgences: ‘Innocence for Sale’ Jurisprudence</b></i> – Amicus Application was submitted to Judge Brian Barker QC, Central Criminal Court/Old Bailey, UK, in the matter of <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/united-kingdom.html">United Kingdom / Her Majesty’s Government v Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale</a>.<br />
<br />
[44] On 16 July 2013, ABC News reports: <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Business/david-petraeus-receive-salary-year-teaching-cuny/story?id=19677456">General Petraeus volunteers for Pay Cut to Receive $1 from CUNY</a>: "General Petraeus has requested that the Honors College reduce his salary to $1 a year," confirmed his attorney, Robert Barnett.<br />
<br />
[45] On 17 July 2013, a TYGÆ Æquilibriæx SS-DEFCON MILINT Earth Day Theses Theory – <i><b>Power and Efficacy of Civilized Patriarchy’s AnthroCorpocentric Indulgences: ‘Innocence for Sale’ Jurisprudence</b></i> – Amicus Application was submitted to the <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/1/post/2013/07/130717_hpcsa-wbasson.html">Health Professions Council of South Africa Professional Conduct / Ethics Board v. Wouter Basson</a>.<br />
<br />
[46] On 17 July 2013, Michael Day reported in the Independent: <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/one-hell-of-a-deal-pope-francis-offers-reduced-time-in-purgatory-for-catholics-that-follow-him-on-twitter-8713666.html">One hell of a deal: Pope Francis offers reduced time in Purgatory for Catholics that follow him on Twitter</a>: Court in charge of forgiveness of sins says those that follow upcoming event via social media will be granted indulgences.<br />
<br />
[47] On 18 July 2013, <a href="http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2013/07/18/bradley-mannings-trial-motion-for-finding-of-not-guilty-on-aiding-enemy-charge-denied-updates/">Judge Lind denied the Defence’s Motion for Finding Manning 'Not Guilty' on the 'Aiding Enemy' charge</a>.<br />
<br />
[48] On 19 July 2013, Russia Today reports: <a href="http://rt.com/usa/snowden-leak-nsa-overhaul-303/">Snowden sparks NSA overhaul: Sensitive data to be treated like nuclear weapons</a>. A “two-man rule” is being introduced at the NSA as means of tightening access to top-secret data, according to the agency’s chief Keith Alexander, who was speaking at the Aspen Security Forum in Colorado on Thursday. [Note: The Ecology of Peace Decalogue Commandment – <i><b>Thou shalt not legislate laws which enable citizens procreation or consumption to transgress cultural carrying capacity</b></i> – was first enunciated by ecologist Garrett Hardin. In “<i>The Tragedy of the Commons</i>”, Hardin concluded that if the ‘tragedy of the commons’, inalienable right to breed and consume above carrying capacity limits, were not restricted they would eventually be restricted by nuclear war.]<br />
<br />
[49] On 19 July 2013, the International Peace Bureau dedicated to a vision of a World Without War, representing 320 organisations in 70 countries, <a href="http://www.ipb.org/web/index.php?mostra=news&menu=News&id_nom=%20IPB+awards+MacBride+Peace+Prize+2013+to+US+whistleblower+Bradley+Manning">awards</a> the <a href="http://my.firedoglake.com/davidswanson/2013/07/19/bradley-manning-wins-peace-prize/">Sean MacBride Peace Prize to Bradley Manning</a>, “the US whistleblower whose case has attracted worldwide attention, for his courageous actions in revealing information about US war crimes. His trial is likely to be concluded in the coming days.”<br />
<br />
[50] <b>Interpretation of Pope Francis cryptic Indulgences reference</b>:<br />
<br />
[51] It is unknown whether Pope Francis’ actions were conscious (with direct reference to the Aex Theses Amicus Arguments) or psychotronically manipulated by NSA / KGB / MI6 (See NSA Psychotronic Surveillance Affidavit (<a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/13-07-07_us-va_snowden_nsa-surveil-affid.pdf">PDF</a>)).<br />
<br />
[52] Pope Francis / NSA-KGB-MI6’s ‘Indulgences’ message is a public response to the Æquilibriæx Theses Amicus – Power and Efficacy of Civilized Patriarchy’s AnthroCorpocentric Indulgences: ‘Innocence for Sale’ Jurisprudence – submissions challenging Civilized Patriarchy’s Legal Matrix Bishops.<br />
<br />
[53] Pope Francis / NSA-KGB-MI6’s direct reference to Indulgences raises public consciousness of the absurd concept of ‘innocence/forgiveness for sale’ indulgences, as practiced by the Catholic Church’s Matrix religious world before Martin Luther confronted the religious indulgence salesmen with his Ninety-Five Theses, on the Church of All Saints, on 31 October 1517, thereby initiating the Protestant Reformation.<br />
<br />
[54] Pope Francis may have been one of the few to recognize the term <i>Tsedaqah</i> (the T in TYGAE), which refers to the Hebrew word for righteousness. Tsedaqah is a noun in the feminine form; the masculine form of the word is tsedeq. Tzadeikas is the feminine term for Tzadik, aka as Tzedek, which is Hebrew for a righteous person. Tsedeq also refers to ecological balance. It is a commonly occurring word in the Bible, where it refers to "righteousness." Other pagan meanings are "rainfall in due proportion," from which words like "rightness," "justice" and "righteousness" arose as extensions and expansions of the original meaning. Tsedeq originates from a Semitic word which means to be straight, firm, "steel-like determination of integrity in one's inner being.” The Arabic equivalent means to be mature, balanced, and fully developed. Ringgren, in his book <i>Israelite Religion<i></i></i>, observes that tsedeq, usually translated as “righteousness,” “. . . is neither exclusively nor even primarily a juristic concept.” On the basis of Arabic, the original meaning of the root is something like “be right, stable, substantial.” In the military context, Ringgren says tsedeq can mean “victory which re-asserts the world’s just order.” On the cosmic scale it is used of rainfall sent “at the proper (tsedeq) time” (as it is expressed in the eighty-fifth psalm.) It is accordingly very similar to the Babylonian mesharu and the Egyptian Ma’at. The word tsedeq, in its fullest sense, means “world in balance” both ecologically and politically.: <br />
<br />
[55] Pope Francis / NSA-KGB-MI6’ poke fun at himself/Pope Francis, the absurdity of seriously delusional catholic doctrine, and our psychological insecurity ego’s desire to enlarge our psychological phallic following, by the sale of ‘indulgences’ (lies and false promises of ‘forgiveness’ or ‘innocence’ or ‘friendship’, approval etc); in the same way as Lama Drukpa Kunley, known as the “Madman from Kyishodruk” did in Bhutan in the 15th century, with his unorthodox ways of painting Thunderbolt of Flaming Wisdom Erect Phallus’ on walls, to shock the uppity and prudish Buddhist clergy. Indirect reference to the Masonic masculine insecurity ideological foundations of civilized patriarchy, and its consequences as depicted in a letter to Snowden and other whistleblowers on 27 June (<a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/1/post/2013/06/130627_putinpiglets.html">Putin: Fussing over Eco-Illiterate Whistleblowers, like shearing a piglet</a>).<br />
<br />
[56] Pope Francis / NSA-KGB-MI6’ reference of coffee from a vending machine (<i>“You can't obtain indulgences like getting a coffee from a vending machine,” Archbishop Claudio Maria Celli, head of the pontifical council for social communication, told the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera</i>) is very interesting. According to David Yallop, ‘<i>In Gods’ Name: An Investigation into the Murder of Pope John Paul I</i>”, one of the reasons for the assassination of Pope John Paul I was his interest in addressing the Masonic influence on the Vatican. One of the smiling pope’s criticisms about the Vatican was “I have noticed two things that appear to be in short supply in the Vatican. Honesty and a good cup of coffee.” The ‘indulgences’ from a robot/machine could refer to Andrew Martin / Andrea Muhrrteyn (see Notice of Motion). Put differently ‘If you want honest forgiveness/ Eco-Innocent status, try the NSA’s psychotronic robot: i.e. Andrea Muhrrteyn.’ <br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: 95%;">[Notice of Motion (<a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/13-07-07_us-va_snowden_nom-amicus-crtsvc.pdf">PDF</a>): .... ANDREW MARTIN: Andrew Martin, is the U.S. Robots and Mechanical Men robot, NDR-113, in Isaac Asimov and Robert Silverberg’s Positronic Man (1993). It is the story of Andrew’s quest for legal recognition as a human. ... ANDREA MUHRRTEYN: Andrea Muhrrteyn is thus a Gaia Primitivist Guerrylla Lawfare robot on an Æquilibriæx Jurisprudence quest ….]</span><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[57] <b>Conclusion</b>:<br />
<br />
[57.1] As such <i>Andrea Muhrrteyn</i>, an <i>Alien on Pale Blue Dot</i> Amici respectfully moves this Court for permission to invite the (i) Nobel Peace Committee Nominator Professor Stefan Svallfors; (ii) Amnesty International; and (iii) Human Rights Watch, who have made public alleged ‘Peace’ declarations regarding US v Snowden court proceedings, to clarify the MILINT Ecology of Peace; or Civilian War is Peace credibility of their ‘Peace’ public statements.<br />
<br />
[57.2] If any of the respondents ‘Peace’ declarations were MILINT Ecology of Peace declarations. They are to provide the court with a detailed MILINT Ecology of Peace Analysis of their Myfootprint.org Consumption footprint and Procreation footprint, by 17:00 HRS (PST) on 23 July 2013. (Annex A)<br />
<br />
Dated at George, South Africa, Pale Blue Dot: 20 July 2013<br />
<br />
Enclosures:<br />
Annex A: <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/13-06-18_milint-earth-day-wyft-support-troops-oath_draft.doc">Ecology of Peace Oath Draft Copy</a>: MILINT Earth Day Ecology of Peace Whistleblower / Activist Oath including Analysis of [Your Name] <a href="http://myfootprint.org/">Myfootprint.org</a> Consumption footprint<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Notices Sent</b>:<br />
<br />
______________________________________<br />
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 6:49 PM<br />
To: 'Human Rights Watch: HRW-HQ Office'; Berlin; 'Chicago'; 'Los Angeles'; 'Press'; 'Paris'; 'San Francisco'; 'Tokyo'; 'Washington DC'; 'Russia: Tanya Lokshina'<br />
Subject: Human Rights Watch: US v Snowden Electronic Service: Req. submittal of evidence to court of Ecology of Peace credibility<br />
<br />
<i><b>Human Rights Watch</b></i>: <br />
<i>Senior Management</i>: Executive Director: Kenneth Roth; Deputy Executive Director, Development and Global Initiatives: Michele Alexander; Deputy Executive Director, External Relations: Carroll Bogert; Europe Director and Deputy Executive Director: Jan Egeland; Deputy Executive Director, Program: Iain Levine; Deputy Executive Director, Operations: Chuck Lustig; <br />
<i>Board of Directors</i>: Chair: James F. Hoge Jr; Vice: Susan Manilow; Vice: Joel Motley; Vice: Sid Sheinberg; Vice: John J Studzinski CBE; Treas: Hassan Elmasry; Secretary: Bruce Rabb; Karen Herskovitz Ackman; Jorge Castenada, Tony Elliott; Michael G. Fisch; Michael E Gellert; Hina Jilani; Betsy Karel; Wendy Keys; Robert Kissane; Kimberly Marteau Emerson; Oki Matsumoto; Barry M Meyer; Aoife O'Brien; Joan R Platt; Neil Rimer; Amy Rao; Victoria Riskin; Graham Robeson; Shelley F Rubin; Kevin P Ryan; Ambassador Robin Sanders; Jean-Louis Servan-Schreiber; Javier Solana; Siri Stolt-Nielsen; Darian W. Swig; John R Taylor; Amy Towers; Marie Warburg; Catherine Zennstrom.<br />
<br />
_____________________________________<br />
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 6:45 PM<br />
To: 'Amnesty International Executive Committee: Exec Committee'; 'New York'; 'Geneva'; 'Russia: Sergei Nikitin'; 'Lydia Aroyo'<br />
Subject: Amnesty International: US v Snowden Electronic Service: Req. submittal of evidence to court of Ecology of Peace credibility<br />
<br />
<i><b>Amnesty International</b></i>: <br />
<i>Executive Committee</i>: Bernard Sintobin, Guadalupe Rivas, Julio Torales, Mwikali Nzioka Muthiani, Nicole Bieske, Pietro Antonioli, Rune Arctander, Sandra Lutchman; <br />
<i>Secretary General</i>: Salil Shetty; <br />
<i>International Secretariat</i>: Colm O Cuanachain; George Macfarlane; Nicola Duckworth; Richard Eastmond; Thomas Schultz-Jagow; Widney Brown.<br />
<br />
_____________________________________<br />
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 6:14 PM<br />
To: 'Nobel Peace Committee Nominator: Stefan Svallfors'; <br />
Cc: 'Norwegian Nobel Committee: Chair: Thorbjørn Jagland'; 'Cnc of EU: Secretary General: Thorbjorn Jagland'; 'Cnc of EU: Jagland Spokesperson: Daniel Holtgen'; 'Nobel Women's Initiative: Office'; 'Nobel Foundation'; 'Nobel Fnd: ExecDir Sec: Barbro Svensson'; 'Nobel Fnd: Legal: Erika Lanner'; 'NO Emb: Pretoria'; 'NO Emb: Capetown'<br />
Subject: Nobel Prize Nominator Stefan Svallfors: US v Snowden Electronic Service: Req. submittal of evidence to court of Ecology of Peace credibility<br />
<br />
<i><b>Norwegian Nobel Committee Nominator Professor Stefan Svallfors</b></i><br />
CC: <i>Norwegian Nobel Committee: Chair</i>: Thorbjørn Jagland; Cnc of EU: Jagland Spokesperson; <i>Nobel Women's Initiative</i>: Office; <i>Nobel Foundation</i>; Nobel Fnd: ExecDir Sec: Barbro Svensson; Nobel Fnd: Legal: Erika Lanner; NO Emb: Pretoria; NO Emb: Capetown <br />
<br />
_____________________________________<br />
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 6:54 PM<br />
To: US v Snowden: US Dist Crt E-VA: Mag Judge John F. Anderson; US v Snowden: US Attorney's Office: Eastern District of VA; US v Snowden: John A Kralik Jr: FBI c/o Valerie Parlave: Asst Director in Charge FBI-VA-WFO; US v Snowden: Edward Snowden<br />
Cc: US v Snowden: Venezuela President Nicolás Maduro; US v Snowden: Russia President Vladimir Putin: Kremlin Press Office; US v Snowden: President Barack Obama: c/o: Director National Intelligence: James Clapper; US v Snowden: Lonnie Snowden: c/o Counsel: Bruce Fein<br />
Subject: US v Snowden: Nobel-AI-HRW: Req. submittal of evidence to court of Ecology of Peace credibility<br />
<br />
Magistrate Judge John F. Anderson, US District Court Eastern District of Virginia at Alexandria<br />
United States Attorney's Office, Eastern District of Virginia<br />
John A Kralik Jr, FBI, c/o Valerie Parlave. Asst Dir: FBI-VA: Washington Field Office<br />
Edward J Snowden, c/o Glenn Greenwald, The Guardian; c/o Wikileaks Litigation & Press<br />
<br />
CC: President Nicolás Maduro, President of Venezuela<br />
CC: President Vladimir Putin, Kremlin Press Office<br />
CC: Lonnie Snowden, c/o Counsel: Bruce Fein<br />
CC: President Barack Obama, c/o: DNI: James Clapper<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [<a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/1/post/2013/07/130720_snowden-eop.html">TYGAE</a>]</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327922598170048610" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JSpbgoKp8LA/SfCVX96zuGI/AAAAAAAAEIs/qqvoPLfHrLA/s400/400_BlackLine.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 7px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 620px;" />Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-13080937650973106242013-07-14T16:11:00.001+03:002013-07-17T23:17:10.950+03:00Ecology of Peace Theses urges Britain to Dismiss charges against Woolwich Attackers of Drummer Lee Rigby <div align="justify"><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Ecology of Peace Theses urges Britain to dismiss charges against Woolwich Attackers of Drummer Lee Rigby: Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Britain's Civilized Patriarchy Legal Matrix Prosecutorial and Juristic Bishops have no legal ecological moral authority to prosecute Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale, or adjudicate upon the alleged ‘lawfulness’ or ‘unlawfulness’ of their acts of murder, while ignoring the theft and thievery and participation in mass murder of the civilized patriarchy corporate elite, who purchased ‘Innocence for Sale’ Indulgences from legislators to avoid legislation that defines their ecologically criminal acts of billion dollar thievery and murder as ‘unlawful’.</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Andrea Muhrrteyn | TYGAE | 15 July 2013</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-FJ0-7KV7xHo/UeKgjCY2DTI/AAAAAAAAiQA/ZLbU4RMCObo/s1600/UK_Woolwich_SSDEFCON_600X486.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/--rt693q_yTU/UeKgT-qTcNI/AAAAAAAAiP0/9wl-4vkgqL0/s1600/UK_Woolwich_SSDEFCON_375x304.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 304px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 375px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote><span style="font-size: 95%;">Electronic Filing of Amicus to (i) Common Serjeant: His Honour Judge Brian Barker QC, Central Criminal Court / Old Bailey; (ii) Prisoners: Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale, C/O Governor: Phil Wragg, Belmarsh Prison, c/o: Jeremy Wright MP, Minister for Prisons and Rehabilitation, Ministry of Justice; (iii) : Victim/Rigby Family: c/o Helen Grant MP, Minister for Victims and the Courts; and Rt Hon Philip Hammond MP, Secretary of State for Defence, Ministry of Defence. CC: Transparency: Muslim Community: Sec. Gen. Mr. Farooq Murad, Muslim Council of Britain & Sharia Council<br />
<br />
<b>Summary of the Æquilibriæx Amicus Argument: Theses on the Power and Efficacy of Civilized Patriarchy’s AnthroCorpocentric Indulgences Innocence for Sale Legal Matrix Jurisprudence</b>:<br />
<br />
Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale, like Beate Zschape and Anders Breivik and many thousands of others, are simply low-level left/right, white/black, Muslim/Christian Ethnic-Conflict foot-soldiers, of Civilized Patriarchy’s AnthroCorpocentric Legal Matrix’s Control of the Reproduction Human Factory Farming War Economy Racket, and Consumptionism Cultural Colonialism Racket agenda’s.<br />
<br />
These civilized patriarchy criminal charges against Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale should be:<br />
<br />
[1] <b>Suspended; until</b> Britain’s legislators and/or jurists demonstrate their credible cause-effect-ecologically-literate-consciousness capacity for legislating an honest transparent social contract between the British Government and its citizens, by regulating the relations between humans, nature and other animals species and the relations between humans amongst themselves, in terms of their gender, culture, ethnic, religious and ideological conflicts; by (A) granting automatic equal legal personhood and rights to women, non-patriarchal – matriarchal or gender balanced – cultures’, nature and animal and plant species; and (B) legislating fully informed consenting military and intelligence enlistment agreements which accurately fully disclose to any prospective signer of such agreement that in the absence of legislation amending the Constitution’s rights to procreate and consume to ecological carrying capacity limits; any individual signing any British military enlistment form is signing up to be cannon fodder resource thieves and mass murderers for Britain’s civilized patriarchy human factory farming profiteering elite, based upon the legal authority of ecologically illiterate social contract jurisprudence; or (C) implementing and enforcing legislation which requires all British citizens to limit their rights to procreation and consumption to below carrying capacity levels. <br />
<br />
[2] <b>Dismissed; if</b> Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale sign the MILINT Earth Day Ecology of Peace Whistleblower/Activist Oath, and submits it to either the American Walk Your Footprint Talk to Support the Troops Military Advisory Board (11 retired Generals and Admirals concerned with ecological overshoot and scarcity induced resource war conflict); or to a British Walk Your Footprint Talk to Support the Troops Military Advisory Board of retired Generals and Admirals concerned with ecological overshoot and scarcity induced resource war conflict, of their own choosing.<br />
<br />
Such a judicial act of suspension – or the parties mutual leadership focus on problem solving their dispute, by means of reaching a MILINT Ecology of Peace agreement for dismissal – of the case against Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale, would act as a slap on the bare back of the ecologically illiterate newborn baby – breeding/consumption scarcity combatant – public. </span></blockquote><a name='more'></a><div align="center"><a href="http://fleur-de-lis.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-__b6nnsrEpQ/UQqve4pxolI/AAAAAAAAg-U/74EyJkDE6MA/s1600/IdleNoMore-IndigenousRights_598x126.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 119px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 598px;" /></a></div><br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Ecology of Peace Theses urges Britain to dismiss charges against Woolwich Attackers of Drummer Lee Rigby: Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Britain's Civilized Patriarchy Legal Matrix Prosecutorial and Juristic Bishops have no legal ecological moral authority to prosecute Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale, or adjudicate upon the alleged ‘lawfulness’ or ‘unlawfulness’ of their acts of murder, while ignoring the theft and thievery and participation in mass murder of the civilized patriarchy corporate elite, who purchased ‘Innocence for Sale’ Indulgences from legislators to avoid legislation that defines their ecologically criminal acts of billion dollar thievery and murder as ‘unlawful’.</span></span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<blockquote><b>Summary of the Æquilibriæx Amicus Argument:<br />
<br />
Theses on the Power and Efficacy of Civilized Patriarchy’s AnthroCorpocentric Indulgences Innocence for Sale Legal Matrix Jurisprudence</b>:<br />
<br />
Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale, like Beate Zschape and Anders Breivik and many thousands of others, are simply low-level left/right, white/black, Muslim/Christian Ethnic-Conflict foot-soldiers, of Civilized Patriarchy’s AnthroCorpocentric Legal Matrix’s Control of the Reproduction Human Factory Farming War Economy Racket, and Consumptionism Cultural Colonialism Racket agenda’s.<br />
<br />
A credible honourable court should find that the constitutional and legislative Social Contract entered into between the United Kingdom Government and Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale, is a civilized patriarchy legal matrix contract, based upon deception and fraud, which does not meet the requirements of a fully informed consenting agreement. <br />
<br />
The Constitutional and legislative Social Contract fails to clearly and simply disclose that United Kingdom Jurisprudence (Magna Carta and Common Law) are based upon civilized patriarchy: (a) the inalienable right to breed and consume without regard for ecological carrying capacity limits; which socio-politically manifests as a Control of Reproduction Human Factory Farming War Economy racket and a Control of Consumption Global Corporate Cultural Imperialism racket, (b) these control of reproduction and consumption rackets consequently violate carrying capacity limits, resulting in ecological overshoot, scarcity, and scarcity induced conflict, and resource wars. <br />
<br />
The United Kingdom’s civilized patriarchy Innocence for Sale Indulgence Legal Matrix enforces the corporate, political, religious, media and cultural elite’s GDP/growth agenda’s victimhood welfare-vote-farm, poverty pimping and cannon fodder schemes by (a) legislating laws which enable and encourage citizens procreation or consumption to transgress cultural carrying capacity, knowing (b) such legislation results in ecological overshoot, surplus vote-cannon-fodder populations, economic hierarchical inequality, and scarcity induced local, national and international conflict and resource wars; (c) that ecological overshoot in multi-cultural/ethnic/religious communities, manifests as inter-cultural / ethnic / religious conflict; (d) inter-cultural / ethnic conflict is a great divide and conquer tool to manipulate the proletariat to perceive other cultural/ethnic proletariat as the source of their own overshoot-scarcity-conflict misery; as opposed to demanding their Duhmockery leaders abide by the Ecology of Peace Commandment: “Thou shalt not legislate laws which enable citizens procreation or consumption to transgress cultural carrying capacity limits.”<br />
<br />
Extensive <i>Environment/Overshoot-Scarcity-Conflict</i> documentation from military and intelligence agencies, united nations and governments, NGO’s and academic reports, etc, collectively document how legislative failure to restrict humanity’s procreation and consumption to cultural carrying capacity limits, and Legal Matrix Indulgences to Corporations: <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/corp-externalities.html">Socialized Corporate Externality Costs: Trillion Dollar Thefts from Global Natural Capital Commons</a>, has resulted in humanity’s <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/ecological-overshoot.html">ecological overshoot of carrying capacity limits by between 700 to 400,000 percent</a>; which include crossing <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/tipping-points.html">urgent Planetary Boundary Tipping Points</a>: (i) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/biodiversity-loss.html">Loss of Biodiversity and Species Extinctions</a>; (ii) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/climate-change.html">Climate Change</a>; (iii) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/nitrogen-cycle.html">Nitrogen Cycle</a>; (iv) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/ocean-acidification.html">Ocean Acidification</a>; (v) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/land-use.html">Changes in Land Use</a>; (vi) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/freshwater-use.html">Global Freshwater Use</a>; (vii) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/biosphere-state-shift.html">State Shift in the Earth’s Biosphere</a>; (viii) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/peak-nnr-scarcity.html">Peak Non-Renewable Natural Resources: Scarcity</a>; with devastating current climate-resource-scarcity-conflict and refugees, and impending threat multiplier aggravation of crisis of ‘scarcity-conflict’ death spiral consequences.<br />
<br />
The public in general are ecologically illiterate of current <i>Overshoot-Scarcity-Conflict</i> consequences of their procreation and consumption lifestyle’s, such as climate-resource-scarcity-conflict and refugees, and impending threat multiplier aggravation of crisis of ‘scarcity-conflict’ death spiral consequences; and hence unable or unwilling to make informed environmental decisions, as a result of the Media’s Censorship of Overshoot-Scarcity-Conflict contextual information in their reporting on socio-political scarcity and conflict problems resulting from ecological overshoot. For example in Dr. Michael Maher’s study: <i>How and Why Journalists Avoid Population - Environment Connection</i>, he took a random sample of 150 stories about urban sprawl, endangered species and water shortages and found that only 1 in ten framed population growth as a source of the problem. Media Matters studies in the US show that (i) in recent 2013 wildfire coverage, only 6 percent of total wildfire items mentioned climate change; (ii) in Midwest flood coverage, only 3 percent of stories mentioned climate change; (iii) in 2012, the nightly news covered the royal family more than climate change; (iv) a recent study documenting the warmest year on record received cool media coverage, almost entirely censoring scientists from climate change discussion; (v) in 2012, the Kardashians got 40 times more news coverage than ocean acidification, which affects over 50% of US fishery revenues; (vi) in 2012, TV media covered Joe Biden’s smile nearly twice as much as climate change, and Paul Ryan’s workout, three times more than record Arctic Sea Ice loss.<br />
<br />
The United Kingdom’s Civilized Patriarchy Legal Matrix Prosecutorial and Juristic Bishops have no legal ecological moral authority to prosecute Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale, and adjudicate upon the alleged ‘lawfulness’ or ‘unlawfulness’ of their acts of alleged murder, while ignoring the theft and thievery and participation in mass murder of the civilized patriarchy corporate elite, who purchased ‘Innocence for Sale’ Indulgences from their puppet legislators to avoid legislation that defines their ecologically criminal acts of billion dollar thievery and murder as ‘unlawful’.<br />
<br />
A few of Global Civilized Patriarchy’s ‘Innocence for Sale’ – Control of Reproduction and Consumption Indulgence’s – Corporate Thieving Statistics:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>A. The 100 largest corporations externalities are costing the economy $4.7 trillion per year in lost ecosystem services and pollution.<br />
<br />
B. $7.3 Trillion is the estimate of Unpriced Natural Capital Costs of Primary production: agriculture, forestry, fisheries, mining, oil and gas exploration, utilities and primary processing of cement, steel, paper pulp and petrochemicals.<br />
<br />
C. Land Use externalities amount to $1.8 Trillion, Water Consumption Impact to $1.9 Trillion and Greenhouse Gas impact of $2.7 Trillion.<br />
<br />
D. $2.25 Trillion are the externality costs of the top 3,000 listed corporations.<br />
<br />
E. $2-4.5 Trillion of natural capital losses destruction and pollution of ecosystem services represent 45-90% of the GDP of the Poor, who rely primarily on ecosystem services for their livelihoods.<br />
<br />
F. The Copenhagen decision to select a target of 2 degrees was an ethical decision of pre-meditated scorched earth murder to exterminate all coral reefs, 1/4 of all fish species, which are the very livelihoods of more than half a billion people. </blockquote><br />
A few British Civilized Patriarchy ‘Innocence for Sale’ – Control of Reproduction and Consumption Indulgence’s – Corporate Thieving & Murdering Statistics:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>G. Socialized Externality Costs Footprint of Britain’s 22 Richest Billionaires is $52.7 billion.<br />
<br />
H. The Thermodynamic Footprint – quantifies the amount of damage to the planet’s physical, biological and chemical makeup through mining, manufacturing, construction, habitat alterations, and the generation of wastes such as carbon dioxide, garbage and other pollution – of Britain’s 22 Richest Billionaires is the Scarcity-Conflict equivalent of 199 million hunter-foragers.<br />
<br />
I. Britain’s support for the Copenhagen decision to select a target of 2 degrees was an ethical decision of pre-meditated scorched earth murder to allow Britain’s emissions to destroy 8,529 km2 of coral reefs, an area equivalent to North East England: Northumberland, County Durham, Tyne and Wear, and Teesside; and 15 million livelihoods.<br />
<br />
J. Britain’s support for the Copenhagen decision to select a target of 2 degrees was an ethical decision of pre-meditated scorched earth murder to allow Britain’s 22 Richest Billionaires emissions to destroy 597 km2 of coral reefs, an area equivalent to the New Forest National Park, and the livelihoods of 1.05 million poor people living simply off the sea’s natural capital.</blockquote><br />
Comparatively Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale’s involvement in the politically motivated murder of British Army soldier, Drummer (Private) Lee Rigby is infinitely miniscule. <br />
<br />
Consequently these civilized patriarchy criminal charges against Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale should be:<br />
<br />
[1] <b>Suspended; until</b> Britain’s legislators and/or jurists demonstrate their credible cause-effect-ecologically-literate-consciousness capacity for legislating an honest transparent social contract between the British Government and its citizens, by regulating the relations between humans, nature and other animals species and the relations between humans amongst themselves, in terms of their gender, culture, ethnic, religious and ideological conflicts; by <br />
<br />
<blockquote>A. granting automatic equal legal personhood and rights to women, non-patriarchal – matriarchal or gender balanced – cultures’, nature and animal and plant species; and<br />
<br />
B. legislating fully informed consenting military and intelligence enlistment agreements which accurately fully disclose to any prospective signer of such agreement that in the absence of legislation amending the Constitution’s rights to procreate and consume to ecological carrying capacity limits; any individual signing any British military enlistment form is signing up to be cannon fodder resource thieves and mass murderers for Britain’s civilized patriarchy human factory farming profiteering elite, based upon the legal authority of ecologically illiterate social contract jurisprudence; or<br />
<br />
C. implementing and enforcing legislation which requires all British citizens to limit their rights to procreation and consumption to below carrying capacity levels. </blockquote><br />
[2] <b>Dismissed; if</b> Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale sign the MILINT Earth Day Ecology of Peace Whistleblower/Activist Oath, and submits it to either the American Walk Your Footprint Talk to Support the Troops Military Advisory Board (11 retired Generals and Admirals concerned with ecological overshoot and scarcity induced resource war conflict); or to a British Walk Your Footprint Talk to Support the Troops Military Advisory Board of retired Generals and Admirals concerned with ecological overshoot and scarcity induced resource war conflict, of their own choosing.<br />
<br />
Such a judicial act of suspension – or the parties mutual leadership focus on problem solving their dispute, by means of reaching a MILINT Ecology of Peace agreement for dismissal – of the case against Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale, would act as a slap on the bare back of the ecologically illiterate newborn baby – breeding/consumption scarcity combatant – public.<br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-FJ0-7KV7xHo/UeKgjCY2DTI/AAAAAAAAiQA/ZLbU4RMCObo/s1600/UK_Woolwich_SSDEFCON_600X486.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-FJ0-7KV7xHo/UeKgjCY2DTI/AAAAAAAAiQA/ZLbU4RMCObo/s1600/UK_Woolwich_SSDEFCON_600X486.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 486px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
<b>MILINT Earth Day Ecology of Peace Whistleblower/Activist Oath</b>:<br />
<br />
Please find attached Amici’s MILINT Earth Day Ecology of Peace Whistleblower / Activist Oath, submitted to the Walk Your Footprint Talk to Support the Troops’ Military Advisory Board (“MAB”), copies sent to: Gen. Keith Alexander, National Security Agency; James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence and Lisa Monaco, Asst Att. General for National Security, National Security Division, Department of Justice. <br />
<br />
The oath submits that “our civilized patriarchy constitutions rights to breed and consume have resulted in ecological overshoot of carrying capacity by between <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/ecological-overshoot.html">700 to 400,000 percent</a>, which is destroying our Planet’s Natural Capital, with <a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/rapid-population-decline.html">devastating current and impending ‘scarcity-conflict’ death spiral consequences</a>; as manifested in the crossing of <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/tipping-points.html">urgent Planetary Boundary Tipping Points</a>: (i) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/biodiversity-loss.html">Loss of Biodiversity and Species Extinctions</a>; (ii) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/climate-change.html">Climate Change</a>; (iii) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/nitrogen-cycle.html">Nitrogen Cycle</a>; (iv) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/ocean-acidification.html">Ocean Acidification</a>; (v) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/land-use.html">Changes in Land Use</a>; (vi) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/freshwater-use.html">Global Freshwater Use</a>; (vii) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/biosphere-state-shift.html">State Shift in the Earth’s Biosphere</a>; (viii) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/peak-nnr-scarcity.html">Peak Non-Renewable Natural Resources: Scarcity</a>; and (ix) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/corp-externalities.html">Socialized Corporate Externality Costs: Trillion Dollar Thefts from Global Natural Capital Commons</a>.<br />
<br />
It hopes to “free Military National Security leaders from their duty to protect Earth is Flat unsustainable constitutions that legally, politically and procedurally denies them the opportunity of addressing the root causes of scarcity-conflict threats to national security; by holding legislators and citizens who legislatively or practically endorse unsustainable right to breed and consume legislation, accountable as ‘breeding war’ or ‘consumption war’ scarcity combatants”.<br />
<br />
The oath requires the oath keeper to maintain her/his Walk my Eco-footprint Talk to Support the Troops to below the <a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/guerrylla-laws.html">following Carrying Capacity limits</a>: (procreate one child, to consume below 1 gha; procreate no children, to consume below 20 gha.); and legally authorizes the MAB to authorize the oath keepers assassination should they violate the oath, by procreating or consuming above said carrying capacity limits. <br />
<br />
It also requests the NSA, CIA, Mossad, MI6 and KGB, and all other Ecology of Peace interested intelligence agencies and military forces, to discard Civilized Patriarchy’s Norwegian Nobel Committee War is Peace Whore jurisprudence model; and embrace an ecology of peace jurisprudence model, based upon jurisprudence limiting procreation and consumption to carrying capacity limits; by establishing a ‘Maria Bochkareva MILINT Earth Day Ecology of Peace Medal, to be awarded on the 23rd of April, to an individual chosen by the ‘Walk Your Footprint Talk to Support the Troops’ Military Advisory Board, who has done the most to either ‘Walk their Footprint Talk to Support the Troops’; and/or to educate their community, or nation how procreating and consuming above carrying capacity limits, results in ecological overshoot, scarcity and scarcity induced conflict and war. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>The ‘Walk Your Footprint Talk to Support the Troops’ Military Advisory Board:</b> (<a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/1/post/2013/06/130620_mab-eop-oath.html">Advisory Board notified of Oath</a>)<br />
<br />
* General Charles F. “Chuck” Wald, USAF (Ret.): Former Deputy Commander, Headquarters U.S. European Command (USEUCOM) <br />
* Lieutenant General Lawrence P. Farrell Jr., USAF (Ret.): Former Deputy Chief of Staff for Plans and Programs, Headquarters U.S. Air Force <br />
* General Ronald E. Keys USAF (Ret.): Former Commander, Air Combat Command <br />
* General Gordon R. Sullivan, USA (Ret.): Former Chief of Staff, U.S. Army <br />
* Admiral John B. Nathman, USN (Ret.): Former Vice Chief of Naval Operations <br />
* Admiral T. Joseph Lopez, USN (Ret.): Former Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Naval Forces Europe and Allied Forces, Southern Europe <br />
* General Charles G. Boyd, USAF (Ret.): Former Deputy Commander in Chief of U.S. Forces in Europe <br />
* General Paul J. Kern, USA (Ret.): Former Commanding General, U.S. Army Materiel Command <br />
* Vice Admiral Dennis V. McGinn, USN (Ret.): Deputy Chief of Naval Operations, Warfare Requirements and Programs <br />
* Rear Admiral David R. Oliver, Jr., USN (Ret.): Former Principal Deputy to the Navy Acquisition Executive <br />
* Vice Admiral Richard H. Truly, USN (Ret.): Former NASA Administrator, Shuttle Astronaut and the first Commander of the Naval Space <br />
<br />
(Aforementioned officers were the Military Advisory Board for the CNA Report: <a href="http://www.cna.org/reports/energy">Powering America's Defense: Energy and the Risks to National Security</a>, which included a military appeal for US citizens to Walk their Talk to Support the Troops, by massively reducing their consumption lifestyle’s: “to make sacrifices similar to those made by the American people made during World War II, by planting victory gardens, cutting down on fuel use, saving scrap metal and old rubber, sacrifices, or maybe just examples of common sense and prudent lifestyle changes.”)<br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-SOcFNbzUVBU/UeKi2FtYXNI/AAAAAAAAiQc/7XbLGWh7N-c/s1600/MAB_PoweringADefense-cr.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-nr0sczDygwc/UeKijD1MR4I/AAAAAAAAiQQ/hKfBXZKVUqM/s1600/MAB_PoweringADefense-cr_600x620.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 620px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
Dated at George, South Africa, Pale Blue Dot: 15 July 2013<br />
<br />
</blockquote><table align="center" border="0" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" style="width: 600px;"><tbody>
<tr><td width="600"><div align="center"><div class="issuuembed" data-configid="2190019/4034919" style="height: 800px; width: 600px;"></div><script async="true" src="//e.issuu.com/embed.js" type="text/javascript"></script><br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 80%;"></span></strong></div></td></tr>
</tbody></table><blockquote><br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [<a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/1/post/2013/07/130715_aex-uk-woolwich.html">TYGAE</a>]</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<br />
<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327922598170048610" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JSpbgoKp8LA/SfCVX96zuGI/AAAAAAAAEIs/qqvoPLfHrLA/s400/400_BlackLine.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 7px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 620px;" />Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-64829242026968609112013-07-12T15:40:00.000+03:002013-07-14T16:12:29.722+03:00Ecology-of-Peace-Theses urges Germany to dismiss murder charges against Beate Zschape<div align="justify"><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Aex/Ecology of Peace Amicus urges Judge Manfred Gotzl to dismiss murder charges against Beate Zschape</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">The Federal Republic of Germany Civilized Patriarchy Legal Matrix Prosecutorial and Juristic Bishops have no legal ecological moral authority to prosecute Ms. Zschape, or adjudicate upon the alleged ‘lawfulness’ or ‘unlawfulness’ of her Eco-Innocent leaver acts of murder, while ignoring the theft and thievery and participation in mass murder of the civilized patriarchy corporate elite, who purchased ‘Innocence for Sale’ Indulgences from legislators to avoid legislation that defines their ecologically criminal acts of billion dollar thievery and murder as ‘unlawful’.</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;"> Andrea Muhrrteyn | 12 July 2013 | TYGAE</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-0BPKTj6Wsao/Ud_2V3WABNI/AAAAAAAAiPM/ne0OCC5Wyq4/s1600/De_BZschape_cr.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-FIgLKhkBKBU/Ud_2JeAmiyI/AAAAAAAAiPA/qC5VskeVYhk/s1600/De_BZschape_cr_375x234.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 234px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 375px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote><span style="font-size: 95%;">Electronic Filing of Amicus to Judge Manfred Götzl, c/o Registrar of the Court, Oberlandesgericht München; Der Generalbundesanwalt beim Bundesgerichtshof / Federal Prosecutor Harald Range; Beate Zschape Counsel: Wolfgang Heer, Wolfgang Stahl & Anja Sturm; CC: Transparency: Turkish Community: c/o: CEO: Fuat Sengul, Turkish Union in Berlin-Brandenburg. Subject: Deutschland v. Beate Zschäpe: Judge Manfred Götzl, Oberlandesgericht München <br />
<br />
The electronic filing of the Amicus requests Judge Götzl’s consent to submit the attached Pro Se Motion and Æquilibriæx (Ecology of Peace) Amicus brief into the court record in this matter.<br />
<br />
<b> Conclusion of the Æquilibriæx Amicus Argument:</b><br />
<br />
<b> Theses on the Power and Efficacy of Civilized Patriarchy’s AnthroCorpocentric Indulgences Innocence for Sale Legal Matrix Jurisprudence</b>:<br />
<br />
[1] Beate Zschape, like Michael Adebolajo, Michael Adebowale, Anders Breivik and many thousands of others, are simply low-level left/right, white/black, Muslim/Christian Ethnic-Conflict foot-soldiers, of Civilized Patriarchy’s AnthroCorpocentric Legal Matrix’s Control of the Reproduction Human Factory Farming War Economy Racket, and Consumptionism Cultural Colonialism Racket agenda’s.<br />
<br />
[8] These civilized patriarchy criminal charges against Beate Zschape should be:<br />
<br />
[8.1] <b>Suspended; until</b> Germany’s legislators and/or jurists demonstrate their credible cause-effect-ecologically-literate-consciousness capacity for legislating an honest transparent social contract between the German Government and its citizens, by regulating the relations between humans, nature and other animals species and the relations between humans amongst themselves, in terms of their gender, culture, ethnic, religious and ideological conflicts; by (A) granting automatic equal legal personhood and rights to women, non-patriarchal – matriarchal or gender balanced – cultures’, nature and animal and plant species; and (B) legislating fully informed consenting military and intelligence enlistment agreements which accurately fully disclose to any prospective signer of such agreement that in the absence of legislation amending the Constitution’s rights to procreate and consume to ecological carrying capacity limits; any individual signing any German military enlistment form is signing up to be cannon fodder resource thieves and mass murderers for Germany’s civilized patriarchy human factory farming profiteering elite, based upon the legal authority of an ecologically illiterate constitution; or (C)implementing and enforcing legislation which requires all German citizens to limit their rights to procreation and consumption to below carrying capacity levels. <br />
<br />
[8.2] <b>Dismissed; if</b> Ms. Zschape signs the MILINT Earth Day Ecology of Peace Whistleblower/Activist Oath, and submits it to either the American Walk Your Footprint Talk to Support the Troops Military Advisory Board (11 retired Generals and Admirals concerned with ecological overshoot and scarcity induced resource war conflict); or to a German Walk Your Footprint Talk to Support the Troops Military Advisory Board of retired Generals and Admirals concerned with ecological overshoot and scarcity induced resource war conflict, of her own choosing.<br />
<br />
[8.3] Such a judicial act of suspension – or the parties mutual leadership focus on problem solving their dispute, by means of reaching a MILINT Ecology of Peace agreement for dismissal – of the case against Ms Zschape, would act as a slap on the bare back of the newborn baby ecologically illiterate public.</span></blockquote><table align="right" border="0" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" style="width: 560px;"><tbody>
<tr><td width="560"><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size: 80%;"></span></strong></div></td></tr>
</tbody></table><a name='more'></a><div align="center"><a href="http://fleur-de-lis.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-__b6nnsrEpQ/UQqve4pxolI/AAAAAAAAg-U/74EyJkDE6MA/s1600/IdleNoMore-IndigenousRights_598x126.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 119px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 598px;" /></a></div><br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Aex/Ecology of Peace Amicus urges Judge Manfred Gotzl to dismiss murder charges against Beate Zschape</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">The Federal Republic of Germany Civilized Patriarchy Legal Matrix Prosecutorial and Juristic Bishops have no legal ecological moral authority to prosecute Ms. Zschape, or adjudicate upon the alleged ‘lawfulness’ or ‘unlawfulness’ of her Eco-Innocent leaver acts of murder, while ignoring the theft and thievery and participation in mass murder of the civilized patriarchy corporate elite, who purchased ‘Innocence for Sale’ Indulgences from legislators to avoid legislation that defines their ecologically criminal acts of billion dollar thievery and murder as ‘unlawful’.</span></span></strong> </blockquote></div><br />
<blockquote>Sent: Friday, July 12, 2013 12:34 AM<br />
To: 'Judge Manfred Götzl: c/o: Registrar of the Court: Oberlandesgericht München'; 'Federal Prosecutor Harald Range'<br />
Cc: 'Beate Zschape: co Wolfgang Heer'; 'Beate Zschape: co Wolfgang Stahl'; 'Beate Zschape: co Wolfgang Stahl'; 'Beate Zschape: co Anja Sturm'; 'Beate Zschape: co Anja Sturm'; 'German-Turkish Community: co: CEO: Fuat Sengul: Turkish Union in Berlin-Brandenburg'; 'Spokeswoman: Ayse Demir'; 'Spokesman: Hilmi Kaya Turan'; 'Spokesman: Mustafa Doganay'<br />
Subject: Deutschland v. Beate Zschäpe: Judge Manfred Götzl, Oberlandesgericht München <br />
<br />
TO: Judge Manfred Götzl, c/o Registrar of the Court, Oberlandesgericht München<br />
TO: Der Generalbundesanwalt beim Bundesgerichtshof / Federal Prosecutor Harald Range<br />
TO: Beate Zschape Counsel: Wolfgang Heer, Wolfgang Stahl & Anja Sturm<br />
CC: Transparency: Turkish Community: c/o: CEO: Fuat Sengul, Turkish Union in Berlin-Brandenburg<br />
<br />
Your Honour: Judge Manfred Götzl,<br />
<br />
<b>Federal Republic of Germany v. Beate Zschäpe, et al; in the Oberlandesgericht München / Higher Regional Court of München, before Judge Manfred Götzl</b>. <br />
<br />
I hereby request Judge Götzl’s consent to submit the attached Pro Se Motion and Æquilibriæx (Ecology of Peace) Amicus brief into the court record in this matter. <br />
<br />
<blockquote>* Notice of Motion: Motion to Enter Appearance as Pro Se, Andrea Muhrrteyn, Amicus Curiae . <br />
* Æquilibriæx Amicus Brief: Brief In Propria Persona by Amici Curiae, Andrea Muhrrteyn, an Alien on Pale Blue Dot: Æquilibriæx Sustainable Security Theses on the Power and Efficacy of Civilized Patriarchy’s AnthroCorpocentric Indulgences: ‘Innocence for Sale’ Jurisprudence.<br />
* Certificate of Service [<a href="http://www.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/13-07-11_de-oberlandesgericht-munchen_b-zschape_nom-amicus-svc.pdf">PDF: NoM-Amicus-CrtSvc</a>]</blockquote><br />
Attached Enclosures:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>* MILINT Earth Day Ecology of Peace Whistleblower/Activist Oath, submitted to ‘Walk Your Footprint Talk to Support the Troops Military Advisory Board’ (<a href="http://www.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/13-06-18_milint-earth-day-wyft-support-troops-oath_cert.pdf">PDF</a>)</blockquote><br />
Online Enclosures: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>Control of Consumption: Global Corporate Cultural Imperialism Racket (<a href="http://www.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/13-07-11_de-ob-munchen_b-zschape_ssd_c-cons.pdf">PDF</a>)<br />
Control of Reproduction Human Factory Farming War Economy Racket (<a href="http://www.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/13-07-11_de-ob-munchen_b-zschape_ssd_c-rep.pdf">PDF</a>) <br />
SS-DEFCON 3: Ecological Overshoot (<a href="http://www.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/13-07-11_de-ob-munchen_b-zschape_ssd-3_e-overshoot.pdf">PDF</a>)<br />
SS-DEFCON 2: Scarcity-Conflict (<a href="http://www.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/13-07-11_de-ob-munchen_b-zschape_ssd-2_s-conflict.pdf">PDF</a>)<br />
Ecology of Peace Oath Draft Copy (<a href="http://www.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/13-06-18_milint-earth-day-wyft-support-troops-oath_draft.doc">DOC</a>)</blockquote><br />
Should your consent be granted, I’d be more than happy to mail a hardcopy to the Clerk, for the court record. In the absence of such consent, I’d prefer not to waste valuable ecological natural capital resources.<br />
<br />
<b>Summary of the Æquilibriæx Amicus Argument</b>:<br />
<br />
<b>Theses on the Power and Efficacy of Civilized Patriarchy’s AnthroCorpocentric Indulgences Innocence for Sale Legal Matrix Jurisprudence</b>:<br />
<br />
[1] Beate Zschape, like Michael Adebolajo, Michael Adebowale, Anders Breivik and many thousands of others, are simply low-level left/right, white/black, Muslim/Christian Ethnic-Conflict foot-soldiers, of Civilized Patriarchy’s AnthroCorpocentric Legal Matrix’s Control of the Reproduction Human Factory Farming War Economy Racket, and Consumptionism Cultural Colonialism Racket agenda’s.<br />
<br />
[2] A credible honourable court should find that the constitutional and legislative Social Contract entered into between the Federal Republic of Germany and Beate Zschape, is a civilized patriarchy legal matrix contract, based upon deception and fraud, which does not meet the requirements of a fully informed consenting agreement. <br />
<br />
[3] The Constitutional and legislative Social Contract fails to clearly and simply disclose that the German Constitution is based upon civilized patriarchy: (a) the inalienable right to breed and consume without regard for ecological carrying capacity limits; which socio-politically manifests as a Control of Reproduction Human Factory Farming War Economy racket and a Control of Consumption Global Corporate Cultural Imperialism racket, (b) these control of reproduction and consumption rackets consequently violate carrying capacity limits, resulting in ecological overshoot, scarcity, and scarcity induced conflict, and resource wars. <br />
<br />
[4] Germany’s civilized patriarchy Innocence for Sale Indulgence Legal Matrix enforces the corporate, political, religious, media and cultural elite’s GDP/growth agenda’s victimhood welfare-vote-farm, poverty pimping and cannon fodder schemes by (a) legislating laws which enable and encourage citizens procreation or consumption to transgress cultural carrying capacity, knowing (b) such legislation results in ecological overshoot, surplus vote-cannon-fodder populations, economic hierarchical inequality, and scarcity induced local, national and international conflict; (c) that ecological overshoot in multi-cultural/ethnic/religious communities, manifests as inter-cultural / ethnic / religious conflict; (d) inter-cultural / ethnic conflict is a great divide and conquer tool to manipulate the proletariat to perceive other cultural/ethnic proletariat as the source of their own overshoot-scarcity-conflict misery; as opposed to demanding their Duhmockery leaders abide by the Ecology of Peace Commandment: “Thou shalt not legislate laws which enable citizens procreation or consumption to transgress cultural carrying capacity limits.”<br />
<br />
[5] Extensive <i>Environment/Overshoot-Scarcity-Conflict</i> documentation from military and intelligence agencies, united nations and governments, NGO’s and academic reports, etc, collectively document how legislative failure to restrict humanity’s procreation and consumption to cultural carrying capacity limits, and <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/corp-externalities.html">Socialized Corporate Externality Costs: Trillion Dollar Thefts from Global Natural Capital Commons</a> Legal Matrix Indulgences, has resulted in humanity’s <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/ecological-overshoot.html">ecological overshoot of carrying capacity limits by between 700 to 400,000 percent</a>; including crossing <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/tipping-points.html">urgent Planetary Boundary Tipping Points</a>: (i) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/biodiversity-loss.html">Loss of Biodiversity and Species Extinctions</a>; (ii) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/climate-change.html">Climate Change</a>; (iii) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/nitrogen-cycle.html">Nitrogen Cycle</a>; (iv) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/ocean-acidification.html">Ocean Acidification</a>; (v) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/land-use.html">Changes in Land Use</a>; (vi) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/freshwater-use.html">Global Freshwater Use</a>; (vii) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/biosphere-state-shift.html">State Shift in the Earth’s Biosphere</a>; (viii) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/peak-nnr-scarcity.html">Peak Non-Renewable Natural Resources: Scarcity</a>; with devastating current climate-resource-scarcity-conflict and refugees, and impending threat multiplier aggravation of crisis of ‘scarcity-conflict’ death spiral consequences.<br />
<br />
[6] The public in general are ecologically illiterate of current Overshoot-Scarcity-Conflict consequences of their procreation and consumption lifestyle’s, such as climate-resource-scarcity-conflict and refugees, and impending threat multiplier aggravation of crisis of ‘scarcity-conflict’ death spiral consequences; and hence unable or unwilling to make informed environmental decisions, as a result the Media’s Censorship of Overshoot-Scarcity-Conflict contextual information in their reporting on socio-political scarcity and conflict problems resulting from ecological overshoot. For example in Dr. Michael Maher’s study: <i>How and Why Journalists Avoid Population - Environment Connection</i>, he took a random sample of 150 stories about urban sprawl, endangered species and water shortages and found that only 1 in ten framed population growth as a source of the problem. Media Matters studies in the US show that (i) in recent 2013 wildfire coverage, only 6 percent of total wildfire items mentioned climate change; (ii) in Midwest flood coverage, only 3 percent of stories mentioned climate change; (iii) in 2012, the nightly news covered the royal family more than climate change; (iv) a recent study documenting the warmest year on record received cool media coverage, almost entirely censoring scientists from climate change discussion; (v) in 2012, the Kardashians got 40 times more news coverage than ocean acidification, which affects over 50% of US fishery revenues; (vi) in 2012, TV media covered Joe Biden’s smile nearly twice as much as climate change, and Paul Ryan’s workout, three times more than record Arctic Sea Ice loss.<br />
<br />
[7] The Federal Republic of Germany Civilized Patriarchy Legal Matrix Prosecutorial and Juristic Bishops have no legal ecological moral authority to prosecute Ms. Zschape, or adjudicate upon the alleged ‘lawfulness’ or ‘unlawfulness’ of her Eco-Innocent leaver acts of murder, while ignoring the theft and thievery and participation in mass murder of the civilized patriarchy corporate elite, who purchased ‘Innocence for Sale’ Indulgences from legislators to avoid legislation that defines their ecologically criminal acts of billion dollar thievery and murder as ‘unlawful’, such as among others:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>A. $117.3 billion stolen from planet’s natural capital (Socialized Externality Costs Footprint of Germany’s 31 Richest Billionaires: Scarcity-Conflict equivalent of $117.3 billion); <br />
<br />
B. Thermodynamic Footprint of Germany’s 31 Richest Billionaires: Scarcity-Conflict equivalent of 941 million hunter-foragers; <br />
<br />
C. Thermodynamic Footprint of Germany’s 15 Most Profitable Companies: Scarcity-Conflict equivalent of 1.2 billion hunter-foragers; <br />
<br />
D. Germany’s emissions destroy 4,400 km2 of coral reefs, 20 million poor people’s livelihoods; <br />
<br />
E. German Industry’s emissions destroys 9,100 km2 of coral reefs and livelihoods of 16 million poor people living simply off the sea’s natural capital; <br />
<br />
F. Germany’s 31 Richest Billionaires emissions destroy 1,820 km2 of coral reefs and livelihoods of 3.2 million poor people living simply off the sea’s natural capital. </blockquote><br />
[8] These civilized patriarchy criminal charges against Beate Zschape should be:<br />
<br />
[8.1] Suspended; until Germany’s legislators and/or jurists demonstrate their credible cause-effect-ecologically-literate-consciousness capacity for legislating an honest transparent social contract between the German Government and its citizens, by regulating the relations between humans, nature and other animals species and the relations between humans amongst themselves, in terms of their gender, culture, ethnic, religious and ideological conflicts; by <br />
<br />
<blockquote>A. granting automatic equal legal personhood and rights to women, non-patriarchal – matriarchal or gender balanced – cultures’, nature and animal and plant species; and<br />
<br />
B. legislating fully informed consenting military and intelligence enlistment agreements which accurately fully disclose to any prospective signer of such agreement that in the absence of legislation amending the Constitution’s rights to procreate and consume to ecological carrying capacity limits; any individual signing any German military enlistment form is signing up to be cannon fodder resource thieves and mass murderers for Germany’s civilized patriarchy human factory farming profiteering elite, based upon the legal authority of an ecologically illiterate constitution; or<br />
<br />
C. implementing and enforcing legislation which requires all German citizens to limit their rights to procreation and consumption to below carrying capacity levels. </blockquote><br />
[8.2] Dismissed; if Ms. Zschape signs the MILINT Earth Day Ecology of Peace Whistleblower/Activist Oath, and submits it to either the American Walk Your Footprint Talk to Support the Troops Military Advisory Board (11 retired Generals and Admirals concerned with ecological overshoot and scarcity induced resource war conflict); or to a German Walk Your Footprint Talk to Support the Troops Military Advisory Board of retired Generals and Admirals concerned with ecological overshoot and scarcity induced resource war conflict, of her own choosing.<br />
<br />
[8.3] Such a judicial act of suspension – or the parties mutual leadership focus on problem solving their dispute, by means of reaching a MILINT Ecology of Peace agreement for dismissal – of the case against Ms Zschape, would act as a slap on the bare back of the newborn baby ecologically illiterate public.<br />
<br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-0BPKTj6Wsao/Ud_2V3WABNI/AAAAAAAAiPM/ne0OCC5Wyq4/s1600/De_BZschape_cr.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-a96Vu30xKoE/Ud_2woi3v9I/AAAAAAAAiPY/8Zbg2oUHvng/s1600/De_BZschape_cr_600x374.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 374px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
<br />
<b>MILINT Earth Day Ecology of Peace Whistleblower/Activist Oath</b>:<br />
<br />
Please find attached Amici’s MILINT Earth Day Ecology of Peace Whistleblower / Activist Oath, submitted to the Walk Your Footprint Talk to Support the Troops’ Military Advisory Board (“MAB”), copies sent to: Gen. Keith Alexander, National Security Agency; James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence and Lisa Monaco, Asst Att. General for National Security, National Security Division, Department of Justice. <br />
<br />
The oath submits that “our civilized patriarchy constitutions rights to breed and consume have resulted in ecological overshoot of carrying capacity by between <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/ecological-overshoot.html">700 to 400,000 percent</a>, which is destroying our Planet’s Natural Capital, with <a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/rapid-population-decline.html">devastating current and impending ‘scarcity-conflict’ death spiral consequences</a>; as manifested in the crossing of <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/tipping-points.html">urgent Planetary Boundary Tipping Points</a>: (i) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/biodiversity-loss.html">Loss of Biodiversity and Species Extinctions</a>; (ii) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/climate-change.html">Climate Change</a>; (iii) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/nitrogen-cycle.html">Nitrogen Cycle</a>; (iv) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/ocean-acidification.html">Ocean Acidification</a>; (v) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/land-use.html">Changes in Land Use</a>; (vi) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/freshwater-use.html">Global Freshwater Use</a>; (vii) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/biosphere-state-shift.html">State Shift in the Earth’s Biosphere</a>; (viii) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/peak-nnr-scarcity.html">Peak Non-Renewable Natural Resources: Scarcity</a>; and (ix) <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/corp-externalities.html">Socialized Corporate Externality Costs: Trillion Dollar Thefts from Global Natural Capital Commons</a>.<br />
<br />
It hopes to “free Military National Security leaders from their duty to protect Earth is Flat unsustainable constitutions that legally, politically and procedurally denies them the opportunity of addressing the root causes of scarcity-conflict threats to national security; by holding legislators and citizens who legislatively or practically endorse unsustainable right to breed and consume legislation, accountable as ‘breeding war’ or ‘consumption war’ scarcity combatants”.<br />
<br />
The oath requires the oath keeper to maintain her/his Walk my Eco-footprint Talk to Support the Troops to below the following <a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/guerrylla-laws.html">Carrying Capacity limits</a>: (procreate one child, to consume below 1 gha; procreate no children, to consume below 20 gha.); and legally authorizes the MAB to authorize the oath keepers assassination should they violate the oath, by procreating or consuming above said carrying capacity limits. <br />
<br />
It also requests the NSA, CIA, Mossad, MI6 and KGB, and all other Ecology of Peace interested intelligence agencies and military forces, to discard Civilized Patriarchy’s Norwegian Nobel Committee War is Peace Whore jurisprudence model; and embrace an ecology of peace jurisprudence model, based upon jurisprudence limiting procreation and consumption to carrying capacity limits; by establishing a ‘Maria Bochkareva MILINT Earth Day Ecology of Peace Medal, to be awarded on the 23rd of April, to an individual chosen by the ‘Walk Your Footprint Talk to Support the Troops’ Military Advisory Board, who has done the most to either ‘Walk their Footprint Talk to Support the Troops’; and/or to educate their community, or nation how procreating and consuming above carrying capacity limits, results in ecological overshoot, scarcity and scarcity induced conflict and war. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>The ‘Walk Your Footprint Talk to Support the Troops’ Military Advisory Board</b>: (<a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/1/post/2013/06/130620_mab-eop-oath.html">Advisory Board notified of Oath</a>)<br />
<br />
* General Charles F. “Chuck” Wald, USAF (Ret.): Former Deputy Commander, Headquarters U.S. European Command (USEUCOM) <br />
* Lieutenant General Lawrence P. Farrell Jr., USAF (Ret.): Former Deputy Chief of Staff for Plans and Programs, Headquarters U.S. Air Force <br />
* General Ronald E. Keys USAF (Ret.): Former Commander, Air Combat Command <br />
* General Gordon R. Sullivan, USA (Ret.): Former Chief of Staff, U.S. Army <br />
* Admiral John B. Nathman, USN (Ret.): Former Vice Chief of Naval Operations <br />
* Admiral T. Joseph Lopez, USN (Ret.): Former Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Naval Forces Europe and Allied Forces, Southern Europe <br />
* General Charles G. Boyd, USAF (Ret.): Former Deputy Commander in Chief of U.S. Forces in Europe <br />
* General Paul J. Kern, USA (Ret.): Former Commanding General, U.S. Army Materiel Command <br />
* Vice Admiral Dennis V. McGinn, USN (Ret.): Deputy Chief of Naval Operations, Warfare Requirements and Programs <br />
* Rear Admiral David R. Oliver, Jr., USN (Ret.): Former Principal Deputy to the Navy Acquisition Executive <br />
* Vice Admiral Richard H. Truly, USN (Ret.): Former NASA Administrator, Shuttle Astronaut and the first Commander of the Naval Space <br />
<br />
(Aforementioned officers were the Military Advisory Board for the CNA Report: <a href="http://www.cna.org/reports/energy">Powering America's Defense: Energy and the Risks to National Security</a>, which included a military appeal for US citizens to Walk their Talk to Support the Troops, by massively reducing their consumption lifestyle’s: “to make sacrifices similar to those made by the American people made during World War II, by planting victory gardens, cutting down on fuel use, saving scrap metal and old rubber, sacrifices, or maybe just examples of common sense and prudent lifestyle changes.”)<br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-SOcFNbzUVBU/UeKi2FtYXNI/AAAAAAAAiQc/7XbLGWh7N-c/s1600/MAB_PoweringADefense-cr.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-nr0sczDygwc/UeKijD1MR4I/AAAAAAAAiQQ/hKfBXZKVUqM/s1600/MAB_PoweringADefense-cr_600x620.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 620px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
<br />
Dated at George, South Africa: 11 July 2013<br />
<br />
</blockquote><table align="center" border="0" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" style="width: 600px;"><tbody>
<tr><td width="600"><div align="center"><div class="issuuembed" data-configid="2190019/4016059" style="height: 800px; width: 600px;"></div><script async="true" src="//e.issuu.com/embed.js" type="text/javascript"></script><br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 80%;"></span></strong></div></td></tr>
</tbody></table><blockquote><br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [<a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/1/post/2013/07/130711_de-zschape.html">TYGAE</a> (<a href="http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/13-07-11_de-oberlandesgericht-munch">PDF</a>)]</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327922598170048610" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JSpbgoKp8LA/SfCVX96zuGI/AAAAAAAAEIs/qqvoPLfHrLA/s400/400_BlackLine.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 7px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 620px;" />Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-71265934305646083822013-05-27T08:13:00.001+03:002013-05-27T08:21:19.007+03:00MCB & EDL: MILINT Earth Day analysis of Cameron’s TERFOR Ethnic-Conflict Agenda<div align="justify"><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Letter to EDL & Muslim Council of Britain: MILINT Earth Day analysis of why Cameron’s TERFOR Agenda fails to confront the root causes of Scarcity induced Ethnic Conflict.</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Cameron’s TERFOR Agenda fails to confront the root GDP/Growth Agenda causes of Scarcity induced Ethnic Conflict: because the Lord$ of War Profiteer$ from Ethnic Conflict Agenda is fully supported by African and Islamic Breeding War extremists and Western/European Consumption War extremists. Welcome to Civilized Patriarchy’s Human Factory Farming War Economy!!</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Andrea Muhrrteyn | TYGAE | 27 May 2013</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-VOlaE8VKACU/UaLkDXmcbNI/AAAAAAAAh-c/JdnmzcP_3Xk/s1600/EnvScarcity_EthnicConflict_EDL-MCB.PNG"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Pi2vTnndFZE/UaLjv6JkSqI/AAAAAAAAh-Q/JGgXcjKxCVk/s1600/EnvScarcity_EthnicConflict_EDL-MCB_375X265.PNG" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 265px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 375px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote><span style="font-size: 95%;">Conclusion reached:<br />
<br />
Are UK Muslim and British Nationalist Leaders capable of:<br />
<br />
[1] Confronting the reality that the Lord$ of War profit from the ethnic/religious/etc conflict resulting from African/Islamic/etc Breeding War civilized patriarchs incapacity or refusal to breed below carrying capacity & Western/etc Consumption War civilized patriarchs incapacity or refusal to consume below carrying capacity; and<br />
<br />
[2] Giving Prime Minister David Cameron and his ProGrowth Corporate Lord$ of War Profiteer$ a big ‘F**k You’ by listening to Military Intelligence Leaders who have called for American/World Citizens to ‘Walk their Talk’ of ‘Supporting the Troops’ to reduce Scarcity-Conflict threats to National Security; by personally reducing your (i) energy consumption, by “planting victory gardens, cutting down on fuel use, saving scrap metal and old rubber, sacrifices, or maybe just examples of common sense and prudent lifestyle changes”; (ii) procreation factor; by breeding one or less than one child per family; and<br />
<br />
[3] Doing what no Corporate ProGrowth Breeding War Politician Terrorist including Nelson Mandela, or any Feminist Terrorist, not even those Sextremist Femen Feminists, ever had the honour or integrity to do: launching Uncivilized Primitivist cultural campaigns – including collaborating with British or NATO Military Intelligence Leaders – to educate citizens to ‘Walk their Talk’ of ‘Supporting their British / Muslim / European / African / Asian / American Troops’ to reduce Scarcity-Conflict threats to National and Global Security; and encourage gender equality by breeding and consuming below carrying capacity? </span></blockquote><a name='more'></a><div align="center"><a href="http://fleur-de-lis.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-__b6nnsrEpQ/UQqve4pxolI/AAAAAAAAg-U/74EyJkDE6MA/s1600/IdleNoMore-IndigenousRights_598x126.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 119px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 598px;" /></a></div><br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Letter to EDL & Muslim Council of Britain: MILINT Earth Day analysis of why Cameron’s TERFOR Agenda fails to confront the root causes of Scarcity induced Ethnic Conflict.</span></span></strong> </blockquote></div><br />
<br />
<table align="center" border="0" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" style="width: 550px;"><tbody>
<tr><td valign="top" width="270"><strong><span style="font-size: 85%;">TO: Sec. Gen. Mr. Farooq Murad<br />
Muslim Council of Britain<br />
<br />
TO: Islamic Sharia Council <br />
<br />
CC: Prime Minister David Cameron<br />
10 Downing Street, London, SW1A 2AA<br />
c/o: Secretary of Def: Philip Hammond<br />
<br />
CC: Global Security Experts: Climate Change is a Global Security Threat<br />
</span></strong></td><td valign="top" width="270"><strong><span style="font-size: 85%;">TO: Tommy Robinson<br />
English Defense League (EDL)<br />
<br />
TO: Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain<br />
<br />
CC: Gen. Sir David Richards <br />
Chief of the Defence Staff<br />
C/O: Defence Secretary Group <br />
<br />
CC: NATO & Global Military Advisory Council on Climate Change (GMACCC)</span></strong></td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">MILINT Earth Day analysis of why Cameron’s TERFOR Agenda fails to confront the root causes of Scarcity induced Ethnic Conflict.</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-BJjXm-Pyzmw/UaLpTPSXaqI/AAAAAAAAh-4/2L-Vk4_7III/s1600/EnvScarcity_EthnicConflict4.PNG"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ir5TxABS9M8/UaLpFdgQQYI/AAAAAAAAh-s/XJGSo1DAVNY/s1600/EnvScarcity_EthnicConflict4_600x424.PNG" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 424px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
Cameron’s TERFOR Agenda fails to confront the root GDP/Growth Agenda causes of Scarcity induced Ethnic Conflict: because the Lord$ of War Profiteer$ from Ethnic Conflict Agenda is fully supported by African and Islamic Breeding War extremists and Western/European Consumption War extremists. Welcome to Civilized Patriarchy’s Human Factory Farming War Economy!!<br />
<br />
Civilized Patriarchy: where Lord$ of War profit from the ethnic/religious/etc conflict resulting from – generally speaking – African/Islamic/etc Breeding War civilized patriarchs incapacity to breed below carrying capacity & Western/etc Consumption War civilized patriarchs incapacity to consume below carrying capacity. <br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-z15nO_twrsE/UaLrM6R-2_I/AAAAAAAAh_g/cgexRNLK2JU/s1600/Kienholzedward_Birthday_455x444.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-z15nO_twrsE/UaLrM6R-2_I/AAAAAAAAh_g/cgexRNLK2JU/s1600/Kienholzedward_Birthday_455x444.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 444px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 455px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">________________________________________</div><br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Understanding the Religion of Civilized Patriarchy’s Human Factory Farming War Economy</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<b>Definition of Religion: Group-Shared System of Thought and Action that Offers the Individual a Frame of Orientation and an Object of Devotion</b>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“To clarify, “religion” as I use it here does not refer to a system that has necessarily to do with a concept of God or with idols or even to a system perceived as religion, but to <i><b>any group-shared system of thought and action that offers the individual a frame of orientation and an object of devotion</b></i>. Indeed, in this broad sense of the world no culture of the past or present, and it seems no culture in the future, can be considered as not have religion.<br />
<br />
This definition does not tell us anything about its specific content. People may worship animals, trees, idols of gold or stone, an invisible god, a saintly person, or a diabolical leader; they may worship their ancestors, their nation, their class or party, money or success. Their religion may be conducive to the development of destructiveness or of love, of domination or of solidarity; it may further their power of reason or paralyze it. <br />
<br />
.. A specific religion, provided it is effective in motivating conduct, is not a sum total of doctrines and beliefs; it is rooted in a specific character structure of the individual and, inasmuch as it is the religion of a group, in the social character. Thus, our religious attitude may be considered an aspect of our character structure, for <i><b>we are what we are devoted to, and what we are devoted to is what motivates our conduct</b></i>. Often however, individuals are not even aware of the real objects of their personal devotion and mistake their “official” beliefs for their real, though secret religion. If, for instance, a man worships power while professing a religion of love, the religion of power is his secret religion, while his so-called official religion, for example Christianity, is only an ideology.” – Erich Fromm, <i><b>To Have or to Be</b></i>, pp.135-136 </blockquote><br />
<b>Civilized Patriarchy’s Breeding / Consumption War Frame of Orientation and Objects of Devotion:</b><br />
<br />
<b>‘Civilized’ Patriarchy (pa•tri•arch•y)</b>: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>A system of society or government, is Patriarchal to the extent that it regulates (a) the relations between humans, nature and other animals species and (b) the relations between humans amongst themselves, in terms of their gender, culture, ethnic, religious and ideological conflicts; for the (c) almost exclusive benefit of violent Anthropocentric humans and corporations. <br />
<br />
Consequently a legal, political or social system is Patriarchal to the extent of its (a) failure to provide automatic equal legal personhood and rights to women, nature and animal and plant species; (b) disregard for the objective and scientific breed and consume below carrying capacity truth of the laws of nature/ecology; and (c) disregard for the laws of human nature; when they contradict the AnthroCorpocentric – breeding and consumption war – objectives of the holders of subjective AnthroCorpocentric Truth.<br />
<br />
A society has violent Patriarchal breeding and consumption war objectives, to the extent that:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>• its socio-political status symbols involve breeding war, consumption war and violent warrior mythology: (a) breeding war procreation above carrying capacity: i.e. cultures that reward their male members with concepts of manhood virility status, which are based on the man breeding a family above carrying capacity levels; (b) consumption war consuming above carrying capacity; i.e. cultures that reward their male members with concepts of manhood intelligence/virility status, which are based upon the man consuming above carrying capacity levels, to demonstrate his ‘large consumption penis’; (c) warrior mythology, where violent men are rewarded with ‘freedom fighter’ or ‘soldier’ socio-political status symbol medals and awards; particularly if the warrior mythology censors and ignores information to educate the culture’s members, that scarcity induced resource war violence can be avoided by the culture’s members choosing to breed and consume below carrying capacity levels. A culture which teaches a purely defensive warrior mythology; i.e. based purely on defense of its landbase and resources, i.e. which educate the members of the culture to avoid overpopulation and overconsumption scarcity inducing lifestyle’s within its culture, and hence does not engage in patriarchal breeding and consumption war objectives would not be considered a patriarchal culture. <br />
<br />
• Its religious, political and corporate leaders (a) endorse patriarchal objectification and sexualized concepts of ‘beauty’, which demean and vilify all women who do not meet those ‘beauty’ requirements; where a woman’s value is not based on her honesty, character and integrity, but upon how well she is able to market and trade her sexuality for physical and economic safety and security, and (b) avoid addressing the overpopulation and overconsumption scarcity induced root causes of most direct and indirect causes of conflict: from murder, rape, suicide, homeless, unemployment, courts, police, prisons, mental illness, mental institutions, because cumulatively they serve as socio-political conflict pressure cookers to socio-psychologically pressure women to (i) purchase safety and security by trading sexual favours from men, for physical and economic safety and security; (ii) conform to civilized patriarchy’s expectation that she behave as her partners brood sow and/or sexual socio-economic status symbol bimbo accessory, to breed/consume above carrying capacity, to thereby (iii) aggravate scarcity induced violence, particularly against lower class men and women.</blockquote></blockquote><br />
<div style="text-align: center;">________________________________________</div><br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">MILINT Earth Day Correspondence & TERFOR Chronology of Events: Notice’s & Correspondence related to Military Necessity Justification for Implementing Temporary Sustainable Security Coup d’état De-Industrialization:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
Copies of all documents and various acknowledged receipts available at <a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/milint-earth-day.html" target="_blank">MILINT Earth Day</a> (and <a href="http://navyjag-humint.co.nr/">navyjag-humint.co.nr</a>).<br />
<br />
<b>03 May: MILINT Earth Day Petition to White House (<a href="http://wh.gov/zjyC">wh.gov/zjyC</a>)</b>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><b>Avoid a Coup d’état, by implementing Sustainable Security Relocalization, De-Industrialization and Primitivization</b>.<br />
<br />
We demand Sustainable Security Relocalization, Decentralization, De-Industrialization and Primitivization policies, by 22 April 2014 - 09:11 GMT; & turning off all coal, nuclear & fossil fuel sources to the National Grid on 22 April 2015.<br />
<br />
If we are too few or ignored; we call on the US Military to participate in worldwide simultaneous temporary Coup d'état's; to enact Sustainable Security Constitutions (a ‘SusSec Licence to Vote’ policy).<br />
<br />
If we fail, we confront the extermination of humanity, by 2100, due to runaway feedback confluence of ecological tipping points.<br />
<br />
Our failure to act by 2014/15; will aggravate the runaway feedback confluence, rendering it impossible & futile to act later.<br />
<br />
"We've got to act now.” – Gen. Wesley Clark, NATO '96-99</blockquote><br />
<b>04 May: USA: Joint Chiefs of Staff: General Dempsey & WH. Pres. Obama</b>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>General Martin Dempsey: Chairman: Joint Chiefs of Staff; c/o: Colonel Mark Lee USAEC; U.S. Army Environmental Command and President Barak Obama, c/o: Ms. Virginia Palmer, Charge D'Affaires USA Embassy, c/o: Dir Nat. Intel: James Clapper: JCS Dempsey & WH Obama MILINT Necessity of Coup d'etat to implement Sustainable Security Policies.</blockquote><br />
<b>05 May: Russia: Russian Army: Gen. Shoygu & President Putin</b>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>President Putin and Sergey Kuzhugetovich Shoygu, General of the Russian Army; CC & c/o: Commanders of: Land Forces; Air Force; Navy; Strategic Missile Forces; Air and Space Defense; Airborne Troops; W. Military Dist. S. Military Dist.; E. Military Dist.; N. Fleet; Pacific Fleet; Baltic Fleet; Black Sea Fleet: Pres Putin & Gen Shoygu: MILINT Necessity of Coup d'etat to implement Sustainable Security Policies.</blockquote><br />
<b>05 May: Help from FBI-Miami</b>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Correspondence with FBI-Miami who responded to RE: JCS Dempsey & WH Obama: MILINT Necessity of Coup d'etat to implement Sustainable Security Policies; with “How can the FBI help you?”</blockquote><br />
<b>06 May: United Kingdom: Gen. Richards & PM Cameron</b>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Gen. Sir David Richards, Chief of the Defence Staff; Gen Nicholas Houghton: VC of Defence; Adm George Zamebellas: Chief Navy; Gen Peter Wall: Chief Gen. Staff; Marshall Stephen Dalton: Air Chief; Gen Richard Barrons: Joint Forces Command; Prime Minister David Cameron; c/o: Secretary of Def: Philip Hammond; Min Armed Forces: Andrew Robathan; Sec State: Defense Spokesman: Lord Astor of Hever; Secretary of Energy & Climate Change: Edward Davey. PM Cameron & Gen D.Richards: MILINT Necessity of Coup d'etat to implement Sustainable Security Policies</blockquote><br />
<b>07 May: Correspondence: UKIP: MEP: Roger Helmer</b>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Correspondence with UKIP MEP Roger Helmer: Primitive Feminist's MILINT Earth Day Coup d'etat Correspondence with UKIP Climate Change Skeptic MEP: Roger Helmer Re: 1. Obsessive: “excessive in degree or nature”; 2. Realistic view of the likely impact of my actions.</blockquote><br />
<b>08 May: News: Prince Charles: Urgency of Climate Change Action</b>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Speaking at a conference for scientists at St James’ Palace in London, which included Owen Paterson, the Conservative Secretary of State for the Environment, Ed Davey, the Lib Dem secretary of state for energy and climate (both of whom received the MILINT Earth Day Notices on 06 May) and Lord Stern</blockquote><br />
<b>09 May: NATO: Mil. Comm: Bartels & Sec. Gen. Rasmussen</b>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><b>NATO Member Chief of Defence</b>: AL: Maj. Gen. Xhemal Gjunkshi; BE: Maj. Gen. Eddy Testelmans; BG: Gen. Simeon Simeonov; CA: Gen. Thomas Lawson; HR: Gen. Drago Lovric; CZ: Lt. Gen. Petr Pavel; DK: Gen. Peter Bartram; EE: Maj. Gen. Riho Terras; FR: Gen. Bertrand Ract-Madoux; DE: Gen. Volker Wieker; GR: Gen. Michail Kostarakos; HU: Gen. Tibor Benko; IS: R.Adm. Georg Larusson; IT: Gen. Biagio Abrate; LV: Brig. Gen. Juris Zeibarts; LT: Lt. Gen. Arvydas Pocius; LU: Col. Mario Daubenfield; NL: Gen. Tom Middendorp; NO: Gen. Harald Sunde; PL: Gen. Mieczyslaw Cieniuch; PT: Gen. Luis Pinto; RO: Lt. Gen. Stefan Danila; SK: Gen. Peter Vojtek; SI: Brig. Dobran Bozic; Gen. Fernando Garcia Sanchez; TK: Gen. Necdet Ozel; UK: Gen. David Richards; JCS: Gen. Martin Dempsey; c/o & via: NATO Military Committee: Knud Bartels.<br />
<br />
<b>NATO Member Commander in Chief</b>: AL: Pres. Bujar Nishani; BE: PM: Elio Di Rupo; BG: Pres. Rosen Plevneliev; CA: PM. Stephen Harper; HR: Pres. Ivo Josipovic; CZ: Pres. Milos Zeman; DK: Queen Margrethe; EE: PM: Andrus Ansip; FR: Pres. Francois Hollande; DE: Chanc. Angela Merkel; GR: Pres. Karolos Papoulias; HU: Pres. Janos Ader; IS: Pres: Olafur Ragnar Grimsson; IT: Pres. Giorgio Napolitano; LV: Andris Berzins; LT: Pres. Dalia Grybauskaite; LU: PM: Jean-Claude Juncker; NL: King Willem-Alexander; NO: King Harald V; PL: Pres. Bronislaw Komorowski; PT: Pres. Anibal Cavaco Silva; RO: Pres. Traian Basescu; SK: Pres. Ivan Gasparovic; SI: Pres. Borut Pahor; ES: King Juan Carlos I; TR: Pres. Abdullah Gul; UK: Queen Elizabeth II; US: President Barack Obama; c/o: NATO Sec. Gen. Andres Foch Rasmussen.</blockquote><br />
<b>10 May: Climate Change Global Military Advisory Council</b>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Copies of NATO MILINT Necessity of Coup d'etat to implement Sustainable Security Policies, sent to: Global Military Advisory Council on Climate Change (GMACCC): RNLMC Kees Homan; BIPSS: Maj.Gen. ANM Muniruzzaman; Maj. Piet Wit; Lt General Bala Nanda Sharma.</blockquote><br />
<b>14 May: United Nations visit to MILINT Earth Day</b>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Repeated visits by United Nation Official to Milint Earth Day website.</blockquote><br />
<b>14 May: News: Pentagon Legal Coup d’etat Preparations</b>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Legal Preparations for MILINT Necessity of Sustainable Security Coup d'etat to protect Constitution from Eco-Illiterate Voters & Politicians<br />
<br />
A defense official who declined to be named takes a different view of the rule, claiming, “The authorization has been around over 100 years; it’s not a new authority. It’s been there but it hasn’t been exercised. This is a carryover of domestic policy.” ... Nevertheless, he says, “every person in the military swears an oath of allegiance to the Constitution of the United States to defend that Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.”</blockquote><br />
<b>15 May: DECC: Min. Climate Change: Gregory Barker</b>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Correspondence with DECC: Dept Energy & Climate Change & Minister of State for Climate Change: Rt. Hon. Gregory Barker Primitive Feminist's MILINT Earth Day Coup d'état Correspondence with DECC: Minister of State for Climate Change. PS: Pentagon make Legal Preparations for MILINT Necessity of Coup d'etat to implement Sustainable Security Policies; and protect Constitution from Eco-Illiterate Voters and Politicians.</blockquote><br />
<b>16 May: Pres. Obama: ‘Mutant’s Climate Change Suicide’ Tweet</b>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Pres Obama tweets about the styd by Australian John Cook, an expert in climate change communication: "Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made and dangerous. Read more: <a href="http://ofa.bo/gJsdFp">http://OFA.BO/gJsdFp</a>"<br />
<br />
Mutant Message Down Under is about an American woman who goes on a 4 month walkabout through the Outback, with nomadic Aboriginals, who call themselves the "Real People". She learns a new ecologically centred way of life, their methods of healing, decision to commit tribal suicide, and the wisdom of their 50,000-year-old culture; experiencing a dramatic personal transformation.</blockquote><br />
<b>22 May 2013: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Woolwich_attack" target="_blank">Woolwich Murder of Drummer Lee Rigby</a></b>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>At 14:20 hrs on the afternoon of 22 May 2013, Lee Rigby, a British Army soldier and a Drummer of the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers, was killed by two attackers – allegedly Michael Olumide Adebolajo, age 28, and Michael Oluwatobi Adebowale, age 22 – in Wellington Street, near the Royal Artillery Barracks in Woolwich, south-east London.<br />
<br />
Rigby was off duty and walking along Wellington Street when the attack occurred. The two men ran him down with a car, then used knives and a cleaver to stab and hack him to death. The men then dragged Rigby's body onto the road. The two attackers, who remained at the scene until police arrived, told passers-by that they had killed a soldier to avenge the killing of Muslims by the British military. Armed police arrived at the scene 14 minutes after initial emergency calls, shot both the assailants, apprehended them, and took them to separate hospitals. Both men are British of Nigerian descent who were raised as Christians and converted to Islam.<br />
<br />
Michael Olumide Adebolajo made the following statement to a bystander about his justification for the attack, which was captured on video by the same bystander at the scene:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>"The only reason we have killed this man today is because Muslims are dying daily by British soldiers, and this British soldier is one, is a eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. By Allah, we swear by the Almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you until you leave us alone. So what if we want to live by the Sharia in Muslim lands. Why does that mean you must follow us and chase us and call us extremists and kill us? Rather you lot are extreme. You are the ones. When you drop a bomb, do you think it hits one person or rather your bomb wipes out a whole family. This is the reality. By Allah, if I saw your mother today with a buggy I would help her up the stairs. This is my nature. But we are forced by the Qur'an in Sura at-Tawba [Chapter 9 of the Qur'an], through many, many ayah [verses] throughout the Qur'an that [say] we must fight them as they fight us, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. I apologise that women had to witness this today, but in our land our women have to see the same. You people will never be safe. Remove your governments. They don't care about you. Do you think David Cameron is gonna get caught in the street when we start busting our guns? Do you think the politicians are going to die? No it's going to be the average guy, like you, and your children. So get rid of them. Tell them to bring our troops back so we can..., so you can all live in peace. Leave our lands and you will live in peace. That's all I have to say. Allah's peace and blessings be upon Muhammad, as-salamu alaykum." </blockquote><br />
<i><b>Michael Olumide Adebolajo Provides 2 Reasons for Killing Rigby:</b></i><br />
<br />
1. British Soldiers are Killing Muslims in Muslim lands<br />
2. The Koran commands Muslims to fight those who make mischief in Muslim lands.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“What’s the penalty for making mischief in a Muslim land? If it is something serious, the penalty is death. Who was Lee Rigby? He was a machine gunner in the British Army. He had a tour in Afghanistan and more recently he was recruiting more soldiers to go to places like Afghanistan. By the way bringing a Non-Muslim military into a Muslim land to interfere in Muslim affairs is the most extreme form of mischief making. According to Islam, the penalty is death. The Koran even tells Muslims how to kill in order to spread fear. In Sura 8:12 it says “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.” Don't just kill them, mutilate them. But -- according to Cameron -- Rigby's beheading and mutilation had nothing to do with the Islam. How could it be any simpler. There are only two ingredients in this recipe for terror. Take one cup of the Koran and add one spoon of mischief making and stir together and wait for the attack. So Mayor Johnson, saying that the teachings of Islam and British soldiers fighting in Afghanistan had nothing to do with the massacre of Lee Rigby is like saying that flower and sugar had nothing to do with the biscuits you were probably munching on for your afternoon tea, while Rigby was being slaughtered like an animal in the city that elected you mayor. <br />
<br />
[..] Mr. Cameron instead of using your position to promote open discussion about the ideology of Islam [and the West's Corporate Pro-Growth Overconsumption Oil-War Agenda for Britain’s mischief making in Muslim lands] you use it to tell millions of people that anyone who obeys the Koran's clear commands to kill has somehow betrayed the religion that ordered him to kill [those who make mischief in Muslim lands]. There's definitely a betrayal here Prime Minister Cameron, but its not a betrayal of Islam.” - <i><b><a href="http://youtu.be/SH7Ty8iPh5c" target="_blank">Jihad Returns to London: A Reply to David Cameron </a></b></i></blockquote></blockquote><br />
<b>23 May 2013: MILINT Earth Day Complaint to MI5: Corporate Pro-Growth Agenda a Threat to Global Security: i.e. an aggravation of the Climate Change Scarcity-Conflict Death Spiral on Steroids National Security Threat</b>.<br />
<br />
<blockquote><b>Complaint to MI5: Bribery & Threat to National Security</b>: Corporate Pro-Growth Agenda Conspiracy to Profit from bribing the public to engage in Unsustainable Scarcity-Conflict Procreation, Consumption and Production behaviour; by ignoring the role of GDP/economic growth and energy consumption’s aggravation of the Climate Change Scarcity-Conflict Death Spiral on Steroids National Security Threat. (<a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/13-05-20_uk-mi5_bribery-national-security-threat.pdf" target="_blank">Complaint PDF</a>) (<a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/13-05-20_uk-mi5_affidavit-lara-johnstone.pdf" target="_blank">Affid PDF</a>)<br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-LmZVJUJZDhY/UaLqVoON-HI/AAAAAAAAh_Q/XhgTeHbX_lc/s1600/13-05-23_MI5_ProGrowthCorpAgenda_ThreatNationalSecurity.PNG"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9C_gBaT38Ps/UaLp1YJZA2I/AAAAAAAAh_E/b3AKduzCLZU/s1600/13-05-23_MI5_ProGrowthCorpAgenda_CorpThreatNationalSecurity_600x621.PNG" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 621px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
<br />
<b>Conclusion</b>: The longer the propagandists, legislators and profiteers of the Pro-Growth Agenda, avoid being held accountable for how their Pro-Growth agenda of Unsustainable Scarcity-Conflict Procreation, Consumption and Production, GDP/economic growth and industrialized energy consumption is massively aggravating the Climate Change Scarcity-Conflict Death Spiral on Steroids National Security Threat; the greater the military necessity urgency and justifications for implementing Temporary De-Industrialization and Sustainable Security Constitution Coup d’etat’s.<br />
<br />
<b>Bribery & Threat to National Security Charges against</b>: Roland Rudd: Chair: Business for New Europe; Dame Helen Alexander: Chair: UBM; Sir Win Bischoff: Chair: Lloyds Banking Group; Sir Richard Branson: Founder: Virgin Group; Sir Roger Carr: Chair: Centrica; Sir Andrew Cahn: Vice-Chair: Nomura; David Cruickshank: Chair: Deloitte LLP; Lord Davies of Abersoch: Vice-Chair: Corsair Capital; Guy Dawson: Dir: ASA International; Lord Kerr of Kinlochard: Dep.Chair: Scottish Power; Sir Adrian Montague: Chair: 3i; Nicolas Petrovic: CEO: Eurostar; Sir Michael Rake: Chair: BT; Anthony Salz: Vice-Chair: Rothschild; Sir Nicholas Scheele: Chair: Key Safety Systems Inc; Sir Nigel Sheinwald: Dir: Shell; Sir Martin Sorr elL: CEO: WPP; Malcolm Sweeting: Snr.Partner: Clifford Chance; Bill Winters: CEO Renshaw Bay. Corporate Media: Independent: Editor: Chris Blackhurst & Grp Mng Ed: Doug Wills: Independent Print Ltd, 2 Derry Street, London W8 5HF. Re: <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/letters/letters-the-benefit-of-european-union-membership-outweighs-the-cost-8622571.html" target="_blank">Letters: The benefit of European Union membership outweighs the cost</a>. DailyMail: Editor: Paul Dacre, Mng Dir: Guy Zitter: Northcliffe House, 2 Derry Street, London, W8 5TT: Re: <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2327401/Every-family-3-500-worse-Britain-left-EU-business-chiefs-warn.html" target="_blank">Every family would be up £3,500 worse off if Britain left the EU, business chiefs warn</a>. Telegraph: Editor: Andrew Gilligan: 111 Buckingham Palace Road, London, SW1W 0DT: Re: <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10067402/Economic-case-to-stay-in-EU-is-overwhelming-say-business-leaders.html" target="_blank">'Economic case to stay in EU is overwhelming', say business leaders</a>.</blockquote><br />
<b>25 May 2013: Cameron announces establishment of Tackling Extremism and Radicalisation Task Force (TERFOR)</b><br />
<br />
<blockquote>EXCLUSIVE: 'I will gag the hate clerics': Cameron to launch new terror task force to bring an end to religious extremism<br />
<br />
[..] Government insiders say Mr Cameron’s new TERFOR group is intended to ‘disrupt’ the activities of extremist clerics wherever they preach their ‘hateful message’.<br />
<br />
One said: ‘We are looking at the range of powers and current methods of dealing with extremism at its root, as opposed to just tackling criminal violent extremism. <br />
<br />
‘And we will look at ways of disrupting individuals who may be influential in fostering extremism.<br />
<br />
‘We cannot allow a situation to continue where extremist clerics go around this country inciting young people to commit terrorist acts.</blockquote><br />
<b>Prime Minister Cameron’s Support for -- Mischief Making Resource theft colonization of Muslim lands, Corporate Multiculti aggravation of Ethnic-Conflict Colonization of European lands – Lord$-of-Ethnic-Conflict/War-Profiteer$ Terrorism</b>: <br />
<br />
In 2010, when Prime Minister Cameron was asked which living person he most admires, the Tory leader said it was Nelson Mandela, 'the freedom fighter who led South Africa’s liberation struggle'. According to Cameron:<br />
<br />
Muslims who obey the Koran and fight back against British Forces making mischief in their Muslim lands are ‘<i><b>terrorists</b></i>’!<br />
<br />
» Violent Resistance to ProGrowth Multiculti Corporatism Mischief Making Oil Wars in Muslim Lands is ‘terrorism’!<br />
<br />
Europeans like Breivik who obey the principles of International law and fight back against <a href="http://www.soc.aau.dk/fileadmin/user_upload/kbm/VoF/%20Kurser/2011/Multiculturalism/slavoj_zizek-multiculturalism-or-the-cultural-logic-of-multinational-capitalism.pdf" target="_blank">ProGrowth Multiculti Corporate Colonialists</a> and Muslim immigrants making mischief to colonize their European lands are ‘<i><b>terrorists</b></i>’!<br />
<br />
» Violent Resistance to ProGrowth Multiculti Corporatism Colonizing Mischief Making Multiculti Ethnic Conflict Wars in European lands are terrorists!<br />
<br />
<blockquote><b><a href="http://www.soc.aau.dk/fileadmin/user_upload/kbm/VoF/%20Kurser/2011/Multiculturalism/slavoj_zizek-multiculturalism-or-the-cultural-logic-of-multinational-capitalism.pdf" target="_blank">Multiculturalism</a></b>: How, then, does the universe of Capital relate to the form of Nation State in our era of global capitalism? Perhaps, this relationship is best designated as ‘auto-colonization’: with the direct multinational functioning of Capital, we are no longer dealing with the standard opposition between metropolis and colonized countries; a global company as it were cuts its umbilical cord with its mother-nation and treats its country of origins as simply another territory to be colonized. This is what disturbs so much the patriotically oriented right-wing populists, from Le Pen to Buchanan: the fact that the new multinationals have towards the French or American local population exactly the same attitude as towards the population of Mexico, Brazil or Taiwan. Is there not a kind of poetic justice in this self-referential turn? Today’s global capitalism is thus again a kind of ‘negation of negation’, after national capitalism and its internationalist/colonialist phase. At the beginning (ideally, of course), there is capitalism within the confines of a Nation-State, with the accompanying international trade (exchange between sovereign Nation-States); what follows is the relationship of colonization in which the colonizing country subordinates and exploits (economically, politically, culturally) the colonized country; the final moment of this process is the paradox of colonization in which there are only colonies, no colonizing countries—the colonizing power is no longer a Nation-State but directly the global company. In the long term, we shall all not only wear Banana Republic shirts but also live in banana republics.<br />
<br />
And, of course, the ideal form of ideology of this global capitalism is multiculturalism, the attitude which, from a kind of empty global position, treats each local culture the way the colonizer treats colonized people—as ‘natives’ whose mores are to be carefully studied and ‘respected’. That is to say, the relationship between traditional imperialist colonialism and global capitalist self-colonization is exactly the same as the relationship between Western cultural imperialism and multiculturalism: in the same way that global capitalism involves the paradox of colonization without the colonizing Nation-State metropole, multiculturalism involves patronizing Eurocentrist distance and/or respect for local cultures without roots in one’s own particular culture. In other words, multiculturalism is a disavowed, inverted, self-referential form of racism, a ‘racism with a distance’—it ‘respects’ the Other’s identity, conceiving the Other as a self-enclosed ‘authentic’ community towards which he, the multiculturalist, maintains a distance rendered possible by his privileged universal position. <br />
<br />
Multiculturalism is a racism which empties its own position of all positive content (the multiculturalist is not a direct racist, he doesn’t oppose to the Other the particular values of his own culture), but nonetheless retains this position as the privileged empty point of universality from which one is able to appreciate (and depreciate) properly other particular cultures—the multiculturalist respect for the Other’s specificity is the very form of asserting one’s own superiority.</blockquote><br />
African National Congress Cadres who relied on the principles of International law and fought against Apartheid Forces making mischief in African lands are ‘freedom fighters’ involved in a liberation struggle!<br />
<br />
» Violent Resistance to Boer Anti-Imperialist’s Mischief Making of introducing Separatist Multiculturalism and urging urgent population control policies to avoid Resource scarcity and Ethnic Conflict; are ‘freedom fighters’! <br />
<br />
<b>Prime Minister Cameron’s ProGrowth Corporate Agenda ‘Fuck You’ to Military Intelligence Leaders who have called for American/World Citizens to ‘Walk their Talk’ of ‘Supporting the Troops’ to reduce Scarcity-Conflict threats to National Security; by massively reducing their energy consumption, by – for example - “planting victory gardens, cutting down on fuel use, saving scrap metal and old rubber, sacrifices, or maybe just examples of common sense and prudent lifestyle changes.”</b><br />
<br />
<blockquote>“A yellow ribbon on a car or truck is a wonderful message of symbolic support for our troops. I’d like to see the American people take it several steps further. If you say a yellow ribbon is the ‘talk,’ then being energy efficient is the ‘walk’. A yellow ribbon on a big, gas-guzzling SUV is a mixed message. We need to make better energy choices in our homes, businesses and transportation, as well as to support our leaders in making policies that change the way we develop and use energy. If we Americans truly embrace this idea, it is a triple win: it reduces our dependence on foreign oil, it reduces our impact on the climate and it makes our nation much more secure.” - Vice-Admiral Dennis V. McGinn, <i><b>Powering America’s Defense: Energy and the Risks to National Security</b></i>; Center for Naval Analysis, CAN Military Advisory Board</blockquote><br />
<a href="http://www.cna.org/reports/energy" target="_blank">Powering America’s Defense: Energy and the Risks to National Security</a>; Center for Naval Analysis, CAN Military Advisory Board:<br />
<blockquote>• Vice Admiral Dennis V. McGinn, USN (Ret); Former Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Warfare Requirements and Programs: <br />
• General Charles F. “Chuck” Wald, USAF (Ret.): Former Deputy Commander, Headquarters U.S. European Command (USEUCOM); Chairman, CNA Military Advisory Board<br />
• General Charles G. Boyd, USAF (Ret.): Former Deputy Commander in Chief of U.S. Forces in Europe<br />
• Lieutenant General Lawrence P. Farrell Jr., USAF (Ret.): Former Deputy Chief of Staff for Plans and Programs, Headquarters U.S. Air Force<br />
• General Paul J. Kern, USA (Ret.): Former Commanding General, U.S. Army Materiel Command<br />
• General Ronald E. Keys USAF (Ret.): Former Commander, Air Combat Command<br />
• Admiral T. Joseph Lopez, USN (Ret.): Former Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Naval Forces Europe and of Allied Forces, Southern Europe<br />
• Admiral T. Joseph Lopez, USN (Ret.): Former Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Naval Forces Europe and of Allied Forces, Southern Europe<br />
• Vice Admiral Dennis V. McGinn, USN (Ret.): Deputy Chief of Naval Operations, Warfare Requirements and Programs<br />
• Admiral John B. Nathman, USN (Ret.): Former Vice Chief of Naval Operations<br />
• Rear Admiral David R. Oliver, Jr., USN (Ret.): Former Principal Deputy to the Navy Acquisition Executive<br />
• General Gordon R. Sullivan, USA (Ret.): Former Chief of Staff, U.S. Army; Former Chairman, CNA Military Advisory Board<br />
• Vice Admiral Richard H. Truly, USN (Ret.): Former NASA Administrator, Shuttle Astronaut and the first Commander of the Naval Space Command</blockquote><br />
Vice Admiral Dennis McGinn; <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1FMeVH2AgI" target="_blank">Energy, Climate Change, and the Military: Implications for National Security</a>; Woodrow Wilson Center for Environmental Security: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>“Global climate change will pose serious threats to water supplies and agricultural production, leading to mass migration in some cases. At the same time we will see an increasing demand for a dwindling supply of fossil fuels. These factors mean and intense competition for key and vital resources, around the globe and that leads to conflict. <br />
<br />
“This report is different to many other reports, involving military leaders. That is because in it, we make a direct appeal to the American people. We talk in this report about the amazing sacrifices the American people made during World War II, planting victory gardens, cutting down on fuel use, saving scrap metal and old rubber, sacrifices, or maybe just examples of common sense and prudent lifestyle changes. Whatever you call them, the steps taken by the American people then, shortened the war and saved lives. <br />
<br />
And I believe the same can be said today about these challenges of energy security and climate security. There are individual steps that every American can take. Using less energy. Being more efficient with the energy that we do use. Supporting new policies to help our country take a new energy path. These are the steps that can help us avoid, or shorten wars in the future. Those wars over competition for vital resources. These are steps that can save lives. They may cost money yes, but if we don't spend the money now, we will still pay, and we will pay much more later. In fact, we'll pay in American lives lost. <br />
<br />
American civilians played an important role in World War II because they understood the stakes and because they were asked to do so. General Wald made the stakes clear, and our report makes the stakes clear. Our current energy posture poses a significant and urgent threat to our national security, militarily, economically and diplomatically. <br />
<br />
Hopefully more Americans will understand these stakes, and that these consequences will affect them. Hopefully more Americans will hear the very direct request from our Commander in Chief and from this small group of a dozen retired Admirals and Generals. <br />
<br />
The American people, all of us, through our energy choices can contribute directly to the security of our nation. It is a triple win. It makes us energy independent. It reduces our effect on the environment, and it makes our nation very much more secure.” </blockquote><br />
James Woolsey, Former CIA Director; <a href="http://youtu.be/NfobHy0a9CU" target="_blank">Climate Change and National Security</a>: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>“I was testifying before a House Committee a few months ago and one of the members was very sceptical of climate change and was arguing with me, because I presented some of the reasons why I thought climate change was a serious problem, and I finally said "Congressman look, set aside climate change, do you realize that seven of the nine things that I've suggested will help us be allot more resilient against terrorism or oil cut-offs." And he said, "Oh if you are doing them for that reason, then its fine."”</blockquote><br />
James Woolsey (19 October 2009): <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNDiQUBjR1o" target="_blank">How your Gas Money Funds Terrorism</a>, American Jewish Committee, Washington DC.: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>“The author of the fine book The Looming Tower, about Al'Qaeda and 9/11, Laurence Wright, writes for the New Yorker, has a fascinating sentence in the Looming Tower. He says that with a little over 1% of the worlds Muslims, Saudi's control about 90% of the worlds Islamic Institutions. Now what does that mean to the rest of us? Wahaabi Islam, the religion of Saudi Arabia, if you read the Imam's Fatwa's, rather than what they say to us, the Fatwa's are somewhere between murderous and genocidal with respect to their discussion of Shiite Muslims, Jews, homosexuals and apostates. They are massively oppressive of women in many, many ways. They are focussed on the establishment of a worldwide Caliphate, a theocratic dictatorship. That is essentially Al'Qaeda's doctrine. There is no substantive difference between Al'Qaeda and the Wahaabi's of Saudi Arabia want to take us. The question is 'Who's in charge'? So its somewhat like the feud between the Trotskyites and the Stalinists in the 1920's and 30's. Because the reach of Wahaabi Madrassas is so great, you have all over Pakistan, as well as the West Bank and in allot of other parts of the world, little boys being taught hatred essentially. Now that produces a situation in which by shelling out essentially a billion dollars a day at seventy dollars a barrel of oil, for imported oil, and since allot of that money goes to the Middle East, you and I shouldn't have any question about who is paying for the other side of this long war that we are in. If you want to know who is paying for those Madrassas in Pakistan or the West Bank to teach those little boys to hate, just next time you go to a filling station, before you get out to charge your gasoline and credit card, turn the rear-view mirror just a few inches, so you are looking into your own eyes. Now you know who is paying for those little boys to be taught to hate. The situation we have with the Wahaabi's of Saudi Arabia is not too far from what would be the case if Ferdinand and Isabella and Torquemada running the Spanish Inquisition were still around in Spain and Spain drilled down and found 25% of the worlds oil under Spain. Ferdinand and Isabella turn to Torquemada and they say "We know that you like to pick the pope and pick the head of the Lutherans and the Evangelicals and the President of Notre Dame and that’s all fine with us, here's six, seven, eight billion dollars a year, just go to it. That’s the kind of problem the world, would hypothetically have if Torquemada and the Inquisition were still around and that’s the kind of problem we've got with the Wahaabi's of Saudi Arabia.”</blockquote><br />
<b>Conclusion</b>:<br />
<br />
<b>Are UK Muslim and British Nationalist Leaders capable of:</b><br />
<br />
[1] Confronting the reality that the Lord$ of War profit from the ethnic/religious/etc conflict resulting from African/Islamic/etc Breeding War civilized patriarchs incapacity or refusal to breed below carrying capacity & Western/etc Consumption War civilized patriarchs incapacity or refusal to consume below carrying capacity; and<br />
<br />
[2] Giving Prime Minister David Cameron and his ProGrowth Corporate Lord$ of War Profiteer$ a big ‘Fuck You’ by listening to Military Intelligence Leaders who have called for American/World Citizens to ‘Walk their Talk’ of ‘Supporting the Troops’ to reduce Scarcity-Conflict threats to National Security; by personally reducing your (i) energy consumption, by “planting victory gardens, cutting down on fuel use, saving scrap metal and old rubber, sacrifices, or maybe just examples of common sense and prudent lifestyle changes”; (ii) procreation factor; by breeding one or less than one child per family; and<br />
<br />
[3] Doing what no Corporate ProGrowth Breeding War Politician Terrorist including Nelson Mandela, or those Sextremist Femen Feminists, ever had the honour or integrity to do: launching Uncivilized Primitivist cultural campaigns – including collaborating with British or NATO Military Intelligence Leaders – to educate citizens to ‘Walk their Talk’ of ‘Supporting their British / Muslim / European / African / Asian / American Troops’ to reduce Scarcity-Conflict threats to National and Global Security; and encourage gender equality by breeding and consuming below carrying capacity?<br />
<br />
Dated at George, South Africa, Pale Blue Dot: 27 May 2013<br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [<a href="http://tygae.weebly.com/milint-earth-day.html">TYGAE MILINT Earth Day</a>]</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327922598170048610" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JSpbgoKp8LA/SfCVX96zuGI/AAAAAAAAEIs/qqvoPLfHrLA/s400/400_BlackLine.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 7px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 620px;" />Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-21176361480479178602013-05-26T18:43:00.000+03:002013-05-26T18:47:51.615+03:00UK Media Pretend to Discover the Fraud of Political Psychiatry<div align="justify"><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">British Media Pretend to Discover the Fraud of Political Psychiatry</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;"><br />
"There is no such thing as mental illness. Psychiatric diagnosis of 'mental disorders' is just a way of stigmatizing behaviour that society does not want to live with. Psychiatry thrives on coercion and is replacing religion as a form of social control." - Dr. Thomas Szasz</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">The Times | Daily Mail | 23 May 2013</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-gceYJCdBQx0/UaIr6ONuvfI/AAAAAAAAh9Q/8TCQvFjA8tE/s1600/PsyFraud_Cracked-JamesDavies_580x616.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-xuM_uC3Eezs/UaIryni1aEI/AAAAAAAAh9E/K6DA_kEK8BM/s1600/PsyFraud_Cracked-JamesDavies_375x398.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 398px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 375px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote><b>The Times: Why Britain is hooked on happy pills</b>: <br />
<br />
A controversial new book claims psychiatrists are overdiagnosing mental disorders. Prozac-taking Robert Crampton meets its author, James Davies<br />
<br />
Two important books on psychiatry will be published later this month. One is the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5, to use the shorthand). DSM-5 is produced by the American Psychiatric Association. First published in 1952, by way of an attempt to standardise previously inconsistent diagnoses of various conditions, the DSM has since become the bible of the psychiatric profession across the world.<br />
<br />
The other book is called <i>Cracked</i>. If, in the world of psychiatry, the DSM is <i>Holy Scripture</i>. <i>Cracked</i> is set to become a heretical test.</blockquote><a name='more'></a><div align="center"><a href="http://fleur-de-lis.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-__b6nnsrEpQ/UQqve4pxolI/AAAAAAAAg-U/74EyJkDE6MA/s1600/IdleNoMore-IndigenousRights_598x126.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 119px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 598px;" /></a></div><br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">DailyMail: Why it's truly bonkers to believe in shrinks</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Cracked: Why Psychiatry is doing more harm than good, by James Davies</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Roger Lewis | Daily Mail | 23 May 2013</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-TEoo5Eo5EG8/UaIsMfmABFI/AAAAAAAAh9c/T4D5ltzOsXI/s1600/PsyFraud_JackNichols_479x438.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-TEoo5Eo5EG8/UaIsMfmABFI/AAAAAAAAh9c/T4D5ltzOsXI/s1600/PsyFraud_JackNichols_479x438.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 438px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 479px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote>Psychiatrists - the shrinks, trick-cyclists, Viennese witch-doctors - have always been either figures of fun or feared.<br />
<br />
If it wasn’t Freud getting you to talk dirty about your mother, or the men-in-white-coats in the Soviet Union locking people away for thinking the wrong thoughts, then it was Peter Sellers in a Richard III wig, more mad than any of his patients, in <i>What’s New Pussycat?</i> or Jack Nicholson being tortured in <i>One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest</i>.<br />
<br />
The traditional therapies on offer were barbaric - lobotomies, electro-convulsive seizures - and needless to say never did anyone any good. Nevertheless, psychiatry continues to be the great growth industry of our times - 450 million people worldwide ‘have a mental health problem’ - despite the fact that it has ‘the poorest curative success’.<br />
<br />
The conclusion (and the argument of this essential book) is obvious: psychiatry is basically bogus - and damaging. There is no solid scientific justification for any of its activities - as the only ‘identifiable biological diseases’ involving an observable malfunction of the brain are epilepsy, Alzheimer’s, Huntington’s chorea, strokes and cerebral tumours.<br />
<br />
The ‘chemical imbalance’ theories have been debunked, and as James Davies remarks, ‘no biological markers have been identified’ for the thousands of behavioural ‘disorders’ that now prevail.</blockquote><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ZpptJixjc6A/UaIsTSvpGCI/AAAAAAAAh9o/_UamKF8oGKU/s1600/PsyFraud_Prozac_246x475.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ZpptJixjc6A/UaIsTSvpGCI/AAAAAAAAh9o/_UamKF8oGKU/s1600/PsyFraud_Prozac_246x475.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 475px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 246px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote>This hasn’t stopped the psychiatric experts from cooking up ailments, however. Their bible, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, gets thicker with each new edition. Despite there being ‘no scientific evidence’ for any of this, people are led to believe they have ‘a problem in their brain’ if they drink too much coffee (‘caffeine-related disorders’), stutter or swear (‘language disorders’), are shy or reserved (‘social phobias’), suffer period pains, are too fat or too thin, feel irritable, sexy, unsexy, sleepless, tired, or experience grief for more than two weeks after the death of a loved one. By these means, 26.2 per cent of all American adults suffer from a disorder of some sort, requiring that it be ‘pharmacologically treated’.<br />
<br />
Though psychiatric research is by all accounts ‘a hodgepodge, scattered, inconsistent and ambiguous’, one thing has definitely emerged - that anti-depressants don’t work.<br />
<br />
Extensive trials have shown that placebos induce as much of a degree of uplift as Prozac, Seroxet or any of the other wonder drugs, which simply make patients feel numb, glassy and emotionally disengaged.<br />
<br />
As Davies says: ‘Numbing things isn’t curing things or even, in the long run, helping things.’ The drugs are essentially sedatives, and people are plunged into such a fog ‘they can no longer feel depressed or anything else’.<br />
<br />
The biggest horror is the dosing of children with Ritalin, ‘which is as powerful as cocaine’. These days, any child who’s a bit naughty, inattentive, cheeky, quick or slow, (i.e. any child who is childish) is diagnosed as suffering from Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), or is autistic or has Asperger’s Syndrome. If paediatricians and psychiatrists are to be believed, autism has increased 20 times in 15 years, and as a consequence 5.29 per cent of the global child population is on tablets.<br />
<br />
Few children actually warrant the diagnosis - as Davies says, there is now an ‘out-of-control medicalisation of normality’. So who are the ultimate villains of the piece? Answer: the pharmaceutical companies, which make over £12.5 billion each year from the sale of happy pills. Sane people are told they are insane because it is big business.</blockquote><br />
<div align="center"><a href="http://fleur-de-lis.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-i9k2hlqMJkI/UaIseOeAyhI/AAAAAAAAh90/f2ecKzjEPF0/s1600/PsyFraud_SciEvidence_480x336.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 336px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 480px;" /></a></div><br />
<blockquote>The drug companies pay eminent professors, university officials and teaching hospital chairmen millions ‘in personal income’ to concoct more and more abnormalities so that more and more pills can be dished out by GPs and specialists. <br />
<br />
They pocket consultancy fees to attend conferences, give marketing lectures and endorse useless tablets. They are bribed, in essence, not to openly criticise the pharmaceutical industry. Davies (courageously) names names.<br />
<br />
What this adds up to is a scandal that is bigger and more widespread than thalidomide. If people are ‘not getting any clinically meaningful benefit’ from the pills, then it is because depression, for instance, is simply to be sad or disappointed, unlucky in love, bored or bereaved, full of remorse, jealousy and low morale.<br />
<br />
It is not a condition or a deviation - it is normal. Feeling rotten and anxious, being up and down, or even despairing, are all part of the ordinary problems of living - of being human and not a robot or a zombie.<br />
<br />
When Davies confronted Professor Sue Bailey, head of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, she was frighteningly honest and virtually chucked in the towel: ‘When you go into a profession where you want to help people, and you don’t have the tools to help them, the temptation is to medicalise them.’<br />
<br />
Psychiatry is based upon and feeds the delusion that we have a fundamental in-built right to be continuously happy. Grasp this, stop fretting that you are not full of beans, start enjoying being grumpy, laugh at life, admit that everyone is ill-adjusted to something or other, and, well, you may very well soon end up being me. Twenty stone of sardonic Welsh idiot.<br />
<br />
There - hasn’t the mental image of that made you feel better already?<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [<a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/books/article-2329677/Why-truly-bonkers-believe-shrinks-CRACKED-WHY-PSYCHIATRY-IS-DOING-MORE-HARM-THAN-GOOD-BY-JAMES-DAVIES.html">Daily Mail</a> :: <a href="http://www.cchrint.org/2013/05/24/why-its-truly-bonkers-to-believe-in-shrinks/">CCHRINT</a> :: <a href="http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/magazine/article3752692.ece">The Times</a> :: <a href="http://www.facebook.com/Habeus.Mentem?fref=ts">Habeus Mentem</a>]</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<div align="center"><a href="http://www.facebook.com/Habeus.Mentem?fref=ts"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-I-5F6gYfZlE/UaIs13ckuwI/AAAAAAAAh-A/dG05IVjQe1k/s1600/Habeus_600x222.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 222px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327922598170048610" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JSpbgoKp8LA/SfCVX96zuGI/AAAAAAAAEIs/qqvoPLfHrLA/s400/400_BlackLine.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 7px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 620px;" />Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-12264497486829950932013-05-13T00:20:00.001+03:002013-05-13T00:20:32.563+03:00UNECE-ACCC/C/2013/82: ‘Scarcity & Conflict’ Censorship-Population-Environment-Terrorism Connection <div align="justify"><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">UNECE-ACCC/C/2013/82: ‘Scarcity & Conflict’ Censorship-Population-Environment-Terrorism Connection</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">The Anarcho-Primitivism / Æquilibriæx CommonSism Sustainable Security (I=PAT) worldview argues that reducing conflict (I: Impact), requires reducing procreation (P: Population) and consumption (A: Affluence) to below carrying capacity levels by returning to a low/no tech sustainable agrarian society.</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Andrea Muhrrteyn | EcoFeminist v Breivik | 12 May 2013</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-WAelAsuhgXM/UY_3vdtzurI/AAAAAAAAhzU/jaI3Xkwd6JQ/s1600/unece_aarhus_rh-norway_795x450.PNG"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/--ytLhzLzTbc/UY_3jWxLF8I/AAAAAAAAhzI/NJtjeWQHZYg/s1600/unece_aarhus_mediacensorship_375x295.PNG" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 295px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 375px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote><span style="font-size: 95%;">On 11 March 2013, Communicant filed a Communication to the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee, regarding the alleged Non-Compliance by Kingdom of Norway with the obligations under the Aarhus Convention: Denial of Request for Access to Environmental Information from (a) Newspaper Editors, and (b) Bar Association; by Norwegian Environment Appeals Committee and Parliamentary Ombudsman.<br />
<br />
The Environmental Information denied to Communicant, by Norwegian Newspaper Editors, the Environmental Appeals Board and Parliamentary Ombudsman, related to the decision-making to censor the Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism-Connection during the Breivik trial: how Mainstream Access-to-Discourse Editors censorship of non-violent scarcity-conflict political grievances and problem solving activism facilitate a scarcity-conflict pressure cooker socio-political reality for their “If it Bleads, It Leads” corporate propaganda profits from the exploding terror of the socio-political scarcity-conflict pressure cooker. <br />
<br />
The Environmental Information denied to Communicant, by Norwegian Bar Association, the Environmental Appeals Board and Parliamentary Ombudsman, related to the Bar Association’s refusal to justify their non-Environmental Complaints policy. <br />
<br />
On 26 April 2013, the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee ruled that Communicants complaint was “manifestly unreasonable”, without providing any written reasons justifying their ruling of “manifestly unreasonable”. <br />
</span></blockquote><a name='more'></a><div align="center"><a href="http://fleur-de-lis.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-__b6nnsrEpQ/UQqve4pxolI/AAAAAAAAg-U/74EyJkDE6MA/s1600/IdleNoMore-IndigenousRights_598x126.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 119px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 598px;" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Request for Written Reasons: Re: Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee 26 April 2013 “manifestly unreasonable” ruling concerning compliance by Norway with provisions of the Convention in connection to ‘Scarcity & Conflict’ and ‘Environmental Complaints Policy’ access to information and access to justice (ACCC/C/2013/82).</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<b>Background</b>:<br />
<br />
On 11 March 2013, Communicant filed a Communication to the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee, regarding the alleged Non-Compliance by Kingdom of Norway with the obligations under the Aarhus Convention: Denial of Request for Access to Environmental Information from (a) Newspaper Editors, and (b) Bar Association; by Norwegian Environment Appeals Committee and Parliamentary Ombudsman.<br />
<br />
The Environmental Information denied to Communicant, by Norwegian Newspaper Editors, the Environmental Appeals Board and Parliamentary Ombudsman, related to the decision-making to censor the Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism-Connection during the Breivik trial: how Mainstream Access-to-Discourse Editors censorship of non-violent scarcity-conflict political grievances and problem solving activism facilitate a scarcity-conflict pressure cooker socio-political reality for their “If it Bleads, It Leads” corporate propaganda profits from the exploding terror of the socio-political scarcity-conflict pressure cooker. [See <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/unece-aarhus-comp-comm.html">ACCC: Johnstone v. Norway</a>]<br />
<br />
The Environmental Information denied to Communicant, by Norwegian Bar Association, the Environmental Appeals Board and Parliamentary Ombudsman, related to the Bar Association’s refusal to justify their non-Environmental Complaints policy. [See <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/unece-aarhus-comp-comm.html">ACCC: Johnstone v. Norway</a>]<br />
<br />
The UNECE <b><a href="http://www.unece.org/env/pp/introduction.html"><i>Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters</i></a></b> was adopted on 25th June 1998 in the Danish city of Aarhus at the Fourth Ministerial Conference in the 'Environment for Europe' process. The Convention: (A) Links environmental rights and human rights; (B) Acknowledges that we owe an obligation to future generations; (C) Establishes that sustainable development can be achieved only through the involvement of all stakeholders; (D) Links government accountability and environmental protection; (E) Focuses on interactions between the public and public authorities in a democratic context. It is not only an environmental agreement, it is also a Convention about government accountability, transparency and responsiveness. The Aarhus Convention grants the public rights and imposes on Parties and public authorities obligations regarding access to information and public participation and access to justice.<br />
<br />
The Convention provides for:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>• the right of everyone to receive environmental information that is held by public authorities ("access to environmental information"). This can include information on the state of the environment, but also on policies or measures taken, or on the state of human health and safety where this can be affected by the state of the environment. Applicants are entitled to obtain this information within one month of the request and without having to say why they require it. In addition, public authorities are obliged, under the Convention, to actively disseminate environmental information in their possession;<br />
<br />
• the right to participate in environmental decision-making. Arrangements are to be made by public authorities to enable the public affected and environmental non-governmental organisations to comment on, for example, proposals for projects affecting the environment, or plans and programmes relating to the environment, these comments to be taken into due account in decision-making, and information to be provided on the final decisions and the reasons for it ("public participation in environmental decision-making");<br />
<br />
• the right to review procedures to challenge public decisions that have been made without respecting the two aforementioned rights or environmental law in general ("access to justice").</blockquote><br />
On 26 April 2013, the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee ruled that Communicants complaint was “manifestly unreasonable”, without providing any written reasons justifying their ruling of “manifestly unreasonable”. <br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-WAelAsuhgXM/UY_3vdtzurI/AAAAAAAAhzU/jaI3Xkwd6JQ/s1600/unece_aarhus_rh-norway_795x450.PNG"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-p8hgbByhNgo/UZAHNKolc3I/AAAAAAAAhzk/PajP3YHkrtY/s1600/unece_aarhus_rh-norway_600x340.PNG" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 340px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Request for written reasons as to exactly how and why the Communication was ‘manifestly unreasonable’.</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
[9] <b>Anders Breivik: Scarcity-Conflict and Fraud of Psychiatry Information submitted to Oslo Court and Norwegian Media during the Trial was a manifestly reasonable matter of discourse by parties and of interest to the Media</b>: <br />
<br />
[9.1] In a <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/breivik-letters.html" target="_blank">letter from Mr. Breivik</a>, dated 02 July 2012 he writes: “I also heard about your letter and email campaigns. They have played a part in the national discourse here and the media have observed it with interest. I cant say for sure how much of an impact it has played, the only thing for sure is that it has made an impact!”<br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Manifestly Reasonable: Media’s Censorship of Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
[10] <b>The Oslo & Utoya Attacks were a symptom of the Censorship-Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection</b>: The “<i><b>If It Bleads, It Leads :: Media Population-Terrorism Connection</b></i>” report submitted to Media Editors argued that Mainstream Access-to-Discourse Editors censorship of non-violent political grievances and scarcity-conflict problem solving activism facilitate a pressure cooker socio-political reality for the media’s “If it Bleads, It Leads” corporate propaganda profits, by (1) censoring the Scarcity (due to Overpopulation and Overconsumption) causes of violent resource war conflict; (2) that media abuse their publicity power in terms of their censorship of Ecocentric arguments submitted to courts; and by abusing public discourse/free speech resources; by providing certain parties with preferential and special access to such public discourse, and severely restricting or denying others any access to such public discourse; (3) Mainstream media avoid addressing or enquiring into root causes of the scarcity-conflict socio-political problems they report upon as reported in Dr. Michael Maher’s report How and Why Journalists Avoid Population - Environment connection. Anders Breivik argued his terrorist acts were justified by the necessity to: (1) Resist Eurabia: foreign immigration enabled by a corrupt NeoLiberal Corporatist elite; (2) Gov & Media Censorship of debate and discussion of the consequences of Demographic / Immigration issues required Ultra violence to Access International Public Discourse. <br />
<br />
[11] <b>Military Doctrine & Academic Theory: Scarcity-Conflict & Media Censorship of Population in Scarcity-Conflict equation is Manifestly Reasonable</b>:<br />
<br />
[11.1] The <i><b>‘Scarcity as Root cause of Conflict’</b></i> and <i><b>How and Why Journalists Avoid the Population-Environment Connection</b></i>, information submitted to Media Editors and Oslo District Court, during Breivik Trial, subsequently censored by the media editors, from their readers, was ‘manifestly reasonable’ environmental information. <br />
<br />
[11.2] <b>Scarcity as Root Cause of Conflict</b>: The Academic and Military doctrine documentation detailing the ‘manifestly reasonable’ argument, theory and practice that Scarcity is considered a Root Cause of Conflict is immense. In fact it is one of the primary foundations for the arguments about the national security dangers of climate change: namely that climate change will result in oil, food, and water shortages which will relate to a threat-multiplier effect on all other scarcity related conflict. See Communication para.5.2; as well as, to name but a few: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>A. International Court of Justice: <a href="http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/970925_icj-weeramantry_husl" target="_blank"><i><b>Opinion of Weeramantry J in the Case Concerning the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project</b></i></a> (Hungary v Slovakia) (1998) 37 International Legal Materials 162 206.<br />
<br />
B. Bundeswehr (Sep 2010): <a href="http://www.permaculture.org.au/files/Peak%20Oil_Study%20EN.pdf" target="_blank"><i><b>Peak Oil: Security Policy Implications of Scarce Resources</b></i></a>; Bundeswehr. <br />
<br />
C. Bush, GW Snr (1986/02): <a href="http://www.population-security.org/bush_report_on_terrorism/bush_report_on_terrorism_3.htm" target="_blank"><i><b>Public Report of the Vice-President’s Task Force on Combatting Terrorism</b></i></a>, United States Government<br />
<br />
D. Canadian Security Intelligence Service: Gizewski, Peter (Spring 1997): <a href="http://www.csis-scrs.gc.ca/pblctns/cmmntr/cm71-eng.asp" target="_blank"><i><b>Environmental Scarcity and Conflict</b></i></a>, by Peter Gizewski, Project on Environment Population and Security, Peace and Conflict Studies Program, University of Toronto; Canadian Security Intelligence Service: Archived: Commentary No. 71.<br />
<br />
E. White House: National Security Council (1974/04/24): <a href="http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/740424_wh-nssm200" target="_blank"><i><b>National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests</b></i></a>, Cover Letter by Henry Kissinger.<br />
<br />
F. White House: National Security Council (1974/12/10): <a href="http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/740424_wh-nssm200" target="_blank"><i><b>National Security Study Memorandum (NSSM 200): Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests</b></i></a>, Washington, DC, 227 pp. (The Kissinger Report)<br />
<br />
G. White House: National Security Council (1975/11/26): <a href="http://www.population-security.org/12-CH4.html" target="_blank"><i><b>National Security Decision Memorandum 314: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests</b></i></a>, Washington, DC. 4 pp.; made public policy by Pres. Gerald Ford.<br />
<br />
H. White House: Nixon, R. (1969/07/18): <a href="http://www.population-security.org/10-CH2.html" target="_blank"><i><b>Special Message to the Congress on Problems of Population Growth</b></i></a>, Public Papers of the Presidents, No. 271, p. 521, Office of the Federal Register, National Archives, Washington, DC, 1971 <br />
<br />
I. White House: Nixon, R (1970/03/16): <a href="http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=2911" target="_blank"><i><b>Remarks of President Nixon on Signing Bill Establishing the Commission on Population Growth and the American Future</b></i></a>, White House<br />
<br />
J. White House: Nixon, R. (1972/05/05): <a href="http://www.population-security.org/rockefeller/001_population_growth_and_the_american_future.htm" target="_blank"><i><b>Statement About the Report of the Commission on Population Growth and the American Future</b></i></a>, Public Papers for the Presidents, No. 142, p. 576, Office of Federal Register, National Archives, Washington, DC, 1974.<br />
<br />
K. White House: Rockefeller Commission Report (1972/03/27): <i><b>Population and the American Future: The Report of the Commission on Population Growth and the American Future</b></i> (<a href="http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/720327_rock-pop" target="_blank">PDF</a>); a Signet Special Edition, W5219, The New American Library, Inc., 1301 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY, March, 1972.<br />
<br />
L. United Nations: (1974/08): <i><b>World Population Plan of Action</b></i> (<a href="http://www.population-security.org/27-APP1.html" target="_blank">PDF</a>); Adopted by consensus of the 137 countries represented at the UN World Population Conference at Bucharest, August 1974<br />
<br />
M. United States Army: Department of the Army (December 1994): <a href="http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/74_un-pop-actionplan" target="_blank"><i><b>Field Manual 100-23, Peace Operations</b></i></a>. Washington, DC: Headquarters, Department of the Army<br />
<br />
N. United States Army (2001): <a href="http://www.bits.de/NRANEU/others/amd-us-archive/fm100-23(94).pdf" target="_blank"><i><b>US Army Posture Statement - FY 2002</b></i></a>.<br />
<br />
O. United States Army: Murphy, R (2006/10/24): <a href="http://www.cecer.army.mil/techreports/ERDC-CERL_TR-07-9/Session%20I/RichardMurphy.pdf" target="_blank"><i><b>US Army Strategy of the Environment</b></i></a>, Office of the Dep. Asst. Sec. of the Army, Environment, Safety & Occup. Health: Assistant for Sustainability.<br />
<br />
P. United States Army & TRADOC (2012): <a href="http://www.army.mil/article/68379/Unified_Quest_2012___Fact_Sheet/" target="_blank"><i><b>US Army Unified Quest 2012 Fact Sheet</b></i></a>, Unified Quest 2012 is the Army Chief of Staff's annual Title 10 Future Study Plan (FSP). <br />
<br />
Q. United States Army Command and General Staff College: David, MAJ William E (April 1996): <a href="http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA314878" target="_blank"><i><b>Environmental Scarcity as a Cause of Violent Conflict</b></i></a>, USA Military Intelligence, School of Advanced Military Studies; United States Army Command and General Staff College. <br />
<br />
R. United States Army War College: Butts, Kent (25 April 1994): <a href="http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/PUB339.pdf" target="_blank"><i><b>Environmental Security: A DOD Partnership for Peace</b></i></a>; US Army War College. <br />
<br />
S. United States Army War College: Bush, Col BX (13 Mar 1997): <a href="http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA326869" target="_blank"><i><b>Promoting Environmental Security during Contingency Operations</b></i></a>; US Army War College. <br />
<br />
T. United States Army War College: Peters, R (1996): <a href="http://www.carlisle.army.mil/USAWC/parameters/Articles/1995/peters.htm" target="_blank"><i><b>The Culture of Future Conflict</b></i></a>, US Army War College: Parameters: Winter 1995-96, pp. 18-27. <br />
<br />
U. United States Army War College: Ubbelohde, LTC Kurt F. (10 April 2000): <a href="http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA378148" target="_blank"><i><b>Freshwater Scarcity in the Nile River Basin</b></i></a>, US Army War College.<br />
<br />
V. United States Department of Defence: Department of Defense (Jan 2012): <a href="http://www.defense.gov/news/Defense_Strategic_Guidance.pdf" target="_blank"><i><b>Sustaining U.S. Global Leadership: Priorities for the 21st Century Defense</b></i></a>.<br />
<br />
W. United States Joint Forces Command (15 March 2010): <i><b>Command releases report examining the future</b></i>, FJCOM. <br />
<br />
X. United States Joint Forces Command (2010/02/18): <a href="http://www.jfcom.mil/newslink/storyarchive/2010/JOE_2010_o.pdf" target="_blank"><i><b>The Joint Operating Environment - 2010</b></i></a> (The JOE – 2010).<br />
<br />
Y. U.S. Forest Service (Dec 2012): <a href="http://www.fs.fed.us/news/2012/releases/12/report.shtml" target="_blank"><i><b>Report Predicts a Strain on Natural Resources Due to Rapid Population Growth</b></i></a>. <br />
<br />
Z. Proposed Legal Principles for Environmental Protection and Sustainable Development, adopted by the WCED Experts Group on Environmental Law, <i><b>WCED Our Common Future</b></i> (1987) 348.<br />
<br />
AA. <i><b>World Scientists Warning to Humanity</b></i>, issued 18 November 1992, issued by 1700 leading scientists from 70 countries, including 102 Nobel Prize laureates in Science.<br />
<br />
BB. Chiarelli, Peter W General (6 Nov 2008): Prof Al Bernstein Lecture Series: School of Advanced International Studies, <a href="http://www.army.mil/article/14199/Address_to_Alvin_Bernstein_Lecture_Series___Johns_Hopkins_University/" target="_blank"><i><b>Remarks by General Peter W Chiarelli</b></i></a>.<br />
<br />
CC. Choucri, Nazli: Population & Conflict: <i><b>New Dimensions of Population Dynamics</b></i>; Population Dynamics and Local Conflict<br />
<br />
DD. Guillebaud, J (2007): <i><b>YouthQuake: Population, fertility and environment in the 21st Century</b></i>, Optimum Population Trust<br />
<br />
EE. Hardin, G (1968/12/13): <a href="http://www.garretthardinsociety.org/articles/art_tragedy_of_the_commons.html" target="_blank"><i><b>Tragedy of the Commons</b></i></a>, Science.<br />
<br />
FF. Hardin, G (1986/08/10): <a href="http://garretthardinsociety.org/articles/art_cultural_carrying_capacity.html" target="_blank"><i><b>Cultural Carrying Capacity</b></i></a>, AIBS Distinguished Service Award Acceptance Speech.<br />
<br />
GG. Hardin G (1991): <a href="http://www.garretthardinsociety.org/articles_pdf/cc_quality_of_life.pdf" target="_blank"><i><b>Carrying Capacity and Quality of Life</b></i></a>, Environmental Science: Sustaining the Earth.<br />
<br />
HH. Heinberg, R (2006/04/30): <i><b>Population, Resources, and Human Idealism</b></i>, Energy Bulletin.<br />
<br />
II. Homer-Dixon, T (1991): <a href="http://www.homerdixon.com/projects/thresh/thresh1.htm" target="_blank"><i><b>On The Threshold: Environmental Changes as Causes of Acute Conflict</b></i></a>. <br />
<br />
JJ. Homer-Dixon, T, & Boutwell, J, & Rathjens, G (1993): <a href="http://www.homerdixon.com/projects/evidence/evid1.htm" target="_blank"><i><b>Environmental change and violent conflict: Growing scarcities of renewable resources can contribute to social instability and civil strife</b></i></a>. Scientific American, 268(2), pp. 38-45<br />
<br />
KK. Homer-Dixon, T (1994): <i><b>Environmental Scarcities and Violent Conflict: Evidence from Cases</b></i>. <br />
<br />
LL. Homer-Dixon, T (June 1995): <a href="http://www.homerdixon.com/projects/evidence/evid1.htm" target="_blank"><i><b>Strategies for Studying Causation in Complex Ecological Political Systems</b></i></a>. <br />
<br />
MM. Homer-Dixon, Thomas and Gizewski, Peter (June 1995): <i><b>“<a href="http://www.homerdixon.com/projects/eps/urban/urban1.htm" target="_blank">Urban Growth and Violence: Will the Future Resemble the Past?</a></b></i>,” Environment, Population and Security. <br />
<br />
NN. Homer-Dixon, Thomas and Howard, Philip (June 1995), “<a href="http://www.homerdixon.com/projects/eps/chiapas/chiapas1.htm" target="_blank"><i><b>Environmental Scarcity and Violent Conflict: The Case of Chiapas, Mexico</b></i></a>,” Environment, Population and Security. <br />
<br />
OO. Homer-Dixon, Thomas and Kelly, Kimberley (June 1995): “<a href="http://www.homerdixon.com/projects/eps/gaza/gaza1.htm" target="_blank"><i><b>Environmental Scarcity and Violent Conflict: The Case of Gaza</b></i></a>,” Environment, Population and Security. <br />
<br />
PP. Homer-Dixon, Thomas and Percival, Valerie (June 1995): “<a href="http://www.homerdixon.com/projects/eps/rwanda/rwanda1.htm" target="_blank"><i><b>Environmental Scarcity and Violent Conflict: The Case of Rwanda</b></i></a>,” Environment, Population and Security. <br />
<br />
QQ. Homer-Dixon, T (Sep 1995): <a href="http://www.library.utoronto.ca/pcs/ingen/ingen.htm" target="_blank"><i><b>The Ingenuity Gap: Can Poor Countries Adapt to Resource Scarcity</b></i></a>. <br />
<br />
RR. Homer-Dixon & Percival (Oct 1995): <a href="http://www.homerdixon.com/projects/eps/south/sa1.htm" target="_blank"><i><b>Environmental Scarcity and Violent Conflict: Case of South Africa</b></i></a>. <br />
<br />
SS. Homer-Dixon, Thomas and Gizewski, Peter (April 1996): “<a href="http://www.homerdixon.com/projects/eps/pakistan/pak1.htm" target="_blank"><i><b>Environmental Scarcity and Violent Conflict: The Case of Pakistan</b></i></a>,” Environment, Population and Security.<br />
<br />
TT. Homer-Dixon, Thomas and Schwartz, Daniel; Deligiannis, Tom (Summer 2000): “<a href="http://www.homerdixon.com/wp-content/uploads/2000/06/Response-to-Gleditsch.pdf" target="_blank"><i><b>The Environment and Violent Conflict: A Response to Gleditsch’s Critique and Suggestions for Future Research</b></i></a>,” Environmental Change & Security Project Report: 77-93.<br />
<br />
UU. Koppel, T (2000): <a href="http://youtu.be/7OJeUAx0y-g" target="_blank"><i><b>CIA and Pentagon on Overpopulation and Resource Wars</b></i></a>, Nightline. <br />
<br />
VV. Leahy, E & Engelman R & Vogel C & Haddock S & Preston T (2003): <i><b>The Shape of Things to Come: Why Age Structure Matters to a Safer More Equitable World</b></i>, Population Action Int’l<br />
<br />
WW. Parthemore, C & Nagl, J (2010/09/27): <a href="http://www.cnas.org/files/documents/publications/CNAS_Fueling%20the%20Future%20Force_NaglParthemore.pdf" target="_blank"><i><b>Fueling the Future Force: Preparing the Department of Defense for a Post-Petroleum Environment</b></i></a>, Center for a New American Security (CNAS). <br />
<br />
XX. Simmons, M (2000/09/30): <a href="http://www.clubofrome.org/?p=1869" target="_blank"><i><b>Revisiting the Limits to Growth: Could Club of Rome Have Been Correct, After All?</b></i></a>; Energy Bulletin.</blockquote><br />
[11.3] <b>Military Doctrine & Academic Theory: Climate Change & National Security: Climate Change acts as a Scarcity and Conflict Threat Multiplier of oil, water and food resource wars and mass migration</b>: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>A. Global Military Advisory Council on Climate Change (GMACCC) Chairman: Major General Muniruzzaman (04 Apr 2013): <a href="http://youtu.be/JEtP0I-wwhM" target="_blank"><i><b>Climate Change and Global Security</b></i></a>; America Security Now<br />
<br />
B. Military Advisory Board (MAB)(April 2007): <a href="http://www.cna.org/reports/climate" target="_blank"><i><b>National Security and Climate Change</b></i></a>, Center for Naval Analysis, CAN. [<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCfRGN0YIwQ" target="_blank">video</a>]<br />
<br />
C. Military Advisory Board (MAB)(May 2009): <a href="http://www.cna.org/reports/energy" target="_blank"><i><b>Powering America’s Defense: Energy and the Risks to National Security</b></i></a>; Center for Naval Analysis, CAN<br />
<br />
D. Military Advisory Board (MAB)(July 2010): <a href="http://www.cna.org/reports/economy" target="_blank"><i><b>Powering America’s Economy: Energy Innovation at the Crossroads of National Security Challenges</b></i></a>, Center for Naval Analysis, CAN.<br />
<br />
E. Military Advisory Board (MAB) (unknown): <a href="http://youtu.be/w1FMeVH2AgI" target="_blank"><i><b>Energy, Climate Change, and the Military: Implications for National Security</b></i></a>; Woodrow Wilson Center for Environmental Security.<br />
<br />
F. Military Advisory Board (unknown): <a href="http://youtu.be/8m3DReZxePQ" target="_blank"><i><b>National Security and the Threat of Climate Change</b></i></a>, Woodrow Wilson Center for Environmental Security<br />
<br />
G. Lucka Kajfez-Bogataj (11 Dec 2009): <a href="http://youtu.be/v9uAIQXZUks" target="_blank"><i><b>Climate Change as a National and International Security Threat</b></i></a>; Good Planet Org.<br />
<br />
H. Clark Wesley General, McGinn Dennis rear Admiral, Boycott Rosy (18 Dec 2009): <a href="http://youtu.be/tz9vRxCMZUw" target="_blank"><i><b>Climate Change is a Global Security Threat</b></i></a>; Global Observatory <br />
<br />
I. Climate Patriots (19 Feb 2010): <a href="http://youtu.be/kjS9pU0y_JU" target="_blank"><i><b>Energy, Climate Change and American National Security: A Military Perspective</b></i></a>; Pew Climate Security.<br />
<br />
J. Titley, David, Rear Admiral, USN (19 Nov 2010): <a href="http://youtu.be/7udNMqRmqV8" target="_blank"><i><b>Climate Change and National Security</b></i></a>; TEDxPentagon<br />
<br />
K. McGinn Dennis, Vice Admiral, Navy (26 Jan 2012): <a href="http://youtu.be/LjA5naFfcgk" target="_blank"><i><b>Energy, Climate Change and National Security: Challenges and Opportunities for America</b></i></a>; Purdue University<br />
<br />
L. Congressional Hearing: (06 June 2008): <a href="http://youtu.be/vl3CRssxU7s" target="_blank"><i><b>National Security and Climate Change</b></i></a>; Energy Environment TV<br />
<br />
M. Jarvis Lionel, Rear Admiral, Royal Navy (17 Oct 2011): <a href="http://youtu.be/3neELnBCu5c" target="_blank"><i><b>Climate Change and Military Security</b></i></a>; One World TV</blockquote><br />
[11.4] <b>Academic Theory: Media’s Censorship-Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection</b>:<br />
<br />
[11.5] <i><b>How and Why Journalists Avoid the Population-Environment Connection</b></i>: The argument that journalists and editors consciously and unconsciously practice self-censorship of population-environment issues in the social conflict and environmental destruction stories they report upon is well documented in Dr. Maher’s thesis, <i><b>How and Why Journalists Avoid the Population-Environment Connection</b></i>, which no media publication has disputed. <br />
<br />
<blockquote>A. Maher, MT (1995): <i><b>Media Framing and Salience of the Population Issue</b></i>, PhD dissertation.<br />
<br />
B. Maher, MT (1997/03): <a href="http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/mahertm_journo-env-pop-connection" target="_blank"><i><b>How and Why Journalists Avoid the Population-Environment Connection</b></i></a>, University of Southwestern Louisiana, Population and Environment, Volume 18, Number 4, March 1977; Reprinted in 1997 by the Carrying Capacity Network, Focus, 18 (2), 21-37.<br />
<br />
C. Paddock William (Jan 1998): <a href="http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/27503579?uid=2&uid=4&sid=21102201433171" target="_blank"><i><b>Addendum on Journalists Noncoverage of Population</b></i></a>; Population and Environment ; Vol 19, No 3, pp.221-224.<br />
<br />
D. Ehrlich, Paul and Anne (1998-89): <i><b>Speaking Out on Population: A conspiracy of silence is limiting action on the world's most basic environmental problem</b></i>, Issues in Science and Technology, Winter 1988-89, at 36-37.<br />
<br />
E. Wheeler Timothy (September 2003): <a href="http://www.environmentwriter.org/resources/articles/pop93a.htm" target="_blank"><i><b>Skirting the Population Issue: Why Journalists Need to Tackle Growth</b></i></a>; Environment Writer.<br />
<br />
F. Earth Focus Episode 36: <a href="http://youtu.be/NtHLlanQ7-o" target="_blank"><i><b>National Security and Climate Change</b></i></a>; LinkTV reports on the <a href="http://oilchangeproject.nationalsecurityzone.org/" target="_blank">National Security Journalism Initiative</a> setup by Northwestern University Medill School of Journalism to educate journalists about how to integrate national security concerns of scarcity and conflict within its conventional social problem reporting. </blockquote><br />
<div align="center">____________________</div><br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">22/07 AUF Utoya Survivor Bjorn Ihler’s Center for Free and Creative Expression: The Censorship-Terrorism Connection</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
[12] Mr. Bjørn Magnus Jacobsen Ihler was an AUF student on Utoya on the day that Mr. Anders Breivik committed the Oslo bombing and Utoya Attacks.<br />
<br />
[13] Mr. Ihler does not agree with his Norwegian countrymen’s silent conspiracy to censor those they disagree with (left or right). <br />
<br />
[14] Mr. Ihler believes – like Prof Clark McCauley writes in <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/28/weekinreview/28carey.html?_r=0" target="_blank"><i><b>When Does Political Anger Turn to Violence?</b></i></a>; and as argued in Communicator’s <i><b>“If It Bleeds, it Leads: Media's Censorship Population Terrorism Connection”</b></i> Earth Day Report to Media Editors – that it is precisely when people or groups of people are silenced and censored and denied political solutions for their grievances, that they are left only one option for resolving their scarcity-conflict socio-political problems: violence and terrorism. <br />
<br />
[15] In an oped for RP-Online: <a href="http://www.rp-online.de/digitales/rp-plus/es-ist-noch-lange-nicht-vorbei-1.2973322" target="_blank"><i><b>“It is not over yet”</b></i></a>, he describes the betrayal of Prime Minister Stoltenberg’s promise of an open debate and the “Oppressive Political Correctness” practiced by Norwegians, including after Breivik attack and trial. (via Google translate)<br />
<br />
<blockquote><b>We need an open debate</b><br />
<br />
A few days after the assassination of prime minister stood before the people, he said, that love brings love, and we would fight this terrible act of terrorism, by providing greater openness and more democracy. That sounded to me then that we would conduct a lively public debate about it, it sounded then, that we would hear voices from all possible political camps, it sounded then, that my Prime Minister agreed with me.<br />
<br />
I firmly believe that an open debate is the means by which we can prevent further acts that are based on extremist views. This is connected with the theory that I "the echo chambers of extremism" call. These spaces are closed society of people who share the same extremist ideas. I want to scare anyone, but we know that these groups exist, we know they can be found all over the world, and we know that they are a threat. In these societies, extreme ideas can move freely, sometimes as a group trying to communicate their ideas to the world, but the world is busy taking care of other things, so the ideas usually stay in this closed society.<br />
<br />
Breivik said that the reason why his ideas did not come to the public, was censorship. More precisely: He spoke of self-censorship. It seemed to him that the public had strict guidelines and would never listen to him nor reprint his views. One thinks in closed societies.<br />
<br />
<b>What did the Prime Minister?</b><br />
<br />
This feeling of listening that nobody makes the effort, and the fact that there are ideas in which they all agree to ignore them, generates a high level of frustration. For some people this leads to frustration, which they feel they have to act. So terrorists can be created.<br />
<br />
As the Prime Minister said that openness is the means by which we should be fighting extremism, I believed that it was what he meant. It turned out that I was wrong. I still do not understand exactly what he meant, but the following happened:<br />
<br />
First detained most of the news sites in the country for a certain amount of their time commenting on anything that had to do with terrorism. This could have been an opportunity to hear potential supporters of the idea that was behind the act, and to argue against them. It could be a way to relieve a lot of pressure, which was created in the reverberation room, and to show people that others were interested and had good reasons for their ideas to be against it. Instead, they were locked out.<br />
<br />
<b>Oppressive political correctness</b><br />
<br />
Secondly, began a massive public debate. Debates are usually a good thing, but the output seemed to be that the majority of the public had a clear view of what was politically correct, and that with views that were contrary to this political correctness, should not be possible for people to express their views to communicate. If they did it but they should at least be expressed in a correct language.<br />
<br />
It may be understandable that one represents this condition, but it is also important to remember that many people have other means in communicating around as the average newspaper columnist. Not everyone is trained to write a letter to the editor or write at all. Therefore, we should be more open to people who use their own language, we should ignore bad grammar and spelling errors. The only thing we should consider not to accept, are direct threats and insults.<br />
<br />
All in all I think that this debate about debating with those who have ideas outside the political correct, the feeling has reinforced that we had to censor myself.</blockquote><br />
[16] Mr. Ihler decided to <a href="http://www.tcfce.net/2012/06/18/the-centre-for-free-and-creative-expression/" target="_blank">found the Center for Free and Creative Expression</a>: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>After surviving the terror of the 22nd of July in Norway I’ve decided to devote my life to peoples fight for freedom, against violent extremism and for freedom of expression. I see this centre as what I hope can be my most valuable participation, and I hope you will help me.<br />
<br />
If you in any way feel you can help in finding funding or otherwise, please do not hesitate to contact me.</blockquote><br />
[17] In <a href="http://www.tcfce.net/2012/06/19/freedom-of-expression-in-the-fight-against-terror/" target="_blank"><i><b>Freedom of Expression in the fight against terror</b></i></a>, he writes: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>Sometimes it’s difficult to accept that other people have radically different ideas and views than you. It’s even more difficult to accept it when someone seems to have extremely different ideas and perspectives than what’s commonly accepted elsewhere in the society. This makes it difficult to be an extremism of any sort, right wing, islamic, christian or leftwing. Society strives towards the norm, towards a centre that most people seems to agree about.<br />
<br />
There might be various reasons why it’s difficult to get through whit a message that’s not commonly accepted or politically correct. By those having the extreme opinions some of this will be seen as unfair social censorship, while people other places are threatened by a more organized governmental censorship. In this post censorship refers to social censorship against what’s perceived to be politically incorrect and self-censorship of extremist ideas, even tho I realize the dangers of all forms of censorship.<br />
<br />
The most dangerous part of these forms of censorship is not that we don’t talk about stuff, but that we don’t get to, or won’t listen to certain ideas. This causes a feeling of injustice among those having these ideas. They feel that they don’t get through. And to some extent they don’t.<br />
<br />
This creates small closed societies. Societies where the extremist ideas are shared, where the ideas bounce around, where they grow and amplify. This can go on until someone choses to do something about the idea. They might take to arms. They might go from being extremists to becoming terrorists. We have to avoid that.<br />
<br />
In order to avoid that we have to bring these societies into the light. We have to let them express their ideas, to get them to feel that we hear what they have to say. We have to let the pressure out of the closed societies. This we can do through communication and expression. We must invite to debates, we must show that we listen and we must argue against what we think is unjust. That’s how we, through freedom expression, can fight terrorism.</blockquote><br />
[18] What does it say about the subjective impartial problem solving professionalism of a Committee of alleged ‘Human Rights’ defenders, Neoliberal Editors and Bar Association Attorneys; when a young survivor of brutal psychological and physical terrorism, has a greater commitment to resolving the censorship to public discourse and access to political solutions, causes of terrorism, by making a concerned commitment to listen sincerely and refusal to censor, or endorse the censorship of, the ideas of his enemies, that he does not understand, and may disagree with?<br />
<br />
<div align="center">_____________________</div><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Admirals, Generals, Former CIA Director & News Editor: Censorship-Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection.</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
[19] <b>Climate Change as a Scarcity and Conflict Threat Multiplier of oil, water and food resource wars and current problem of mass migration to Europe</b>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“Climate Change will become a defense and security issue, for four major reasons. There will be water wars, there will be oil wars, there will be massive migration on a scale the world has never seen, and there will be massive food insecurity. The two things of importance to the United States and UK will be issues of migration, which we already have problems with in Europe and the US. It will get much much more extreme. .. So much of our food is derived from Africa and Central and South America, if that starts to fail .. there could be rioting. There is an expression which is called nine meals from anarchy.” – Rosie Boycott, Former Editor of the Independent; <a href="http://youtu.be/NfobHy0a9CU" target="_blank"><i><b>Climate Change and National Security</b></i></a>.</blockquote><br />
[20] <b>Walking the National Security – Scarcity & Conflict -- Talk to Support the Troops: Procreate and Consume below carrying capacity, to enable the avoidance of resource war conflict</b>:<br />
<br />
[20.1] Vice Admiral Dennis V. McGinn, USN (Ret); Former Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Warfare Requirements and Programs: <a href="http://www.cna.org/reports/energy" target="_blank"><i><b>Powering America’s Defense: Energy and the Risks to National Security</b></i></a>; Center for Naval Analysis, CAN: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>“A yellow ribbon on a car or truck is a wonderful message of symbolic support for our troops. I’d like to see the American people take it several steps further. If you say a yellow ribbon is the ‘talk,’ then being energy efficient is the ‘walk’. A yellow ribbon on a big, gas-guzzling SUV is a mixed message. We need to make better energy choices in our homes, businesses and transportation, as well as to support our leaders in making policies that change the way we develop and use energy. If we Americans truly embrace this idea, it is a triple win: it reduces our dependence on foreign oil, it reduces our impact on the climate and it makes our nation much more secure.”</blockquote><br />
[20.2] Vice Admiral Dennis McGinn; <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1FMeVH2AgI" target="_blank"><i><b>Energy, Climate Change, and the Military: Implications for National Security</b></i></a>; Woodrow Wilson Center for Environmental Security: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>“Global climate change will pose serious threats to water supplies and agricultural production, leading to mass migration in some cases. At the same time we will see an increasing demand for a dwindling supply of fossil fuels. These factors mean and intense competition for key and vital resources, around the globe and that leads to conflict. <br />
<br />
“This report is different to many other reports, involving military leaders. That is because in it, we make a direct appeal to the American people. We talk in this report about the amazing sacrifices the American people made during World War II, planting victory gardens, cutting down on fuel use, saving scrap metal and old rubber, sacrifices, or maybe just examples of common sense and prudent lifestyle changes. Whatever you call them, the steps taken by the American people then, shortened the war and saved lives. <br />
<br />
And I believe the same can be said today about these challenges of energy security and climate security. There are individual steps that every American can take. Using less energy. Being more efficient with the energy that we do use. Supporting new policies to help our country take a new energy path. These are the steps that can help us avoid, or shorten wars in the future. Those wars over competition for vital resources. These are steps that can save lives. <br />
<br />
They may cost money yes, but if we don't spend the money now, we will still pay, and we will pay much more later. In fact, we'll pay in American lives lost. <br />
<br />
American civilians played an important role in World War II because they understood the stakes and because they were asked to do so. General Wald made the stakes clear, and our report makes the stakes clear. Our current energy posture poses a significant and urgent threat to our national security, militarily, economically and diplomatically. <br />
<br />
Hopefully more Americans will understand these stakes, and that these consequences will affect them. Hopefully more Americans will hear the very direct request from our Commander in Chief and from this small group of a dozen retired Admirals and Generals. <br />
<br />
The American people, all of us, through our energy choices can contribute directly to the security of our nation. It is a triple win. It makes us energy independent. It reduces our effect on the environment, and it makes our nation very much more secure.” </blockquote><br />
[20.3] James Woolsey, Former CIA Director; <a href="http://youtu.be/NfobHy0a9CU" target="_blank"><i><b>Climate Change and National Security</b></i></a>: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>“I was testifying before a House Committee a few months ago and one of the members was very sceptical of climate change and was arguing with me, because I presented some of the reasons why I thought climate change was a serious problem, and I finally said "Congressman look, set aside climate change, do you realize that seven of the nine things that I've suggested will help us be allot more resilient against terrorism or oil cut-offs." And he said, "Oh if you are doing them for that reason, then its fine."”</blockquote><br />
[20.4] James Woolsey (19 October 2009): <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNDiQUBjR1o" target="_blank"><i><b>How your Gas Money Funds Terrorism</b></i></a>, American Jewish Committee, Washington DC.: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>“The author of the fine book <i>The Looming Tower</i>, about Al'Qaeda and 9/11, Laurence Wright, writes for the New Yorker, has a fascinating sentence in the <i>Looming Tower</i>. He says that with a little over 1% of the worlds Muslims, Saudi's control about 90% of the worlds Islamic Institutions. Now what does that mean to the rest of us? Wahaabi Islam, the religion of Saudi Arabia, if you read the Imam's Fatwa's, rather than what they say to us, the Fatwa's are somewhere between murderous and genocidal with respect to their discussion of Shiite Muslims, Jews, homosexuals and apostates. They are massively oppressive of women in many, many ways. They are focussed on the establishment of a worldwide Caliphate, a theocratic dictatorship. That is essentially Al'Qaeda's doctrine. There is no substantive difference between Al'Qaeda and the Wahaabi's of Saudi Arabia want to take us. The question is 'Who's in charge'? <br />
<br />
So its somewhat like the feud between the Trotskyites and the Stalinists in the 1920's and 30's. Because the reach of Wahaabi Madrassas is so great, you have all over Pakistan, as well as the West Bank and in allot of other parts of the world, little boys being taught hatred essentially. Now that produces a situation in which by shelling out essentially a billion dollars a day at seventy dollars a barrel of oil, for imported oil, and since allot of that money goes to the Middle East, you and I shouldn't have any question about who is paying for the other side of this long war that we are in. If you want to know who is paying for those Madrassas in Pakistan or the West Bank to teach those little boys to hate, just next time you go to a filling station, before you get out to charge your gasoline and credit card, turn the rear-view mirror just a few inches, so you are looking into your own eyes. Now you know who is paying for those little boys to be taught to hate. The situation we have with the Wahaabi's of Saudi Arabia is not too far from what would be the case if Ferdinand and Isabella and Torquemada running the Spanish Inquisition were still around in Spain and Spain drilled down and found 25% of the worlds oil under Spain. Ferdinand and Isabella turn to Torquemada and they say "We know that you like to pick the pope and pick the head of the Lutherans and the Evangelicals and the President of Notre Dame and that’s all fine with us, here's six, seven, eight billion dollars a year, just go to it. That’s the kind of problem the world, would hypothetically have if Torquemada and the Inquisition were still around and that’s the kind of problem we've got with the Wahaabi's of Saudi Arabia.”</blockquote><br />
<br />
<div align="center">______________________</div><br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Manifestly Reasonable: Media Silence/Censorship/Non-coverage of Scientific study results advocating Sustainable Security (Walking the National Security – Scarcity & Conflict -- Talk to Support the Troops): ‘Procreate/Consume below carrying capacity’.</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
[21] <b>Media Censorship: Citizens are ignorant of how to contribute to Sustainable Security: Procreate and Consume below carrying capacity, to avoid scarcity induced resource war conflict</b>.<br />
<br />
[21.1] Maher, Michael (1997/03): <a href="http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/mahertm_journo-env-pop-connection" target="_blank"><i><b>How and Why Journalists Avoid the Population-Environment Connection</b></i></a>: University of Southwestern Louisiana, Population and Environment, Volume 18, Number 4, March 1977; Reprinted in 1997 by the Carrying Capacity Network, Focus, 18 (2), 21-37.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Population researchers Paul and Anne Ehrlich opened their book, <i><b>The Population Explosion</b></i>, with a chapter titled, "Why Isn't Everyone as Scared as We Are?" They acknowledged, "The average person, even the average scientist, seldom makes the connection between [disparate environmental problems] and the population problem, and thus remains unworried" (1990, p. 21). But while they noted that the evening news almost never connects population growth to environmental problems, the Ehrlichs chiefly blamed social taboos fostered by the Catholic Church and "a colossal failure of education" (p. 32) for public indifference about population. Howell (1992) also minimized the role of the media in influencing public aptitude about science and the environment, and pointed instead to education: “The obvious starting point for the individual is the public schools .... Education proceeds into undergraduate programs, which can play more than one major role in enhancing scientific literacy (p. 160).”<br />
<br />
The Ehrlichs and Howell seem to assume that education is the chief factor driving public opinion about environmental causality. But in <i><b>Tradeoffs: Imperatives of Choice in a High-Tech World</b></i>, Wenk (1986) offered a more media-centric view of how the public learns: "Whatever literacy in science and technology the general public has reached is not from formal education. Rather, it is from the mass media. That responsibility of the press has been almost completely ignored" (p. 162).<br />
<br />
This study will examine press responsibility for the public's indifference to population growth by exploring two questions:<br />
<br />
* To what extent do press reports about population-driven environmental problems link those problems to population growth?<br />
<br />
* What reasons do reporters give for ignoring population growth in stories about environmental problems?<br />
<br />
[..]<br />
<br />
<b>Why Journalists Avoid Mentioning Population</b><br />
<br />
As we have seen, both land development economists and environmental experts acknowledge population growth as a key source of environmental change. But journalists frame environmental causality differently.<br />
<br />
Why? Communication theory offers several possibilities. First is the hegemony-theory interpretation: reports omit any implication that population growth might produce negative effects, in order to purvey the ideology of elites who make money from population growth. As Molotch and Lester (1974) put it, media content can be viewed as reflecting "the practices of those having the power to determine the experience of others" (p. 120). Since real estate, construction and banking interests directly support the media through advertising purchases, this interpretation seems plausible. A number of media critics (e.g., Gandy, 1982; Altschull, 1984; Bennett, 1988) have suggested that media messages reflect the values of powerful political and commercial interests. Burd (1972), Kaniss (1991) and others have pointed out that newspapers have traditionally promoted population growth in their cities through civic boosterism. Molotch (1976) even suggested that cities can best be understood as entities competing for population growth, with the city newspaper as chief cheerleader.<br />
<br />
Certainly most reporters would be incensed at the suggestion that they shade their reporting to placate commercial interests. But Breed’s classic study of social control in the newsroom (1955) showed that news managers’ values are transmissible to journalists through a variety of pressures: salaries, story assignments, layout treatment, editing, and a variety of other strategies that effectively shape news stories in ways acceptable to management.<br />
<br />
Another possible explanation for why journalists omit population growth from their story frame is simple ignorance of other explanations. Journalists who cover environmental issues may not be aware of any other possible ways to frame these stories, thus they derive their framing from other journalists. Journalists frequently read each other’s work and take cues for coverage from other reporters, particularly from the elite media (Reese & Danielian, 1989). Perhaps the pervasive predictability of the story frames examined in the Part I is another example of intermedia influence.<br />
<br />
On the other hand, it seems difficult to believe that journalists could be ignorant of the role population growth plays in environmental issues, because media coverage frequently ties population growth to housing starts and business expansion.<br />
<br />
Furthermore, "Why" is one of the five "W’s" taught in every Journalism 101 course. A public affairs reporting textbook, <i>Interpreting Public Issues</i> (Griffin, Molen, Schoenfeld, and Scotton, 1991), admonishes journalists: "A common journalistic mistake is simply to cover events —real or staged— and ignore underlying issues" (p.320). The book identified population trends as one of the "big trouble spots," and listed world population as the first of its "forefront issues in the ’90s" (p. 320). Hence, we cannot say that reporting basic causality is beyond the role that journalists ascribe for themselves. Indeed, a panel at the 1994 Society of Environmental Journalists discussed "<i>Covering Population as a Local Story</i>" (Wheeler, 1994). But ignorance remains a possible reason, for not all reporters have training in environmental issues.<br />
<br />
A third possible explanation comes from the "<i>Spiral of Silence</i>" theory by German scholar Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann (1984): “The fear of isolation seems to be the force that sets the spiral of silence in motion. To run with the pack is a relatively happy state of affairs; but if you can’t, because you won’t share publicly in what seems to be a universally acclaimed conviction, you can at least remain silent, as a second choice, so that others can put up with you. (p. 6)”<br />
<br />
[..]<br />
<br />
This study suggests that the working principles of journalistic storytelling create a vast causal dissociation when the news media report population-driven environmental problems. Local media can cover local environmental degradation, but cannot connect these problems to population growth because, in part, reporters and their sources feel that population growth can only addressed at the national level.<br />
<br />
National media can address the population issue, but national reporters can’t peg a story on population to local events that, from a national perspective, seem trivial. Why would Newsweek readers in Iowa or Oregon want to know about population-driven water rationing in a suburb of San Diego, or a protested land development north of Atlanta? And on the other hand, why would a borough of Boston want to address national population growth as an issue? From a systems theory perspective, the information feedback loop that connects the microcosm to the macrocosm is broken in the news we get.<br />
<br />
A spiral of silence also seems to affect journalists’ framing of population-driven environmental problems. Most journalists interviewed in this study knew population growth affects the environment they cover, but they were reluctant to mention population either in their stories or in the interviews that formed the basis for this chapter. Reporters know the controversial nature of population growth, and would rather avoid the issue than mention it —even in questioning sources for their stories.<br />
<br />
This study suggests that, from an agenda-setting perspective, the narrative imperative of newswriting keeps issues like population off the agenda. Frequency of mention by the media is the chief means by which an issue asserts itself into the public consciousness (McCombs and Shaw, 1977). But even though population growth causes or exacerbates uncountably frequent events that lower the quality of most Americans’ lives, reporters don’t mention this. They can’t connect event to ultimate cause in daily events reporting, and this effectively keeps the cause off the agenda and out of public consciousness. If, as one interviewed reporter suggested, reporters "cover fires" for six months, then write a single "trend story" that connects the events to causes, this pattern likely keeps population low on the agenda, because an isolated trend story is unlikely to have much effect on public consciousness.<br />
<br />
McCombs and Shaw (1977) note that the media serve a useful function by setting the agenda: “Both by deliberate winnowing and by inadvertent agenda-setting the mass media help society achieve consensus on which concerns and interests should be translated into public issues and opinion. (pp. 151-152)”<br />
<br />
But the agenda-setting process seems useful only if we consider what the media do place on the agenda. This study shows that agenda-setting may have a dark side, when we consider what the media do not cover. To generalize from this study, it seems likely the media have a blind spot regarding the basic layers of multilayered causality. The deep causes that drive daily events remain off the agenda. Certainly this is the case with population growth, but such causal dissociation may keep many other deep-seated causes of social problems off the agenda.<br />
<br />
Although scholars have not satisfactorily tied the media agenda and public opinion to the policy agenda (Borquez, 1993), many scholars have agreed that the media are very important for determining what does not get on the policy agenda. Spitzer (1993) noted: "The scope of the conflict determines the outcome...more than any other single force in national politics, the media control the scope of politics." In a similar vein Kingdon (1973) said: "In addition to noting how important the media are in bringing subjects, facts, and interpretations to congressmen, it is also important to mention that the media also play some part in determining which pieces of information will not be brought to congressmen." And indeed, recent U.S. policy on population is pronatalist (Abernethy, 1993). Although in 1996 Congress took measures to reduce immigration, it did so primarily for economic and social reasons, rather than out of concern for the environment. That same Congress dramatically reduced U.S. funding for worldwide family planning programs.<br />
<br />
Many environmentalists are frustrated by the low salience Americans give the population issue. Deploring the "primitive stage" of U.S. public opinion on population, Grant (1992, p. 231) characterizes U.S. political discourse as "the kingdom of the deaf" (p. 239). Part I of this study shows that the American public is not deaf; but in the news they read Americans simply have little to hear that explains the environmental costs of population growth. Well-known population researcher Paul Ehrlich has written that a "conspiracy of silence" keeps humanity from taking action on population (1989). Part II of this study shows that journalists are engaged in no conspiracy; they are simply keeping within the storytelling bounds of their craft, framing their coverage of environmental issues narrowly with regard to space and time. Interviewed journalists feel that a limited newshole keeps them from connecting local environmental problems to global causes like population growth. They also know that reproductive matters are a hot button with some readers, and steer clear of the issue if they can.<br />
<br />
But population must become more salient if future generations are to enjoy the quality of life we now know. A number of scholars conversant with sustainable levels of agricultural and energy output recently estimated an optimum population for the United States (Pimentel and Pimentel, 1992; Costanza, 1992; Ehrlich and Ehrlich, 1992; Werbos, 1992). The highest estimates were below current population levels; several low estimates were for a population of less than 100 million. Meanwhile the population of the United States is 265 million and is growing about 1 percent a year.<br />
<br />
Walter Lippmann (1922) distinguished news from truth: “The function of news is to signalize an event, the function of truth is to bring to light the hidden facts, to set them into relation with each other, and make a picture of reality on which men can act (p. 226).”<br />
<br />
This study shows how and why we are letting signalized events, rather than truth, set the agenda for our demographic and environmental future.</blockquote><br />
[21.2] Articles: <br />
<br />
A. Wheeler Timothy (September 2003): <a href="http://www.environmentwriter.org/resources/articles/pop93a.htm" target="_blank"><i><b>Skirting the Population Issue: Why Journalists Need to Tackle Growth</b></i></a>; Environment Writer.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Why is it so hard for journalists covering the environment to address population?<br />
<br />
Do we lack the guts to tackle really tough, controversial issues? Or do we lack the smarts to sort out the complicated and often-indirect role population growth plays in problems such as water shortages, declines in biodiversity and suburban sprawl?<br />
<br />
We've been talking for years about how population growth is one of the major under-reported stories on our beat. I remember sitting on a panel at a Society of Environmental Journalists conference in 1994, offering tips for "localizing" what many perceived then as a global issue. That wasn't the first, or last, how-to session.<br />
<br />
Yet we have succeeded as journalists so rarely in making the environment-population connection in print or on the air that it remains remarkable when someone does. Population was one of the environmental journalism "taboos" hashed over at SEJ's annual meeting last year in Baltimore. It's on SEJ's agenda again this year in New Orleans.<br />
<br />
[..]<br />
<br />
It doesn't help, either, that almost no environmental groups will talk about population growth. The Sierra Club engaged in a fierce debate in 1998 over immigration, but ultimately decided not to take a stand against it. No other major environmental group has touched it since.<br />
<br />
Recognizing how journalists crave facts that can give them a toehold on such slippery subjects, one population group, Numbers USA, has come out with a study that says only half the land gobbled up in the past decade can be blamed on sprawling development patterns. The rest of the land consumed went to house more people, contends Roy Beck, the group's executive director and another former environmental journalist.<br />
<br />
Many are uncomfortable with such calculations, and distinctly uncomfortable with some of the critics of the driving force in America's population growth these days. Beck and his group have been lumped in with "hate groups," after all, for advocating limits on immigration.<br />
<br />
I plead guilty to some of the same limitations facing other journalists: Last year, when I was editing The Baltimore Sun's environmental coverage, Tom Horton, our Chesapeake Bay columnist, told me he wanted to write a piece calling for limits on immigration because he believed population growth was a long-term threat to the Bay.<br />
<br />
"Do it while I'm on vacation," I grumbled. I didn’t relish getting calls from readers accusing us of xenophobia.<br />
<br />
If he was really serious about writing such a column, I told him, I wanted to see evidence that immigrants are somehow more environmentally damaging to the Bay than those folks who are moving into the region from other parts of the United States.<br />
<br />
Like many other journalists, I'd missed the proverbial forest for the trees. And I'd shied away from a controversial topic because of the "baggage" it came with.<br />
<br />
So maybe it's time to quit lecturing others and start figuring out how to talk reasonably about population again.</blockquote><br />
[21.3] Google News Search: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>A. Your search - michael maher, population, environment, journalists - did not match any news results.</blockquote><br />
[22] <b>Every Child Increases a Woman’s Carbon Footprint by a factor of 20: A woman can reduce her carbon footprint 19 times more by having one fewer child than by all other energy efficiency actions the E.P.A. suggests combined</b>:<br />
<br />
[22.1] Paul A. Murtaugh, Michael G. Schlax (2009): <i><b>Reproduction and the carbon legacies of individuals</b></i> [<a href="http://blog.oregonlive.com/environment_impact/2009/07/carbon%20legacy.pdf" target="_blank">PDF</a>]; Global Environmental Change, 19 (2009) pp. 14-20<br />
<br />
<blockquote><b>Summary</b>: There are many ways that each of us can reduce our emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses. One important choice is how many children we choose to have. While it is obvious that each child, grandchild, and their descendants will be a producer of carbon dioxide in their lifetimes, it is not obvious what those emissions might be, and how those amounts compare with the reduced emissions that might come from driving a more fuel efficient car, using energy-efficient light bulbs and the like.<br />
<br />
The assumption is that a person is responsible for the carbon emissions of his or her descendants, weighted by their relatedness. That is, a parent is responsible for 1/2 the emissions of their children, 1/4 the emissions of their grandchildren and so on. Of course you can't know for certain how many children your grandchildren will have, and you can't know how much carbon dioxide they will emit, but the authors make some estimations based on expected trends in different countries.<br />
<br />
For 11 countries, they estimate the number of descendants using the high, median and low U.N. estimates of how birthrates will change in each country. They then use three levels of how carbon emissions may change in the future: a low (optimistic) estimate that they will drop to 1/2 of Africa's current level, a medium estimate that they will remain constant at today's levels, and a a high estimate that they will continue to increase as they are now until 2100.<br />
<br />
The comparison of carbon dioxide savings are striking. If you live in the U.S. you can reduce your carbon dioxide emissions 19 times more by having one fewer child than by all other actions the E.P.A. suggests combined.</blockquote><br />
[22.2] Related NGO Articles: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>A. Oregon State University: Murtaugh Paul (07/31/2009): <a href="http://oregonstate.edu/ua/ncs/archives/2009/jul/family-planning-major-environmental-emphasis" target="_blank"><i><b>Family Planning: A major Environmental Emphasis</b></i></a>; Oregon State<br />
<br />
B. Institute for Population Studies (17 July 2009): <a href="http://www.howmany.org/News/2009-07-14_Carbon_Legacies_Of_Individuals.htm" target="_blank"><i><b>Reproduction and the Carbon Legacies of Individuals</b></i></a>.</blockquote><br />
[22.3] News Articles: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>A. Oregonian (31 July 2009): <a href="http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2009/07/oregon_state_researchers_concl.html" target="_blank"><i><b>Oregon State study says having fewer children is best way to reduce your carbon footprint</b></i></a>, by Eric Mortenson.<br />
<br />
B. Google News Result: “Your search - murtaugh, carbon, oregon - did not match any news results.” </blockquote><br />
[23] <b>Only Civilization Collapse will prevent runaway global climate change: Industrial Civilization/Consumption Developmentism as Heat Engine Root cause of Scarcity-Conflict Climate Change-National Security Impending Near-term Extinction reality</b>. <br />
<br />
[23.1] Timothy J. Garrett (Nov. 2009), <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10584-009-9717-9" target="_blank"><i><b>Are there basic physical constraints on future anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide?</b></i></a>; Climatic Change<br />
<br />
[23.2] University of Utah (22 Nov 2009): <a href="http://unews.utah.edu/news_releases/is-global-warming-unstoppable/" target="_blank"><i><b>Is Global Warming Unstoppable?: Theory also says Energy Conservation doesn't help</b></i></a>.<br />
<br />
[23.3] Dr. Guy McPherson; Former Professor Emeritus of Natural Resources and Ecology & Evolutionary Biology; University of Tucson, Arizona: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOq2A_SGTYA" target="_blank"><i><b>Guy McPherson speaking in Middleville, Michigan, September 2011</b></i></a> (at 08:08):<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“An article in the refereed journal Climatic Change says that only Economic Collapse will prevent runaway global climate change. That was two years ago. This is among the most important papers I have ever seen and among the least cited in the scientific literature. I interviewed eight of the premier Post Doctoral in the world, last January, and of the eight, six said they were a climate scientist, that was their specialty. So I asked each of the six of them about this paper, and none of them had heard of it. These are the people who are at their best in terms of their knowledge of climate science, and none of them had heard of it. Only complete economic collapse will prevent runaway global climate change. .. It was rejected by several scientific journals first, because its just too dire, that can’t happen here, but then the prestigious journal Climatic Change says ‘Yeah, its bullet proof. There is nothing wrong with his analysis at all’.”</blockquote><br />
[23.4] Google News Results: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>A. “Your search - tim garrett, carbon, utah, anthropogenic - did not match any news results.”<br />
<br />
B. Your search - tim garrett, carbon, utah, "heat engine" - did not match any news results.<br />
<br />
C. Your search - tim garrett, carbon, utah, civilization - did not match any news results.</blockquote><br />
<br />
<div align="center">_____________________________</div><br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee’s history of providing written reasons to Neo-liberal communicants, indicates possible Neo-liberal discrimination towards Anarcho-Primitivist communicant.</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
[27] <b>ACCC History of Providing Written Reasons</b>: <br />
<br />
[27.1] Twenty of the eighty-two communications submitted to the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee have been found inadmissible. <br />
<br />
[27.2] One was inadmissible due to being already under review by the committee (2008-25: Albania: Ardian Klosi, Sinan Hibro); and another due to the withdrawal of the communicant (2010-52: N. Ireland: Gary McGhee).<br />
<br />
[27.3] Two were found to be ‘inadmissible’ by the first Committee, without any reasons provided for such decision (2004/07: Poland: Antoni Zawislak and 2004-10: Kazakhstan: Sergey Kuratov). <br />
<br />
[27.4] A further two were inadmissible for “Insufficient use of domestic remedies” (2004-09: Armenia: Edik Baghdasaryan and 2007-19: UK: John Dall).<br />
<br />
[27.5] Eight were inadmissible for ‘lacking corroborating information’ (2005-14: Poland: Antoni Zawislak; 2008-34: Spain: Maria Lopez Lax; 2009-42: Hungary; 2010-47: UK: Frances McCartney; 2010-49: UK: RM Buxton; 2012-74: UK: Frances McCartney; 2013-79: Italy: Rita D'Orsogna; and 2013-80: Croatia: Lucijan Mohorovich). One was inadmissible for “insufficient information” (2010-56: UK: T Ewing).<br />
<br />
[27.6] Only two were found inadmissible for reasons that they were ‘manifestly unreasonable’. <br />
<br />
<blockquote>A. 2012-75: UK: Terence Ewing was allegedly “manifestly unreasonable” because ‘the proceedings on the adoption of the plan were still ongoing and the content of the communication was very close to the content of communication ACCC/C/2011/61, which was currently under consideration by the Committee.” <br />
<br />
B. 013-82: Norway: Lara Johnstone was simply ‘manifestly unreasonable’ without any ‘because …...’ reasons provided. </blockquote><br />
[28] <b>ACC Committee are comprised of Neo-Liberal/Conservative Pacifist Compulsive Developmentism/Egoist Consumptionism Environmentalists</b>:<br />
<br />
[28.1] Chairperson: Mr. Jonas Ebbesson (Sweden): Mr. Jonas Ebbesson is Professor of Environmental Law, Dean of the Faculty of Law, and Director of Stockholm Environmental Law and Policy Centre, at Stockholm University.<br />
<br />
[28.2] Vice-Chair: Mr. Alexander Kodjabashev (Bulgaria): Mr. Alexander Kodjabashev is a Senior Partner specializing in environmental law matters at Dobrev & Partners in Sofia, Bulgaria.<br />
<br />
[28.3] Mr. Pavel Černý (Czech Republic): Mr. Pavel Černý is a Senior Partner specializing in environmental, administrative and constitutional law at Šikola & Partners in Brno.<br />
<br />
[28.4] Mr. Ion Diaconu (Romania): Mr.Ion Diaconu is professor of international law, with a focus on human rights law, at universities in Bucharest. <br />
<br />
[28.5] Ms. Heghine Hakhverdyan (Armenia): Ms. Heghine Hakhverdyan is a lecturer of Environmental Law at the Faculty of Law, Yerevan State University (YSU). <br />
<br />
[28.6] Ms. Ellen Hey (Netherlands): Dr. Ellen Hey is the Head of the Public International Law Department at Erasmus School of Law in Rotterdam.<br />
<br />
[28.7] Mr. Jerzy Jendrośka (Poland): Dr. Jerzy Jendrośka is the Managing Partner of Jendrośka Jerzmanski Bar & Partners, which is an environmental law firm based in Poland; and Adjunct Professor of European and International Law at Opole University, and of Environmental Law at Wroclaw University.<br />
<br />
[28.8] Mr. Gerhard Loibl (Austria): Dr. Gerhard Loibl is a Professor of International Law and Law of the European Union at the Diplomatic Academy of Vienna.<br />
<br />
[28.9] Ms. Dana Zhandaeva (Kazakhstan) (as of 30 March 2012, replacing Ms. Kravchenko): Ms. Dana Zhandaeva is currently working as a free-lance, independent consultant on issues related to international law.<br />
<br />
<br />
[29] <b>All Communications submitted to ACC Committee, except for Communicator’s Anarcho-Primitivist communication, were from Neo-Liberal / Conservative Environmentalists</b>:<br />
<br />
[29.1] All other Communicator’s appear to have been Neo-Liberal Mainstream Environmentalists; Communicator is the only Anarcho-Primitivist.<br />
<br />
<br />
[30] <b>Unsustainable Patriarchal Pacifism Neo-Liberal ‘Compulsive Development’ Environmentalism vs. Sustainable Gender Balanced Voluntarism Anti-Civilization Anarcho-Primitivism</b>: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>“Civilization, very fundamentally, is the history of the domination of nature and of women. Patriarchy means rule over women and nature.” – John Zerzan, <a href="http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/john-zerzan-patriarchy-civilization-and-the-origins-of-gender" target="_blank"><i><b>Patriarchy, Civilization, And The Origins Of Gender</b></i></a>.<br />
<br />
“Alas, still around to some degree, going through the motions and in some cases finding new ways to repackage the same old shit. The eternally superficial liberal-left “progressives” are as transparently averse to liberation as are the few surviving leninoids. [..] What all these left-leaners lack is a willingness to confront the basics of domination with the resolve and pointed questioning required if domination is to be erased.” – John Zerzan, <a href="http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/john-zerzan-the-left-today" target="_blank"><i><b>The Left Today</b></i></a>.<br />
<br />
“The key component of the left is co-opting indigenous cultures; and breaking the resistance of indigenous cultures [to the cultural imperialism onslaught of industrial civilization’s compulsive Developmentism]; and that is what the left does.” - John Zerzan: <a href="http://youtu.be/tmSjMmqtF8g" target="_blank"><i><b>Pretensions of Modernity</b></i></a> (at 00:38:35) <br />
<br />
“Cultural imperialism is the economic, technological and cultural hegemony of the industrialized nations, which determines the direction of both economic and social progress, defines cultural values, and standardizes the civilization and cultural environment throughout the world. [..] The ideology of the technological imperialists. To western man, culture is the antithesis of nature; it implies the subjugation of nature in order to build a technological, man-made world, in order to establish civilization, the acme of which is the metropolis. The ideology of the subjugation of nature has reached its climax in the conquest of outer space, but it has also supplied the moral justification for the white man's voyages of discovery, for colonialism, the slave trade, the unscrupulous exploitation of natural resources and the overseas aid plans of today: the purpose of these being to yoke all nations to the world trade network of the industrialized countries.” – Matti Sarmela; <a href="http://www.kotikone.fi/matti.sarmela/culturimperialism.pdf" target="_blank"><i><b>What is Cultural Imperialism? </b></i></a></blockquote><br />
[30.1] Neo-Liberal Environmentalism fully endorses Industrial Civilization’s addiction to Compulsive Developmentism, which involves the (a) domination of women, primitives and nature; which consequently means it is (a) patriarchal pacifism: only the patriarch is entitled to violence, all resistance to the patriarch’s violence must be non-violent; and (b) unsustainable since it endorses the unsustainable use of finite resources. <br />
<br />
[30.2] Anarcho-Primitivism opposes Industrial Civilization, as well as all forms of domination against women, nature and primitives, including Technological domination, which consequently means it is (a) gender balanced voluntarism: all agreements, including non-violence, are entered into by fully informed voluntary mutual agreement, and if reneged by one party, the other party is not bound by the nullified agreement; and (b) sustainable since it only endorses the low tech/no tech sustainable use of renewable resources. <br />
<br />
[30.3] <b><a href="http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/anonymous-what-is-anarcho-primitivism" target="_blank">Anonymous: What is Anarcho-Primitivism?</a></b>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Anarcho-primitivists comprise a subculture and political movement that, generally, advocates hunting and gathering as the ideal human subsistence method (from the point of view of sustainable resource use) and the band as the ideal human social structure (for its features of egalitarianism). While the goal may seem improbable, a primitivist would contend that more modest goals are either undesirable or unachievable within the system. The past 10,000 years have after all been largely a history of “solutions” to the problems of an agricultural society. This critique of “civilization” inherently rejects less radical ideals and claims to go uniquely to the heart of all social discontent. It is multi-faceted, drawing on several traditions of thought. These include the nineteenth century social speculators, anthropology of hunter-gatherers, situationism, anarchism, radical (deep) ecology, and anti-technological philosophy. The potential problem of implementation is largely solved by a growing consensus that an end to “economic growth” is fast approaching, making revolutionary change inevitable. The direction of that change is the focus of anarcho-primitivist interest.<br />
<br />
Anarcho-primitivism is subtly influencing society in several ways. The Unabomber’s “manifesto” enunciated many of the central tenets of anarcho-primitivism (e.g. rejection of liberalism and industrialism). Primitivists were among the protesters participating in window-smashing, spray-painting, and other vandalism at the Seattle WTO protests in December 1999. They are probably among those elusive “eco-terrorists” who carry out property destruction in the name of the Earth Liberation Front. The popular novel Fight Club (1996), which became a feature film, portrayed a group of alienated young men who reject consumerist culture and attempt to bring it to an end through massive sabotage. While anarcho-primitivism may not seem worthy of much thought or attention because it falls far outside the mainstream of political discourse, it ought not to be dismissed. It merits substantial attention solely on the basis of its harmonious integration of several historically disparate lines of thought.<br />
<br />
Aims: The prefix “anarcho” signifies the anarchist rejection of the state in favor of small-scale political structures. Additionally, as primitivist icon John Zerzan (2002:67–68) explains, “I would say Anarchism is the attempt to eradicate all forms of domination.” So a key distinction must be made between anarcho-primitivists and anarchists generally because, “[f]or example, some Anarchists don’t see the technological imperative as a category of domination.”<br />
<br />
In the most general terms, they reject “civilization” in favor of “wildness.” More specifically, they call for the abandonment or destruction of industrial (and possibly agricultural) technology in favor of subsistence that is not based on the industrial “forces of production” — hence, the adoption of the “primitive” label. This means that primitivists reject even forms of production based on collective management and ownership because any production exceeding immediate subsistence needs is seen as incompatible with long-term sustainability.<br />
<br />
[..] <br />
<br />
g. A final pillar supporting the primitivist ethos demonstrates the unsustainability of industrial society. This body of work refutes those arguments that claim science will provide the solutions necessary to sustain current First World living standards in the face of massive resource degradation and depletion. It also provides anarcho-primitivists a safe, simple answer to the challenge, “How are you going to get there?” The 1972 book, Limits to Growth (LTG), was the first systematic assessment of the sustainability of modern society. More than a decade of environmentalism still had not popularly integrated ubiquitous environmental problems into a coherent message for public consumption. Earlier works like Erlich’s The Population Bomb and Carson’s Silent Spring had focused on specific bite-sized issues. LTG offered a satisfying, yet disturbing complete picture. It was the product of a research project commissioned by the Club of Rome, an international, informal group of “businessmen, statesmen, and scientists” (Meadows, et. al. 2004:ix) who wanted an assessment of the sustainability of the overall course of human society. The final report predicted that unless widespread measures were taken to reduce consumption and pollution sufficiently early, human society would overshoot global carrying capacity and ultimately face a collapse, defined as “an uncontrolled decline in both population and human welfare” (Meadows, et. al. 2004:xi). The research group reached this conclusion through the use of a computer model which was able to factor in multiple variables and the interaction between them. LTG was the first attempt to present the environmental crisis as a whole and show that it required a systematic response (Kassiola 1990:17).<br />
<br />
Resource shortages have become a serious concern in recent years among limits-to-growth theorists. [..] It must be added, few if any of the scholars who promote limits-to-growth critiques are excited about the end of “civilization” they foresee (most hope to avert it), but, for an anarcho-primitivist, their scenarios provide a near-panacea.<br />
<br />
[..] <br />
<br />
It should be clear, by now, that there is a reasonably solid canon of anarcho-primitivist philosophy available, which provides the seeds for what could potentially blossom into a movement. Several periodicals (Green Anarchy, Species Traitor, Green Anarchist, Fifth Estate, Live Wild or Die, The Final Days, Green Journal, Disorderly Conduct, Cracks in the Empire, Do or Die, and Quick!) are dedicated to anarcho-primitivist theory, and the most widely circulated American anarchist magazine, Anarchy: A Journal of Desire Armed, frequently features primitivist viewpoints (Zerzan 2002:3). The Federal Bureau of Investigation apparently sees the potential of a radical environmental movement, since it has deemed eco-terrorism the number one domestic terrorist threat. The small communities currently in existence may represent the budding of this movement or they may not. In either case, the arguments in favor of anarcho-primitivism should be evaluated openly by mainstream society because, if its claims are valid, their implications are immediate and uncommonly far-reaching.</blockquote><br />
[30.4] <b>John Zerzan: <a href="http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/john-zerzan-patriarchy-civilization-and-the-origins-of-gender" target="_blank">Patriarchy, Civilization, And The Origins Of Gender</a></b>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Civilization, very fundamentally, is the history of the domination of nature and of women. Patriarchy means rule over women and nature. Are the two institutions at base synonymous?<br />
<br />
Philosophy has mainly ignored the vast realm of suffering that has unfolded since it began, in division of labor, its long course. Hélène Cixous calls the history of philosophy a “chain of fathers.” Women are as absent from it as suffering, and are certainly the closest of kin.<br />
<br />
Camille Paglia, anti-feminist literary theorist, meditates thusly on civilization and women:<br />
<br />
“When I see a giant crane passing on a flatbed truck, I pause in awe and reverence, as one would for a church procession. What power of conception: what grandiosity: these cranes tie us to ancient Egypt, where monumental architecture was first imagined and achieved. If civilization had been left in female hands, we would still be living in grass huts.” [1]<br />
<br />
The “glories” of civilization and women’s disinterest in them. To some of us the “grass huts” represent not taking the wrong path, that of oppression and destructiveness. In light of the globally metastasizing death-drive of technological civilization, if only we still lived in grass huts!<br />
<br />
Women and nature are universally devalued by the dominant paradigm and who cannot see what this has wrought? Ursula Le Guin gives us a healthy corrective to Paglia’s dismissal of both:<br />
<br />
“Civilized Man says: I am Self, I am Master, all the rest is other — outside, below, underneath, subservient. I own, I use, I explore, I exploit, I control. What I do is what matters. What I want is what matter is for. I am that I am, and the rest is women and wilderness, to be used as I see fit.” [2]<br />
<br />
The general crisis of modernity has its roots in the imposition of gender. Separation and inequality begin here at the period when symbolic culture itself emerges, soon becoming definitive as domestication and civilization: patriarchy. The hierarchy of gender can no more be reformed than the class system or globalization. Without a deeply radical women’s liberation we are consigned to the deadly swindle and mutilation now dealing out a fearful toll everywhere. The wholeness of original genderlessness may be a prescription for our redemption.</blockquote><br />
[30.5] <b>Uday Chandra: <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/lasr.12004/full" target="_blank">Liberalism and its Other: Primitivism</a></b>: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>“Liberalism is widely regarded as a modern intellectual tradition that defends the rights and freedoms of autonomous individuals. Yet, in both colonial and postcolonial contexts, liberal theorists and lawmakers have struggled to defend the rights and freedoms of political subjects whom they regard as “primitive,” “backward,” or “indigenous.” Liberalism thus recurrently encounters its primitive other, a face-off that gives rise to a peculiar set of dilemmas and contradictions for political theory and law.” - Uday Chandra, <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/lasr.12004/full" target="_blank"><i><b>Liberalism and Its Other: The Politics of Primitivism in Colonial and Postcolonial Indian Law</b></i></a>; Law and Society Review</blockquote><br />
[30.6] <b>Primitives & Liberals view each other as the Wrong Kind of Green</b>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>A. <a href="http://wrongkindofgreen.org/category/neo-liberalism-and-the-defanging-of-feminism/" target="_blank">Neo-Liberalism and the Defanging of Feminism</a>.<br />
<br />
B. <a href="http://wrongkindofgreen.org/category/pacifism-as-pathology/" target="_blank">Pacifism as Pathology</a>.<br />
<br />
C. <a href="http://wrongkindofgreen.org/wrong-kind-of-green-illuminates-the-ideological-manipulations-of-industrial-civilization/" target="_blank">Ideological Motivations of Industrial Civilization</a>.<br />
<br />
D. <a href="http://www.offsettingresistance.ca/" target="_blank">Offsetting Resistance: The Effects of Foundation Funding</a> .</blockquote><br />
[31] <b>Neoliberal White/Black Consumptionist Guilt’s Egotist Consumption; a.k.a. Idiot Compassion and Lifestyle Activism</b>:<br />
<br />
[31.1] In <i><b><a href="http://youtu.be/hpAMbpQ8J7g" target="_blank">First as Tragedy, then as Farce</a></b></i>, Communist Philosopher and Economist Slavoj Zizek shares his perspective on the problems of Neo-Liberalisms addiction to Cultural Imperialist Capitalism’s values of alleged ‘Ethical Consumption’: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>“Like Soros, in the morning he grabs the money; in the afternoon, he gives half of the money back to charity. In today's capitalism, more and more the tendency is to bring this tendency together. So when you buy something, your anti-consumerist duty is to do something for others, for the environment and so on, is already included in the price. If you think I am exaggerating, walk around the corner, into any Starbucks coffee, and you will see how they explicitly tell you, I quote "Its not just what you are buying, its what you are buying into. When you buy starbucks, whether you realize it or not, you are buying into something bigger than a cup of coffee. You are buying into a coffee ethics. Through our Starbucks Shared Planet Program we purchase more fair trade coffee than anyone in the world, ensuring that the farmers who grow the coffee beans receive a fair price for their hard work.......” Its a good coffee karma. This is cultural capitalism at its purist. You don't just buy a coffee. In the very consumerist act, you buy your redemption from only being a consumerist. You do something for the environment, you do something for starving children in Guatamala. ..... For every act of consumerism, within the price you pay, you purchase your redemption. This generates almost a kind of semantic over investment or burden. Its not just buying a cup of coffee, you are fulfilling a whole series of ethical duties. This logic today is almost universalized. Why? It makes you feel warm, it makes you feel like you are doing something for … My point is that, this very interesting short circuit, where the very act of egotist consumption, already includes the price for its opposite.” <br />
<br />
[He proceeds to quote: Oscar Wilde, <b>The Soul of Man under Socialism</b>] “It is much more easy to have sympathy with suffering, than it is to have sympathy with thought. People find themselves surrounded by hideous poverty, ugliness, and starvation. It is inevitable they would be strongly moved by this. Accordingly with admirable, but misdirected intentions, they very sentimentally set themselves the task of remedying the problems they see. But their remedies do not cure the disease, they merely prolong it. Indeed, they are part of the disease. They try to solve the problem of poverty, by keeping the poor alive, or in the case of an advanced school, by amusing the poor. But this is not a solution, it is an aggravation of the difficulty. The proper aim is to reconstruct society on such a basis that poverty will be impossible. It is the altruistic virtues which have prevented the carrying out of this aim. The worst slave owners were those who were kind to their slaves. In doing so they prevented the core of the system to be realized by those who suffered from it, and understood by those who contemplated it. Charity degrades and demoralizes.”</blockquote><br />
[31.2] Zizek refers to Egotist Consumptionism as Cultural Capitalism at its Purist: Where the very act of egotist consumption - buying 'free trade' coffee, going on an 'ecotourist' holiday -- already includes the price for its opposite. In the very consumerist act, you buy your redemption from only being a consumerist.’<br />
<br />
[31.3] <i>Idiot Compassion</i>’s primary conscious or unconscious subjective purpose is to engage in public displays of fake ‘Charity Compassion’ to assert the individuals ‘Moral Superiority’; while doing absolutely nothing about the underlying root causes of the particular suffering they demand ‘charity compassion’ for.<br />
<br />
[31.4] Tibetan Buddhist Master Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche defined <i>Idiot Compassion</i> as “a slimy way of trying to fulfil your desire secretly;” the Karmayogini journal as, “It is when you give people what they want as opposed to what they need, all in the name of being nice and compassionate [so that you can feel better yourself].”<br />
<br />
[31.5] In <i><b>Idiot Compassion</b></i>, Pema Chodron refers to idiot compassion as what in Psychology is referred to as enabling: “Idiot compassion … refers to something we all do a lot of and call it compassion. In some ways, it’s what’s called enabling. It’s the general tendency to give people what they want because you can’t bear to see them suffering. Basically, you’re not giving them what they need. You’re trying to get away from your feeling of I can’t bear to see them suffering. In other words, you’re doing it for yourself. You’re not really doing it for them.”<br />
<br />
[31.6] Soulseeds: <a href="http://www.soulseeds.com/grapevine/2012/10/mindful-compassion-and-idiot-compassion/" target="_blank"><i><b>Mindful Compassion and Idiot Compassion</b></i></a> explains Idiot Compassion as “When you try to help someone when they don’t want your help, or because you are really trying to help yourself, this may be idiot compassion. Its often the distinction between charity (giving TO someone) and empowerment (helping people help themselves) .. The Zen story about compassion with a rolled up umbrella makes the point. A woman was in India, riding with a friend in a rickshaw when they were attacked by a crazed man. He did no harm other than to frighten the women. However the woman was upset and asked her Zen teacher what the appropriate response to her attacker would be. The teacher said very simply, “You should have very mindfully and with great compassion whacked the attacker over the head with your umbrella.””<br />
<br />
[31.7] <i>Right Lifestyle</i>, which refers to both <i>Lifestyle Activism</i> and <i>Lifestyle Politics</i>, avoids any examination of the consumptionist focus of the lifestyle, which involves maximizing physical, psychological social comfort and material acquisition, by getting involved in acts of Lifestyle Activism or Lifestyle Politics, as a feel good way to be involved in shallow activities which pretend to solve the worlds problems; while actively avoiding addressing any root causes of the problems, to implement social structural changes.<br />
<br />
[31.8] Open Left’s article: <a href="http://www.openleft.com/diary/13032/selfdelusion-and-the-lie-of-lifestyle-politics-core-dilemmas-of-community-organizing" target="_blank"><i><b>Self Delusion and the Lies of Lifestyle activism: Core Dilemmas of Community Organizing</b></i></a> argues that much of lifestyle activism’s primary focus of public displays of Lifestyle Activism are to assert the relevant individuals ‘Moral Superiority’: “Most lifestyle activism seems to take the form it does because it allows (mostly middle-class professionals) to feel like they can make a difference in the world while at the same time purifying their lives . Every deposit of old food into the compost pile is a re-enactment of "who" they are, of how their life maintains its wholeness in a complicated, dirty, seemingly uncontrollable world. .. At the same time, lifestyle activism is often an opportunity for display. Others can see your solar panel or wind turbine. You can brag about your compost pile and educate others about how to create one. Every time you drive your Prius around town, others can see how virtuous you are.” <br />
<br />
[31.9] In Part II, <a href="http://www.openleft.com/diary/14295/part-ii-the-distortions-of-lifestyle-politics-core-dilemmas-of-community-organizing" target="_blank"><i><b>The Distortion of Lifestyle Politics</b></i></a> OpenLeft provide an interesting case study of “the ways lifestyle activism and politics can have distorting effects on social change, drawing from a recent book by the sociologist Mary Pattillo. In <a href="http://astore.amazon.com/whitrefu-20/detail//0226649326/" target="_blank"><i><b>Black on the Block</b></i></a> she examines what happened when middle-class African Americans used lifestyle strategies in their effort to "reclaim" an impoverished central city neighborhood, North Kenwood-Oakland, in Chicago. This example is especially fascinating because it shows how class-based preferences for lifestyle activism functioned among a group of middle-class African Americans also grappling with racial inequality.”<br />
<br />
<br />
[32] <b>Neo-Liberal ‘Compulsive Development’ Capital-Consumptionist Melting pot Multiculturalism vs. Voluntarist Anti-Civilization Anarcho-Primitivism Separatist Multiculturalism</b>: <br />
<br />
[32.1] Neo-Liberal Multiculturalism fully endorses Industrial Civilization – and its driver Corporate Capitalism’s – addiction to Compulsive Developmentism, which involves the (a) destruction and cultural ‘sustainable development’ colonization of homogenous tribal, ethnic, cultural, racial and religious individual identities, to be replaced with a ‘Consumerist’ identity and the commodification and commercialization of their culture’s clothing, cuisine, etc. <br />
<br />
[32.2] Anarcho-Primitivism opposes Industrial Civilization, as well as all forms of Compulsive Developmentism and domination against women, nature and primitives, including Technological domination, which consequently means it supports and encourages all communities, cultures, ethnicities, races and religions to resist the destruction and Compulsive Developmentism cultural colonization of their homogenous ethnic, cultural and/or racial tribes. Separatist multiculturalism protects individuals to retain their culture, as their primary form of identity, protecting all culture’s purity hence protects authentic cultural diversity.<br />
<br />
[32.3] Communist Philosopher and Economist Slavoy Zizek argues in <a href="http://www.soc.aau.dk/fileadmin/user_upload/kbm/VoF/%20Kurser/2011/Multiculturalism/slavoj_zizek-multiculturalism-or-the-cultural-logic-of-multinational-capitalism.pdf" target="_blank"><i><b>Multiculturalism: The Cultural Logic of Multinational Capitalism</b></i></a>, that Meltingpot/Non-Racial Multiculturalism, is the ideal Egotist Consumptionism cultural logic of Multinational Capitalism, intent on colonizing all cultures into slaves to Egotist Consumptionism. Multinational Corporations wish to colonize all nations and their cultures, turning all culture’s primary cultural value into that of an egotist consumer, for the profits of multinational corporations. <br />
<br />
<blockquote><b>Multiculturalism</b>: How, then, does the universe of Capital relate to the form of Nation State in our era of global capitalism? Perhaps, this relationship is best designated as ‘auto-colonization’: with the direct multinational functioning of Capital, we are no longer dealing with the standard opposition between metropolis and colonized countries; a global company as it were cuts its umbilical cord with its mother-nation and treats its country of origins as simply another territory to be colonized. This is what disturbs so much the patriotically oriented right-wing populists, from Le Pen to Buchanan: the fact that the new multinationals have towards the French or American local population exactly the same attitude as towards the population of Mexico, Brazil or Taiwan. Is there not a kind of poetic justice in this self-referential turn? Today’s global capitalism is thus again a kind of ‘negation of negation’, after national capitalism and its internationalist/colonialist phase. At the beginning (ideally, of course), there is capitalism within the confines of a Nation-State, with the accompanying international trade (exchange between sovereign Nation-States); what follows is the relationship of colonization in which the colonizing country subordinates and exploits (economically, politically, culturally) the colonized country; the final moment of this process is the paradox of colonization in which there are only colonies, no colonizing countries—the colonizing power is no longer a Nation-State but directly the global company. In the long term, we shall all not only wear Banana Republic shirts but also live in banana republics.<br />
<br />
And, of course, the ideal form of ideology of this global capitalism is multiculturalism, the attitude which, from a kind of empty global position, treats each local culture the way the colonizer treats colonized people—as ‘natives’ whose mores are to be carefully studied and ‘respected’. That is to say, the relationship between traditional imperialist colonialism and global capitalist self-colonization is exactly the same as the relationship between Western cultural imperialism and multiculturalism: in the same way that global capitalism involves the paradox of colonization without the colonizing Nation-State metropole, multiculturalism involves patronizing Eurocentrist distance and/or respect for local cultures without roots in one’s own particular culture. In other words, multiculturalism is a disavowed, inverted, self-referential form of racism, a ‘racism with a distance’—it ‘respects’ the Other’s identity, conceiving the Other as a self-enclosed ‘authentic’ community towards which he, the multiculturalist, maintains a distance rendered possible by his privileged universal position. <br />
<br />
Multiculturalism is a racism which empties its own position of all positive content (the multiculturalist is not a direct racist, he doesn’t oppose to the Other the particular values of his own culture), but nonetheless retains this position as the privileged empty point of universality from which one is able to appreciate (and depreciate) properly other particular cultures—the multiculturalist respect for the Other’s specificity is the very form of asserting one’s own superiority.</blockquote><br />
[33] In <a href="http://www.spiked-online.com/articles/00000002D2C4.htm" target="_blank"><b><i>'</i></b><i><b>The one measure of true love is: you can insult the other'</b></i></a>; Slavoj Zizek writes that fake two faced tolerance, is the worst form of intolerance and cultural bigotry or racism, which treats other cultures as children, and unworthy of honesty and sincerity; whereas brutal honesty is the highest form of sincere multicultural tolerance: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>Another thing that bothers me about this multiculturalism is when people ask me: 'How can you be sure that you are not a racist?' My answer is that there is only one way. If I can exchange insults, brutal jokes, dirty jokes, with a member of a different race and we both know it's not meant in a racist way. If, on the other hand, we play this politically correct game - 'Oh, I respect you, how interesting your customs are' - this is inverted racism, and it is disgusting.<br />
<br />
In the Yugoslav army where we were all of mixed nationalities, how did I become friends with Albanians? When we started to exchange obscenities, sexual innuendo, jokes. This is why this politically correct respect is just, as Freud put it, 'zielgehemmt'. You still have the aggression towards the other.<br />
<br />
You cannot do the game of erotic seduction in politically correct terms. For me there is one measure of true love: you can insult the other. Like in that horrible German comedy film from 1943 where Marika Röck treats her fiancé very brutally. This fiancé is a rich, important person, so her father asks her why are you treating him like that. And she gives the right answer. She says: 'But I love him, and since I love him, I can do with him whatever I want.' That's the truth of it. If there is true love, you can say horrible things and anything goes.<br />
<br />
When multiculturalists tell you to respect the others, I always have this uncanny association that this is dangerously close to how we treat our children: the idea that we should respect them, even when we know that what they believe is not true. We should not destroy their illusions. No, I think that others deserve better - not to be treated like children.</blockquote><br />
<div align="center">_______________________________</div><br />
[40] <b>Supporting Documentation</b>: <br />
<br />
A. List of Aarhus Convention Inadmissible Rulings. <br />
<br />
B. ECHR: 16325/13: Johnstone v. Norway: Oslo District Court’s Breivik Necessity Judgement was Discriminatory & Ineffective Remedy.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>a. 05 March 2013: ECHR: Registrar: Ragna Bjarnadottir: Application no. 16325/13: Johnstone v. Norway (<a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/0/7/13072327/13-04-07_echr_16325-13_johnstone-v-norway.pdf" target="_blank">PDF</a>). <br />
<br />
b. 11 Jan 2013: European Court of Human Rights Application (<a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/eu-court-human-rights.html" target="_blank">PDF</a>)</blockquote><br />
C. <b>Media Censorship: Citizens are ignorant of how to contribute to Sustainable Security: Procreate and Consume below carrying capacity, to avoid scarcity induced resource war conflict</b>.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>a. Maher, Michael (1997/03): <i><b><a href="http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/mahertm_journo-env-pop-connection" target="_blank">How and Why Journalists Avoid the Population-Environment Connection</a></b></i>: University of Southwestern Louisiana, Population and Environment, Volume 18, Number 4, March 1977; Reprinted in 1997 by the Carrying Capacity Network, Focus, 18 (2), 21-37.</blockquote><br />
D. <b>Every Child Increases a Woman’s Carbon Footprint by a factor of 20: A woman can reduce her carbon footprint 19 times more by having one fewer child than by all other energy efficiency actions the E.P.A. suggests combined</b>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>a. Paul A. Murtaugh, Michael G. Schlax (2009): <i><b><a href="http://blog.oregonlive.com/environment_impact/2009/07/carbon%20legacy.pdf" target="_blank">Reproduction and the carbon legacies of individuals</a></b></i>; Global Environmental Change, 19 (2009) pp. 14-20</blockquote><br />
E. <b>Only Civilization Collapse will prevent runaway global climate change: Industrial Civilization/Consumption Developmentism as Heat Engine Root cause of Scarcity-Conflict Climate Change-National Security Impending Near-term Extinction reality</b>.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>a. University of Utah (22 Nov 2009): <a href="http://unews.utah.edu/news_releases/is-global-warming-unstoppable/" target="_blank"><i><b>Is Global Warming Unstoppable?: Theory also says Energy Conservation doesn't help</b></i></a>.<br />
<br />
b. Timothy J. Garrett (Nov. 2009), <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10584-009-9717-9" target="_blank"><i><b>Are there basic physical constraints on future anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide?</b></i></a>; Climatic Change</blockquote><br />
Dated at George, South Africa, Pale Blue Dot: 11 May 2013<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [<a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/unece-aarhus-comp-comm.html">EcoFem vs. KT Breivik</a>]</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<br />
<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327922598170048610" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JSpbgoKp8LA/SfCVX96zuGI/AAAAAAAAEIs/qqvoPLfHrLA/s400/400_BlackLine.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 7px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 620px;" />Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-3190215419854665432013-04-08T19:49:00.003+03:002013-04-08T19:49:52.450+03:00Norway's Rural Center Party votes to Close Borders to Immigration<div align="justify"><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Center Party keen to close borders</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Center Party leaders failed in their attempts to moderate the demands of their anti-Schengen members, who claim that Norway’s participation in Schengen has resulted in more crime and narcotics entering the country.</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">April 8, 2013 | News with Views | Nina Berglund</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zhgciJ3um78/UWL0iEeKsfI/AAAAAAAAhf4/bI_5PZKcV2U/s1600/130408_NO-Centerparty_375x254.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zhgciJ3um78/UWL0iEeKsfI/AAAAAAAAhf4/bI_5PZKcV2U/s1600/130408_NO-Centerparty_375x254.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 254px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 375px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote>Norway’s rural-oriented Center Party (Senterpartiet, Sp) shocked even its sister party in Sweden over the weekend when it voted to promote withdrawal from the so-called “Schengen agreement” that has opened borders among various European countries. The party also wants to replace Norway’s economic agreement with the European Union, in addition to securing high tariffs and subsidies that protect Norwegian agriculture and keep food prices high.<br />
<br />
Center Party leaders failed in their attempts to moderate the demands of their anti-Schengen members, who claim that Norway’s participation in Schengen has resulted in more crime and narcotics entering the country. Led by Sandra Borch of the Center Party’s youth organization and Jenny Klinge, a Member of Parliament on the conservative side of the party, a majority of party members voted to seek withdrawal from Schengen and reinstatement of passport control at all border crossings. They think that will hinder the entry of “organized foreign criminal bands” into Norway.</blockquote><a name='more'></a><br />
<blockquote>“I was shocked,” Sandra Lindström, international secretary of the Swedish Centerpartiet, told newspaper Aftenposten. Lindström was monitoring her Norwegian sister party’s annual national meeting in the mountains at Loen over the weekend, and said she found the proposal to essentially try to close Norway’s borders to the freer flow of labour and goods both “shocking and disturbing.”<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>‘Hostile towards foreigners’</b><br />
<br />
Lindström said “we hadn’t expected” that their sister party would approve an effort to withdraw from Schengen, especially because of the reason for it: “Pulling out of Schengen because they’re afraid of crime from foreign gangs seems hostile towards foreigners.” She said only Sweden’s most anti-immigration party, Sverigedemocraterna, uses the “same sort of rhetoric.”<br />
<br />
Center Party leaders ended up dismissing such criticism and publicly backing the result of their membership’s vote. “They (their Swedish colleagues) can believe what they like,” party leader Liv Signe Navarsete told Aftenposten. <br />
<br />
“But in Norway we’ve had strong growth in crime, the police are worried, and something must be done at the borders. The party has responded that we must pull out of Schengen. Now we have to look at how to do that.”<br />
<br />
Some party members also want to limit labour immigration to Norway, but party leadership managed to thwart that effort. The party did vote, however, to demand a national referendum on whether Norway should continue to honor its economic agreement with the European Union, the so-called EØS-avtale that provides access to EU markets. The Center Party thinks it’s too liberal and wants to scrap it, too.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Slim chances</b><br />
<br />
It’s unlikely the party will succeed in its mission to close the borders, but Navarsete claimed a pull-out “will be a theme” during new negotiations among government coalition members if they win a third term after national elections in September. Current public opinion polls suggest that’s unlikely as well.<br />
<br />
In other voting at the Center Party’s annual meeting, a majority agreed, among other things, to support a military draft for women as well as men, to ban the serving of alcoholic drinks after 3am, to reform the current regional health care delivery system, and to increase the amount of inheritance that’s tax-free.<br />
<br />
As expected, party members also agreed to ban oil exploration and production off Lofoten and Vesterålen in northern Norway, to protect fishing grounds and the scenic beauty of the area. One of the party’s deputy leaders who currently serves as oil minister, Ola Borten Moe, has wanted to open up the offshore area for oil activity but suspended his effort when he realized the majority in his own party was against him.</blockquote><br />
<div align="center"><a href="http://fleur-de-lis.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-__b6nnsrEpQ/UQqve4pxolI/AAAAAAAAg-U/74EyJkDE6MA/s1600/IdleNoMore-IndigenousRights_598x126.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 119px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 598px;" /></a></div><br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Tiny party in the spotlight again</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">April 5, 2013 | News with Views</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<blockquote>NEWS ANALYSIS: More than 90 percent of Norwegian voters don’t support Liv Signe Navarsete’s small, rural-oriented Center Party (Senterpartiet, Sp), yet its top politicians and their upcoming annual meeting this weekend have been grabbing headlines and topping newscasts. Outsiders can only marvel over how and why the party can command so much attention and power given its actual standing within the population.<br />
<br />
The same might be said for the now-small Socialist Left party (SV), since both it and the Center Party now hold only between 4 and 5 percent of the vote. But it’s the Center Party that often seems most out of step with popular opinion, from its eagerness to kill more of Norway’s wolves to its efforts to keep food prices high to benefit farmers. Norwegian Broadcasting (NRK) reported Friday morning that Center Party leader Navarsete herself is in danger of losing her seat in parliament (Stortinget), which represents her mountainous home county of Sogn og Fjordane. The party hasn’t had such a poor showing as it heads into a national election campaign for the past 24 years, reports newspaper Dagsavisen.<br />
<br />
Instead of being ignored because of its lack of support, however, the party continues to receive widespread media coverage, since, like SV, it’s one of the three parties forming Norway’s Labour-led left-center government coalition that’s up for re-election. The Center Party’s rural roots and the national romanticism often attached to its support among farmers likely also play a role, for which the vast majority of Norwegians pay dearly in the form of protectionist policies and agricultural subsidies that the party helps secure.<br />
<br />
The vast amount of media attention lately has also been unwanted since it’s included so many stories about the party’s internal conflicts, an alleged power struggle going on between Navarsete and one of her two deputy leaders, Ola Borten Moe, and, not least, Moe’s own exploits. As Norway’s oil and energy minister, Moe has grabbed the spotlight himself for his bullish promotion of more oil exploration and production. An unauthorized biography of Moe released this week also paints a portrait that reveals a partying playboy behind his otherwise stoic exterior – along with an ambitious young mam who lusts for more power.<br />
<br />
The pressure is thus on Navarsete, who’s suffered some scandals of her own, to assert whatever authority she has left this weekend. She desperately needs to gather and unite her troops, and mobilize them to boost the party’s voter support.<br />
<br />
“It’s too low,” Navarsete admitted to Dagsavisen on Friday, “but we have a tradition for mobilizing before elections and mobilization will begin at the meeting.” She insists the anti-EU Center Party, which actually fights for de-centralizatin, “is important in Norwegian politics, as a party that dares to take up the fight both against Brussels and centralization forces in its own country. I will hammer into our folks that there’s a lot at stake and that we’re important.”<br />
<br />
The Center Party has never enjoyed mass support, even though Ola Borten Moe’s grandfather Per Borten managed to be Norway’s prime minister for six years, from 1965 to 1971. Moe reportedly aspires to follow in his footsteps, using his grandfather’s name in a move that reinforces the association. While former Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland was generally referred to on second reference merely as “Brundtland,” and Health Minister Jonas Gahr Støre is “Støre,” Moe has succeeded in being referred to mostly as “Borten Moe,” allowing him to constantly remind Norwegians of his family heritage.<br />
<br />
The media had mostly refrained from writing about his late-night party exploits or those of his former aid, until Elisabeth Skarsbø Moen’s book came out this week and suddenly the entire nation got a mental glimple of Moe cavorting naked before an improvised sauna in his aid’s apartment. Navarsete was blasting the book on Friday, questioning its sources and saying she thinks they should apologize for suggesting she and Moe all but hate each other.<br />
<br />
Navarsete wants politics, not personalities, to dominate debate again. In addition to flagging the old issues like more support for rural areas and more local autonomy, Navarsete is pushing for more help for the sick and elderly, by offering to pay family members to provide more care at home. She’s disagreed with some party members’ complaints that the Center Party has moved too far away from the center of Norwegian politics, through its government alliance with Labour and the Socialist Left, but was hinting this week that she may go along with tighter bonds to other centrist parties like the Christian Democrats.<br />
<br />
<b>Possible end of an era</b><br />
<br />
Navarsete made a significant concession to one of her Socialist Left government colleagues, Bård Vegar Solhjell, who said earlier this week that Center Party members should stop their complaining and be more satisfied with what they’ve achieved by being part of the government, given the funds now earmarked for better highways, more funding for local governments (kommuner) and other rural-friendly programs. ”We have achieved an enormous amount though our (government) cooperation,” Navarsete told Dagsavisen. “We must be clear about that, and proud of it.”<br />
<br />
The last several months of public opinion polls continue to suggest, however, that the Labour-led coalition won’t survive the September 9 election, and will be replaced by a new government led by the Conservatives. According to an analysis of polls conducted for newspaper Dagens Næringsliv (DN) this week, the Conservatives now hold 32.4 percent of the vote followed by Labour with 27.9 percent and the Progress Party with 17 percent. The centrist parties were left with just around 4-5 percent each, with the Center Party at 4.8 percent.<br />
<br />
That may spell the end of the Center Party’s last eight years as a “red-green” party, not least since its government partner SV is also said to be in crisis with less than 5 percent of the vote. Both may be forced to seek new alliances. It may also spell the end for Navarsete’s party leadership. Right now, though, Navarsete and her colleagues face having to mobilize their rural constituency just to allow them to hang on to some seats, including her own.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [<a href="http://www.newsinenglish.no/2013/04/08/center-party-keen-to-close-borders/">Views and News from Norway</a> :: <a href="http://www.newsinenglish.no/2013/04/05/tiny-party-in-the-spotlight-again/">N&V</a>]</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327922598170048610" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JSpbgoKp8LA/SfCVX96zuGI/AAAAAAAAEIs/qqvoPLfHrLA/s400/400_BlackLine.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 7px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 620px;" />Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-52572414560055857682013-04-07T20:00:00.003+03:002013-04-07T20:38:54.087+03:00ECHR 16325/13: Breivik Necessity Judgement was Discriminatory & Innefective Remedy: Johnstone v. Norway<div align="justify"><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">EU Crt of Human Rights: Case 16325/13 Breivik Necessity Judgement was Discriminatory & Innefective Remedy: Johnstone v. Norway</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">ECHR: European Court of Human Rights Application: Oslo District Courts Breivik Necessity Judgement is Discriminatory & Ineffective Remedy</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Andrea Muhrrteyn | EcoFeminist v Breivik | 07 April 2013</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-YT1G6MaZm24/UWGj3GuXD2I/AAAAAAAAhfY/CuhJyPkD3us/s1600/13-04-07_ECHR_16325-13_Johnstone-v-Norway_800x1117.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-UkGmKuUSa20/UWGjudyHJxI/AAAAAAAAhfM/W6he8rABQd4/s1600/13-04-07_ECHR_16325-13_Johnstone-v-Norway_375x524.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 342px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 297px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote><span style="font-size: 95%;"><b>Correspondence from ECHR Registrar: Legal Secretary: Ragna Bjarnadottir, dated 05 March 2013 (Received 07 April 2013)</b>[<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-YT1G6MaZm24/UWGj3GuXD2I/AAAAAAAAhfY/CuhJyPkD3us/s1600/13-04-07_ECHR_16325-13_Johnstone-v-Norway_800x1117.png">ECHR Letter-Large</a>]:<br />
<br />
ECHR Registrar acknowledges Receipt: <b>Application no. 16325/13: Johnstone v. Norway </b>[Note: Only about 10% of cases submitted to the ECHR are admitted for processing, as 90% of cases filed do not meet all the <a href="http://youtu.be/mcbDDhs5ZVA">ECHR admissibility conditions</a>.]<br />
<br />
<b>Human Rights Violations complained of</b>: <br />
<br />
• <b>Discrimination</b>: 24 August 2012: Oslo District Court: Judge Wenche Arntzen: Norway v. Anders Breivik Necessity Judgement <br />
<br />
• <b>Discrimination and Denied Right to an Effective Remedy</b>: Supreme Court: Secretary General Gunnar Bergby: 10 September 2012 Decision<br />
<br />
• <b>Discrimination and Denied Right to an Effective Remedy</b>: Parliamentary Ombudsman: Head of Division: Berit Sollie: 15 November 2012 Ruling <br />
<br />
The (i) 10 September 2012, administrative decision of Norway Supreme Court Secretary General Gunnar Bergby, denying Applicant Access to Court by refusing to process her 27 August 2012, Application for Review of the Oslo District Court: ‘Breivik Judgement’; and (ii) the 15 November 2012 ruling by Parliamentary Ombudsman, that Secretary General’s Gunnar Bergby’s administrative decision, was a ‘judgement/decision by a court of law’, thereby justifying his refusal to order Secretary General Bergby to process Applicants Application for Review; were (iii) violations of applicants right to an Effective Remedy and (iv) were motivated acts of ideological discrimination against the ‘right wing’ or ‘cultural conservatives’, and against anyone – particularly anyone who is not ‘right wing’ -- who opposes, or objects to Ideological Discrimination against ‘right wing’ (cultural conservatives).</span></blockquote><table align="right" border="0" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" style="width: 560px;"><tbody>
<tr><td width="560"><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size: 80%;"></span></strong></div></td></tr>
</tbody></table><a name='more'></a><div align="center"><a href="http://fleur-de-lis.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-__b6nnsrEpQ/UQqve4pxolI/AAAAAAAAg-U/74EyJkDE6MA/s1600/IdleNoMore-IndigenousRights_598x126.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 119px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 598px;" /></a></div><br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">ECHR: Acknowledgement of Receipt Letter Transcript</span></span></strong> </blockquote></div><br />
<br />
<blockquote><b>EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS</b><br />
<br />
ECHR-LE1.IR<br />
SCP/RPJ/osu<br />
<br />
Application No. 16325/13<br />
Johnstone v. Norway<br />
Date of lodging: 10 January 2013<br />
<br />
Dear Sir,<br />
<br />
I acknowledge receipt of your submission concerning the above application. Your file has been given the above number. You must refer to it in any further correspondence relating to this case. <br />
<br />
In order to process your application more efficiently, please find enclosed a set of 10 barcode lables for your use exclusively in this case. If you send the Registry a letter or any other correspondence, please stick one of the barcode labels on the top right-hand corner of the first page of the correspondence. <br />
<br />
The Court will deal with the case as soon as practicable on the basis of the information and documents submitted by you. Please note that if you wish to send any documents in addition to your application, you should not send original documents as they will not be returned to you by the Court. The proceedings are primarily in writing and you will only be required to appear in person if the Court invites you to do so. You will be informed of any decision taken by the Court.<br />
<br />
You should inform me of any change in your address. Furthermore, you should, of your own motion, inform the Court about any major developments regarding the above case, and submit any further relevant decisions of the domestic authorities. <br />
<br />
Please note that no acknowledgement will be made as to the receipt of subsequent correspondence. No telephone enquiries either please. If you wish to be assured that your letter is actually received by the Court then you should send it be recorded delivery with a prepaid acknowledgement of receipt form. <br />
<br />
Yours faithfully<br />
For the Registrar<br />
<br />
Ragna Bjarnadottir<br />
Legal Secretary<br />
<br />
Enc: Barcode labels</blockquote><br />
<div align="center"><a href="http://armigideon-knights.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-R0qzzurjUP4/T9WzLw5xK_I/AAAAAAAAacg/hZa3QwWxDds/s1600/NorwayVBreivik_FleurdeLis_MargaretHagen_556x119.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 119px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 556px;" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Excerpts from ECHR Application alleging Oslo District Courts Breivik's Necessity Judgement is Discriminatory & an Ineffective Remedy</span></span></strong> </blockquote></div><br />
<br />
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-wkCF-5PI1f4/UPsmtf8Ms8I/AAAAAAAAgr0/cKcCgxK_f5I/s1600/ECHR_JvNO_Breivik.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-z355WBnLdEE/UPsnIMEeg5I/AAAAAAAAgsA/5QIu4JBLI3M/s1600/ECHR_JvNO_Breivik_350x338.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 338px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 350px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">II. Statement of the Facts</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<b>14.1 Overview: Violations of Right to an Effective Remedy, by Supreme Court Secretary General and Parliamentary Ombudsman:</b><br />
<br />
<blockquote>A. The (i) 10 September 2012, administrative decision of Norway Supreme Court Secretary General Gunnar Bergby, denying Applicant Access to Court by refusing to process her 27 August 2012, Application for Review of the Oslo District Court: ‘Breivik Judgement’; and (ii) the 15 November 2012 ruling by Parliamentary Ombudsman, that Secretary General’s Gunnar Bergby’s administrative decision, was a ‘judgement/decision by a court of law’, thereby justifying his refusal to order Secretary General Bergby to process Applicants Application for Review; were (iii) violations of applicants right to an Effective Remedy and (iv) were motivated acts of ideological discrimination against the ‘right wing’ or ‘cultural conservatives’, and against anyone – particularly anyone who is not ‘right wing’ -- who opposes, or objects to Ideological Discrimination against ‘right wing’ (cultural conservatives).</blockquote><br />
<b>14.2 Overview: Discrimination and Right to an Effective Remedy:</b><br />
<br />
14.3 The Norwegian government has no justification to discriminate against an accused, by denying the accused his Right to a Free and Fair Trial (an effective remedy), simply because an accused is an ‘extreme right wing conservative’. <br />
<br />
14.4 The Norwegian government has no justification to discriminate against a ‘right wing’ accused, whose primary objective is to profit from such ‘liberal left wing’ discrimination against him, to attain ‘right wing’ martyr and victimhood status, thereby to emotionally outrage right wing conservatives, and contribute to greater polarisation of the public into left vs. right wing camps. <br />
<br />
14.5 The Norwegian government has no justification to discriminate against a ‘right wing’ accused, for the covert purposes of profiting from such left vs right wing polarisation consequences of denying a right wing accused his right to a free and fair trial. <br />
<br />
14.6 The Norwegian government has no justification to politically profit from denying a ‘hated’ accused their right to a free and fair trial, simply because the public is emotionally outraged and on a ‘right wing extremist witch hunt’ and obtain schadenfreude satisfaction from observing the judicial system discriminate against such ‘hated’ individual.<br />
<br />
14.7 The Norwegian government has no justification to discriminate against any individual who does not share the ‘right wing’ accused’s ideology, nor the public’s rabid emotional ‘right wing witch hunt’ hysteria for revenge and denial of the rule of law to the ‘right wing’ accused, who endorses the ‘right wing’ accused’s right to a free and fair trial.<br />
<br />
14.8 Anthropocentrically speaking: Right wing extremist terrorist Anders Breivik deserves a free and fair trial, and an objective and subjective enquiry into his political necessity evidence; by the Left wing extremist Norwegian Government; upon the same Norwegian rule of law due process principles; as left wing extremist terrorist Nelson Mandela deserved a free and fair trial, and an impartial objective and subjective enquiry into the evidence for his defence; by the Right wing extremist South African Apartheid government.<br />
<br />
<b>14.9 ‘Norway’s Politically Correct Discrimination & Censorship of Cultural Conservatives, by Feminists and Multiculturalists justified the Violent ‘Necessity’ of 22 July 2011 Attacks’ – Anders Breivik</b><br />
<br />
A. On 22 July 2011, a fertilizer truck bomb exploded in Oslo within Regjeringskvartalet, in front of the office of Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg, at 15:25:22 (CEST), killing eight and injuring at least 209; and ninety minutes later, a mass shooting occurred at a summer camp organized by the AUF, the youth division of the ruling Norwegian Labour Party (AP) on the island of Utøya in Tyrifjorden, Buskerud, by a gunman dressed in a homemade police uniform, killing 69, and injuring at least 110.<br />
<br />
B. The Norwegian Police arrested Anders Behring Breivik, born 13 February 1979, on Utøya island and charged him with both attacks. Breivik admitted to having carried out the actions he was accused of, but denied criminal guilt and claimed the defence of necessity (jus necessitatis).<br />
<br />
C. Breivik’s necessity justification – as detailed in his Manifesto: 2083 – A European Declaration of Independence and simplistically referred to as “Titanic Europe is on a demographic/immigration collision course with Islam Iceberg” -- was two-pronged: (1) Resist Eurabia: He believes Islam and cultural Marxism are involved in a ‘Eurabian’ demographic colonisation and ethnic cleansing of indigenous Norwegians and Europeans, and that it is a matter of necessity to resist “Eurabia”, to preserve European Christendom; (2) Gov & Media Censorship required Ultra violence to Access International Publicity: Non-violent resistance is futile, as democracy is no longer functioning in Norway, due to politically correct discrimination and exclusion – by means of censorship and persecution – of cultural conservatives by the left wing extremist Norwegian government and media. <br />
<br />
D. According to Oslo Organized Crime Police Investigation Report: “Explanation of 22 July 2011, doc 08,01”: “[Breivik] emphasizes that if he had not been censored by the media all his life, he would not have had to do what he did. He believes the media have the main responsibility for what has happened because they did not publish his opinions.... The low-intensity civil war that he had already described, had lasted until now with ideological struggle and censorship of cultural conservatives...... He explains that this is the worst day of his life and that he has dreaded this for 2 years. He has been censored for years. He mentions Dagbladet and Aftenposten as those who among other things have censored him..... He says that he also wrote “essays” that he tried to publish via the usual channels, but that they were all censored..... The subject summarizes: As long as more than twelve were executed, the operation will still be a success. The experts ask how the number twelve comes into consideration. Twelve dead are needed to penetrate the censorship wall, he explains..... About his thoughts on the Utøya killings now, the subject says: The goal was to execute as many as possible. At least 30. It was horrible, but the number had to be assessed based on the global censorship limit. Utøya was a martyrdom, and I am very proud of it..... He believes he had to kill at least twelve, because there is a censorship-wall preventing an open debate about what is happening in the country..... So I knew I had to cross a certain threshold to exceed the censorship-wall of the international media.” <br />
<br />
E. As argued in Anders Breivik 22 June 2012 Closing Statement: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>a. “Mullah Krekar [a Kurdish Islamic refugee in Norway] .. calls himself a Kurdish religious leader. He is one of the few Muslim leaders who are honest about Islam’s takeover of Europe. Krekar said, “In Denmark they printed drawings, but the result was that support of Islam increased. I, and all Muslims, are evidence. You have not managed to change us. It is we who are changing you. Look at the changes in the population of Europe, where Muslims reproduce like mosquitoes. Every Western woman in Europe has 1.4 children. Every Muslim woman in the same countries gives birth to 3.5 children.” <br />
<br />
b. “One of the most influential people in Norway, Arne Strand [a print and broadcast journalist and former member of Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland's cabinet] in Dagsavisen [the daily newspaper Strand edits, until 1999 the official organ of the Labor Party, now independent] has issued many statements about press subsidies. He proposes that everyone on the right, to the right of Carl I. Hagen [former Vice President of the Storting (Norwegian Parliament) and ex-chairman of the Progress Party], should be censored, and excluded from the democratic process. He says straight out that government press subsidies [to the Left, denied to the right] are necessary to preserve the current political hegemony. We must protect hegemony, we must not allow people the right to express themselves. The system of press subsidies ensures that Norway will never be a democracy, because those on the far right are excluded.” <br />
<br />
c. “This trial should be about finding the truth. The documentation of my claims—are they true? If they are true, how can what I did be illegal? Norwegian academics and journalists work together and make use of [..] methods to deconstruct Norwegian identity, Christianity, and the Norwegian nation. How can it be illegal to engage in armed resistance against this? The prosecution wondered who gave me a mandate to do what I did. [..] I have answered this before, but will do so again. Universal human rights, international law, and the right to self-defense provided the mandate to carry out this self-defense. Everything has been triggered by the actions of those who consciously and unconsciously are destroying our country. Responsible Norwegians and Europeans who feel even a trace of moral obligation are not going to sit by and watch as we are made into minorities in our own lands. We are going to fight. The attacks on July 22 were preventive attacks in defense of my ethnic group, the Norwegian indigenous people. I therefore cannot acknowledge guilt. I acted from necessity (nødrett) on behalf of my people, my religion and my country.”</blockquote><br />
14.10 Norwegian Prosecutors did not embark on legal proceedings to dispute and negate the evidence of Breivik’s ‘Necessity’ evidence, by means of a Political Necessity ‘Right Wing’ Terrorism trial, wherein Breivik’s Necessity evidence was proven unjustified, in accordance to the required Objective and Subjective test; but chose instead to proceed with a Stalinesque Political Psychiatry show trial, where Breivik was alleged to be ‘insane’, and was forced to prove his sanity. Once his sanity was proven, the matter of an impartial free and fair Terrorism Necessity trial, to determine his guilt or innocence, was ignored, as irrelevant. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.11 Applicant’s EcoFeminist Political Necessity Activism and Social Science Enquiry Ecological Biocentric worldview:</b><br />
<br />
14.12 Applicant is neither anthropocentrically liberal nor conservative, but an EcoFeminist Guerrylla Law Sustainable Security Radical Honoursty Transparency Primitivist and paralegal interested and active in Political Necessity civil disobedience activism. <br />
<br />
14.13 She is the founder of the unregistered Guerrylla Law Radical Honoursty Party, the aim of which is to establish a Green License to Vote, to elect a Green President, to transition South Africa into a Sustainable Voluntaryist (Honourable Free Society of Men and Women capable of ruling themselves) Green Republic. <br />
<br />
14.14 The Guerrylla Law Radical Honoursty Party, is founded on the Guerrylla Law Radical Honoursty Social Contract which include, among others, the following principles:<br />
<br />
A. <i><b>Radical Honoursty Problem Solving Communicator Status</b></i>: Any individual who desires this ‘status’ is required to follow the Radical Honoursty Problem Solving Communicator communication principles. All written communication for such members attention must be (a) acknowledged as received, (b) honestly answered or the questioner to be notified of a ‘by when’ date, when honest answers shall be provided. (c) Brutal honesty is considered honourable respect; sycophancy or PR is considered passive aggressive, manipulative and insulting. (d) In any disagreement or misunderstanding with another member, to commit to remain in discussion, with each other, until it is resolved. (e) Any member who ignores or evades another member’s attempts to resolve a disagreement, or to answer a question, will be put on the ‘Dishonourable Hit List’ for Party assassination after two final warning notices to the member, from the party to either: (a) resign, or (b) resolve the disagreement, by a specific date, in accordance to their Radical Honoursty Problem Solving Communicator Status oath.<br />
<br />
B. <i><b>Sustainability</b></i>: A Sustainable society regulates human procreation and/or resource utilization behaviour , to ensure sustainability. <br />
<br />
C. <i><b>Sustainable Rights</b></i>: Laws of Nature determine that Environmental or ecological rights and responsibilities are the sine qua non foundation for all other Rights . <br />
<br />
D. <i><b>Sustainable Security</b></i>: ‘There is no security without sustainability’ : In the absence of an international new moral order where Ecocentric Guerrylla laws are implemented to regulate and reduce human procreation and resource utilization behaviour, towards a sustainable, pre-industrial lifestyle paradigm; “overpopulation and resource scarcity will result in conflict and war” (perhaps nuclear ) confronting regions at an accelerated pace , resulting in the “collapse of the global economic system and every market-oriented national economy” by 2050 .<br />
<br />
E. <i><b>Guerrylla Laws</b></i>: define the procreation and consumption behaviour of an individual as an Eco-Innocent (sustainable) or Scarcity-Combatant (unsustainable), based upon (A) a sustainable bio-capacity of 1 global hectare (gha) (60 % of 1.8 gha ) in accordance with the proactive conservation policies of Bhutan ; and (B) the Oregon University study that concludes that every child increases a parents’ eco-footprint by a factor of 20 . <br />
<br />
F. A Green Voter is an individual whose procreation and consumption behaviour is sustainable, as defined by Guerrylla laws, as an Eco-Innocent .<br />
<br />
G. Only Green Voters can elect the Green President, whose general duty is to (A) protect the Constitution from the Tragedy of the Commons material greed and psychological and political dishonour of the nations Scarcity (breeding and consumption) combatants, who wish to exploit the country’s resources for short-term political and socio-economic profits, and (B) transition South Africa to a Sustainable Voluntaryist Green Republic. <br />
<br />
H. The Green President’s sustainable security legislative duty is to veto all legislation that obstructs, or fails to reduce, the nation’s Scarcity combatant’s procreation and/or consumption path to sustainability, based upon Guerrylla law sustainable rights and sustainable security principles. <br />
<br />
I. The Green Presidents sustainable security executive duty is to protect the Constitution, root out all corruption, by taking over the duty of executive supervision of the Ministry of Police and Ministry of Justice, including the appointment of all Magistrates and Justices. Magistrates and Judges shall be required to ascertain, verify, and transparently declare – as part of the court record - the Eco-Innocent (sustainable) or Scarcity-Combatant (unsustainable) status of all parties (including the Judge, legal representatives and State Representatives) to any court proceeding; including consideration of such status, where relevant to the legal proceedings. Any Eco-Innocent is entitled to be tried by an Eco-Innocent Prosecutor and Judge, and in any dispute with a Scarcity Combatant, may require the court to take notice of Scarcity Combatants behaviour as a relevant aggravating factor to Scarcity related socio-political problems, such as: crime, violence, unemployment, poverty, food shortages, inflation, political instability, loss of civil rights, conformism, political correctness, vanishing species, pollution, urban sprawl, toxic waste, energy depletion.<br />
<br />
J. An individual can only run for Green President, as (A) an Independent or from a Political Party, which practices 100% transparency disclosure of all campaign contributions, and (B) whose procreation and consumption lifestyle qualifies them as an Eco-Innocent .<br />
<br />
14.15 Applicant consequently partially agrees with Breivik, that not only Europe, but the World is at War, but considers the economic, political and military war between the Political Left and Right to be a deliberate distraction, from the real war that is being waged by both the Left and Right’s support for the Ind:Civ:F(x) world war against nature. <br />
<br />
14.16 <i><b>Ind:Civ:F(x) World War</b></i>: Industrial Civilization’s Exponential Economic Growth Breeding and Consumption War Scarcity combatant humans are at war with each other (Left v Right), Eco-Innocents, all other species for their preferential access to , and control of, nature’s finite resources. <br />
<br />
14.17 Applicant’s terrorism default working hypothesis is that much of terrorism – whether left or right -- is a result of Mainstream Access-to-Discourse Gatekeeper editor’s censorship of dissenter’s attempts at non-violent problem solving, creating a socio-political pressure cooker environment, where activists are forced to resort to violence for publicity, which benefits the media corporations ‘If It Bleeds, it Leads’ editorial policies and corporate profits.<br />
<br />
14.18 Applicant endorses everyone from the extreme left to right’s right to access to impartial courts. Applicant decided to test whether Breiviks allegations of Norway’s discrimination against and censorship of cultural conservatives was true, by means of embarking on a social science test to determine how Left Wing Norwegian Officials and media and right wing Breivik, would react to an EcoFeminist, supporting Breivik’s right to a free and fair trial. <br />
<br />
14.19 Applicant was particularly motivated to test Breivik’s allegations of discrimination against right wing / cultural conservatives, considering his Eco-Innocent status.<br />
<br />
<b>14.20 Anders Breivik: ‘Peacenik Innocent’ in Scarcity Combatants Ind.Civ.F(x) World War on Nature Theory:</b><br />
<br />
A. Dr. Jack Alpert defines Peace and Conflict not as descriptions of behaviour between nations, but as trends describing social conditions. Put differently: Conflict is not defined as the violence between neighbours and nations, but as the unwanted intrusion of one person’s existence and consumption behaviour upon another person. <br />
<br />
B. There are two kinds of conflict: Direct: he took my car, he enslaved me, he beat me, he raped me, he killed me; and Indirect. Indirect intrusions are the by-product of other people's behaviour. ‘All the trees on our island were consumed by our grandparents,’ is an indirect intrusion of a past generation on a present one. ‘The rich people raised the price of gasoline and we can't afford it,’ and ‘The government is offering people welfare to breed more children’ are current economic and demographic intrusions by one present group on another present group. <br />
<br />
C. System conflict is the sum of intrusions experienced by each constituent, summed over all the constituents. A measure of the existing global conflict is the sum of six billion sets of intrusions. A measure of Europe’s conflict is the sum of 740 million sets of intrusions. <br />
<br />
D. Using this definition of conflict, Dr. Alpert establishes that to move Earth’s socio-economic and political system toward peace – in terms of procreation -- would require the implementation of a one child per family policy . In the absence of such rapid population policy, civilization shall collapse . <br />
<br />
E. Consequently, as a result of Breivik’s ‘no children’ status, if his consumption footprint was below 20 global hectares, his status in the Ind.Civ.F(x) world war would be that of an Eco-Innocent. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.21 Social Science Enquiry into Breivik’s ‘Discrimination’ and ‘Censorship’ Allegations: 30 November 2011: Ecofeminist Application for Writ of Habeus Mentem and Review of Husby/Sorheim Psych Evaluation Report to Oslo District Court of Judge Nina Opsahl:</b><br />
<br />
A. On 30 November 2011, applicant filed an Application (PDF ) for a [I] writ of Habeus Mentem on behalf of Anders Breivik psycho-cultural integrity right to a free and fair trial; and [II] writ of Certiorari/Review of the Psychiatric Evaluation Report of Psychiatrists: Synne Sorheim and Torgeir Husby as to the Mens Rea political necessity criminal liability of Anders Breivik terrorist acts, on 22 July 2011. The application was filed electronically to the Oslo District Court Registrar.<br />
<br />
B. Notifications of the Application were sent to: 680 EU Members of Parliament on 04 December; 330 Norwegian Government Officials on 05 December; and 1,283 Norwegian Editors and Journalists on 07 December 2011. The Norwegian media did not consider an EcoFeminists (Breiviks enemy) legal support for Breivik to receive a free and fair trial, to be worthy of publicity; preferring the narrative that only the extreme right wing supported a free and fair trial for Breivik.<br />
<br />
C. On 15 December 2011 applicant requested the Registrar to “confirm: (1) the date my application is to be submitted to Judge Opsahl, or the relevant Judge, for their consideration, (2) the date the said Judge intends to provide me with their ruling on the matter.” There was no response from the Clerk of the Court. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.22 Social Science Enquiry into Breivik’s ‘Discrimination’ and ‘Censorship’ Allegations: 15 April 2012: Ecofeminist Application to Proceed as Amicus Curiae, to Oslo District Court of Judge Wenche Arntzen:</b><br />
<br />
A. On 15 April 2012, Applicant filed an Application to proceed as an Amicus Curiae (PDF ), to the Oslo District Court Registrar. <br />
<br />
B. Notifications were sent to 1,384 Norwegian Editors and Journalists on 16 April 2012. Again the media did not consider an EcoFeminists (Breiviks enemy) legal support for Breivik to receive a free and fair trial, to be worthy of publicity; preferring the narrative that only the extreme right wing supported a free and fair trial for Breivik.<br />
<br />
C. On 26 April 2012, Applicant requested the court to confirm “(1) The date my application is to be submitted to Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen, or the relevant Judge, for her/their consideration. (2) The date the said Judge intends to provide me with their ruling approving or denying my application.” There was no response from the Clerk of the Court. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.23 Social Science Enquiry into Breivik’s ‘Discrimination’ and ‘Censorship’ Allegations: 10 May 2012: Ecofeminist Application for Review to Norway Supreme Court of Justice Tore Schei:</b><br />
<br />
A. On 10 May 2012, Applicant filed an Application to Review the Oslo District Court failure to act in accordance of due process to the Norway Supreme Court Registrar. <br />
<br />
B. On 11 May 2012 Applicant requested the Registrar to “kindly clarify when the Registrar shall issue a Case Number; or whether you require additional documentation or information?”<br />
<br />
C. On 15 May 2012, Deputy Secretary General Kjersti Buun Nygaard responded with: “Please be advised that the Supreme Court of Norway only handles appeals against judgments given by the lower courts and can consequently not deal with the issue mentioned in your e-mails. Further inquiries from you regarding the above issue can not be expected to be answered.”<br />
<br />
D. On 15 May 2012, Applicant responded (PDF ) detailing the Error in Supreme Court: Deputy Secretary General: Kjersti Buun Nygaard Response to SHARP Application to Supreme Court for Declaratory Orders and Review of Oslo District Court’s Decisions. There was no response from Ms. Nygaard or any other Supreme Court official.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.24 Social Science Enquiry into Breivik’s ‘Discrimination’ and ‘Censorship’ Allegations: Complaints against Judge Opsahl, Arentzen and Schei to Secretariat Supervisory Committee for Judges:</b><br />
<br />
A. On 30 May 2012, three complaints of Violation of Ethical Principles of Norwegian Judges, were submitted to Secretariat Supervisory Committee for Judges: against Judge Nina Opsahl (PDF ), Judge Wenche Arentzen (PDF ), and Justice Tore Schei (PDF ). The essence of the Oslo District Court complaints being that the Oslo District Court registrar refuses to process the applications, and refusal to provide any reasons for their refusal, clarifying for example, possible errors which require correction, were judicial ethics violations, and a failure of applicants right to due process, and an effective remedy. <br />
<br />
B. Two complaints of slow case processing – on 04 July 2012 (PDF ) and 02 September 2012 (PDF ) -- had to be filed against the Secretariat Supervisory Committee for Judges with the Parliamentary Ombudsman (Case 2012-1943), before the Secretariat issued Case Numbers: 12-071 (Opsahl), 12-072 (Arntzen) and 12-073 (Schei), on 03 September 2012, and informed the Applicant that “If a party have given a statement in the case, these will be provided the complainant. The Supervisory Committee has not received statements from the other parties involved.”<br />
<br />
C. On 23 October 2012, the Supervisory Committee for Judges changed their minds and decided they were not going to process the complaints in accordance to their ‘standard procedures’, of receiving a statement from the respective Judges, but were going to issue rulings in Norwegian, that all the complaint were ‘obviously unfounded’ (Google Translation). [Opsahl (PDF ), Arntzen (PDF ), and Schei (PDF )]<br />
<br />
D. Repeated requests for an English Translation of the ruling have been refused, including reasons why applicant was not informed, as part of ‘standard procedures’ that the ruling to her English complaint, would be issued in Norwegian.<br />
<br />
E. On 31 December 2012 , a complaint of Language Discrimination and Lack of Clear Principles by Secretariat Supervisory Committee for Judges Norwegian Language Rulings, in response to English Language complaints in Case 12-071: Judge Nina Opsahl, 12-072: Judge Wenche Arntzen, 12-073: Judge Tore Schei.” (PDF ), was submitted to the Parliamentary Ombudsman. As of date, no response has yet been received.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.25 Social Science Enquiry into Breivik’s ‘Discrimination’ and ‘Censorship’ Allegations: 19 June 2012: Appeal to Norway’s Environmental Appeals Board: Media Censorship of Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection:</b><br />
<br />
A. From 24 April to 14 May copies of the 22 April 2012: Earth Day report: <i><b>Acquittal or Firing Squad: If it Bleeds, it Leads, Media's Population Terrorism Connection</b></i> (PDF ) were distributed to: 677 EU Members of Parliament on 24 April; 863 UK Lords and Members of Parliament on 25 April; and on 14 May: 1,230 University of Oslo Law Professors and Lecturers , 482 Law Professors and Lawyers , 1,278 Norwegian Editors and Journalists , PM Jens Stoltenberg and 1676 Norwegian Government Officials , 104 NGO Officials and 258 Psychologists . Again the media did not consider an EcoFeminists (Breiviks enemy) legal support for Breivik to receive a free and fair trial, to be worthy of publicity; preferring the narrative that only the extreme right wing supported a free and fair trial for Breivik.<br />
<br />
B. The “<i><b>If It Bleads, It Leads :: Media Population-Terrorism Connection</b></i>”, Report (PDF ) argued that Mainstream Access-to-Discourse Editors censorship of non-violent political grievances and problem solving activism facilitate a pressure cooker socio-political reality for their “If it Bleads, It Leads” corporate propaganda profits, by (1) censoring the Scarcity (due to Overpopulation and Overconsumption) causes of violent resource war conflict; (2) that media abuse their publicity power in terms of their censorship of Ecocentric arguments submitted to courts; (3) Editors abuse their publicity power, by abusing public discourse/free speech resources; by providing certain parties with preferential and special access to such public discourse, and severely restricting or denying others any access to such public discourse; (4) Mainstream media avoid addressing or enquiring into root causes of problems as reported in Dr. Michael Maher’s report How and Why Journalists Avoid Population - Environment connection (PDF ); and censor non-violent root-cause problem solving activism.<br />
<br />
C. The report also included evidence that (i) 1,283 Norwegian Editors and Journalists had been Informed of the December 2011 Application to the Oslo District Court of Judge Nina Opsahl, all of whom had censored it from their readers; and (ii) 1,384 Norwegian Editors and Journalists had been informed of the April 2012 EcoFeminist Application to the Disctrict Court of Judge Wenche Arntzen, all of whom had censored it from their readers.<br />
<br />
D. On 25 May 2012, correspondence was submitted to: Adresseavisen: Editor: Arne Blix (PDF ); Aftenposten: Editor: Hilde Haugsgjerd (PDF ); Bergens Tidende: Editor: Trine Eilertsen (PDF ); Dagbladet: Editor: John Arne Markussen (PDF ); NRK: Editor: Hans Tore Bjerkaas (PDF ); TV2: Editor: Alf Hildrum (PDF ); VG: Editor: Torry Pedersen (PDF ); requesting the Editors to clarify their editorial decision-making to censor information about the Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection, during a Norwegian Terrorism trial being publicized by international media on the international stage; and their decision-making to censor information regarding the EcoFeminist Applications to the Oslo District Court on behalf of a free and fair trial, for the Feminist hating ‘right wing’ terrorist, from their readers. The editors refused to provide the requested information.<br />
<br />
E. On 19 June 2012, an Appeal (PDF ) was submitted to the Environmental Appeals Board: Request for Access to Environment and Health Information in terms of S.28 (Freedom of Information Act) and S.10 (Environmental Law) RE: Censorship in Norway’s Media: (I) Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection; (II) Norway’s Stalinesque Political Psychiatry Tyranny. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.26 Social Science Enquiry into Breivik’s ‘Discrimination’ and ‘Censorship’ Allegations: 10 September 2012: Environmental Appeal Board Ruling on Media Censorship:</b><br />
<br />
A. Initially Applicant’s media censorship complaint was deleted by the Environmental Appeals Board without reason. Upon complaint to Ministry of Environment , it was given a Reference number , with no apology for the deletion, implying the deletion was intentional and appropriate. On 04 July 2012, a complaint of Slow Case Processing (PDF ) was filed to the Parliamentary Ombudsman. The Environment Appeals Board refused to simply answer questions, delaying the complaint until ‘after summer’ , and refusing to say when the end of summer would be . Then promising it would be dealt with in August , only to do nothing in August . <br />
<br />
B. On 10 September 2012, the Secretariat of the Environmental Appeals Board issued a ruling (PDF ) – in violation of due process principles, without having received any statements from any media, or Bar Association parties – that Applicant’s Appeal was ‘unjustified’. <br />
<br />
C. On 11 September 2012, Applicant requested reasons for the Environmental Appeals Boards violations of general procedures of impartial enquiry and due process. <br />
<br />
D. On 18 September 2012, the Environmental Appeals Board responded that they violated general procedures of impartial enquiry and due process, because the Appeals ‘clearly had to be denied’. <br />
<br />
E. On 08 October 2012, Applicant responded that it was not clear why her Appeals ‘clearly had to be denied’, unless the Environmental Appeals board was massively corrupt. Applicant requested clarification of the Environmental Appeals Board’s ‘Environment’ definitions, and provided evidence how her appeals were both justified in accordance to the Aarhus convention’s definition of ‘environmental information’. <br />
<br />
F. On 03 November 2012, Applicant submitted an official written request (PDF ) to the Environmental Appeals Board in terms of Public Administration Act (PAA), Section 23, 24, 25 and Freedom of Information Act, Section 22, requesting clarification of the factual and legal grounds upon which the Environmental Appeals Board justified their ruling of ‘clearly had to be denied’, “including clarifying exactly how my complaints do not fit the definition of Environment as clarified by the Aarhus convention and LAW 2003-05-09 # 31: Act concerning the right to information and participation in public decision-making processes relating to the environment (environmental law)”.<br />
<br />
G. On 06 November 2012, the Environmental Appeals Board notified Applicant her request for factual and legal grounds for her denied Appeal, had been denied . <br />
<br />
H. On 11 November 2012, Applicant filed an Appeal (PDF ) to the Parliamentary Ombudsman: Erroneous Decision by Environment Appeals Board in Environmental Information Appeals re: [I] Editorial Decision-Making: Censorship of Media’s ‘Population-Environment-Terrorism’ Connection; [II] Bar Association: Anti-Environmental Complaints Policy. <br />
<br />
I. The Parliamentary Ombudsman Appeal against the Media Censorship Ruling argued (i) It was an Irregular Violation of Due Process: Irregular failure of Impartial Arbitration due process procedures; (ii) the Environmental Appeals Board failed to justify how the requested Population Growth and Consumptionism information requested from the Media is not ‘Environmental Information’: Population Growth and Corporate Advocacy of Consumptionism are primary factors in Resource Scarcity, Species Extinction and Environmental Degradation, and (iii) the Editor’s and Environmental Appeals Board’s Refusal of Access to Information from Media Respondents is Contrary to Provisions of Freedom of Information Act, Right to Environmental Information Act and Aarhus Convention.<br />
<br />
J. On 27 November 2012, the Parliamentary Ombudsman ruled (PDF ) that “The Ombudsman has reviewed your complaint and the enclosed documents, and your complaint does not give reasons to initiate further investigations regarding the Appeals Board case processing or decision.”<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.27 Social Science Enquiry into Breivik’s ‘Discrimination’ and ‘Censorship’ Allegations 27 August 2012: Application to Norway Supreme Court, for Review of Oslo District Court: Breivik Judgement ruling of 24 August:</b><br />
<br />
A. On 27 August 2012, an Application (PDF ) was submitted to Norway Supreme Court for Review of Oslo District Court: Breivik Judgement Necessity Ruling, which states that “As regards this submission, the Court briefly notes that neither the provisions of the Penal Code concerning necessity nor international human rights, which the defendant also invokes, allow the murder of government employees, politically active youth or others, to further extreme political goals. It is evident that this submission cannot be accepted.” <br />
<br />
B. <i><b>Review Orders Requested</b></i>: <br />
<br />
a. Set Aside the Judgements ‘Necessity (Nødrett) Ruling’ (pg.67 )<br />
<br />
b. Set Aside Defendant’s Conviction (Finding of Guilt) and Remit to Oslo District Court for hearing of Further Evidence to conclude Objective and Subjective Necessity Test Evidentiary Enquiry.<br />
<br />
C. <i><b>Grounds for Review</b></i>: <br />
<br />
a. The application for review is based on the grounds of (A) Irregularities & Illegalities in the Proceedings before the Oslo District Court: in terms of (1) A Failure of Justice and Failure of a True and Correct Interpretation of the Facts; (2) Judicially Un-Investigated Facts; (3) Failure of Application of Mind and (4) Rejection of Admissible or Competent Evidence: (i) Prosecutor & Judges failure to examine objective and subjective necessity test; and (ii) Courts denial of due process to applicants Habeus Mentem and Amicus Curiae applications .<br />
<br />
b. [A.1.a] Necessity Judgement fails to provide any necessity criminal provisions that prohibit killing of Government Officials in case of Necessity <br />
<br />
c. [A.1.b] Necessity Judgement Ignores that Criminal Necessity provisions do not prohibit the killing of Government Officials in case of objective and subjective Necessity.<br />
<br />
d. [A.1.c] Necessity Judgement’s Erroneous interpretation of Necessity related criminal law provisions and international necessity related human rights law.<br />
<br />
e. [A.1.d] Necessity and Guilt Judgement’s Failure to conduct required Objective and Subjective Tests for Defendant’s Necessity Defence<br />
<br />
f. [A.1.e] Necessity and Guilt Judgement’s Absence of Objective and Subjective Test Enquiry and Conclusions Renders it Inadequate<br />
<br />
g. [A.1.f] Necessity and Guilt Judgement’s Absence of Clarification Upon which party the Onus of Proof lies in a Case of Necessity; and how or why their evidence was insufficient renders the Judgements Conclusions inadequate.<br />
<br />
h. [A.1.g] Necessity and Guilt Judgement’s Absence of Objective and Subjective Test Enquiry and Conclusions Renders it Discriminatory Precedent<br />
<br />
i. [A.1.h] Necessity Judgements ‘Extreme Political Objectives’ conclusion is unsupported in the Absence of Objective and Subjective Necessity Test<br />
<br />
j. [A.1.i] Necessity Judgements ‘Extreme Political Objectives’ conclusion is unsupported in the Absence of Objective and Subjective Necessity Test<br />
<br />
D. <i><b>Failure of Justice: Judicially Un-Investigated Facts: Necessity and Guilt</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. No reference was made during court proceedings by any party alleging that any Norwegian or International specific necessity criminal statute specifically prohibits the killing of government or politically active young people, in the event of objective and subjective reasonably determined necessity.<br />
<br />
b. No International or Norwegian specific necessity criminal statute specifically prohibits the killing of government or politically active young people, in the event of objective and subjective reasonably determined necessity.<br />
<br />
c. Necessity criminal statutes do not specifically allow or disallow the killing of government or politically active young people, but provide for an objective and subjective test that examines each alleged criminal act to objectively and subjectively determine whether necessity existed, or the defendant honestly believed it existed, within the particular criminal act‘s relevant circumstances.<br />
<br />
d. The court, prosecution and defence counsel failed to conduct the required subjective and objective tests to examine the evidence for the Defendant‘s necessity motivations to determine (I) objectively whether the defendant‘s claims – simplistically rephrased as – “Titanic Europe is on a demographic/immigration collision course with Islam Iceberg”; and (II) secondly whether the defendant subjectively perceived the Titanic Europe/Islam Iceberg circumstances this way.<br />
<br />
e. The Judgement fails to disclose Norwegian law‘s Onus of Proof requirements in a case of necessity: i.e. upon which party – Defendant or State - does the Onus of Proof lie in case of Necessity? In South Africa, the proof in a defense of necessity, ruling out the reasonable possibility of an act of necessity, lies on the State. In the absence of the State ruling out the reasonable possibility of an act of necessity, the accused claim of necessity stands.<br />
<br />
f. It is clear that the Court's statement of reasons does not show the results of the courts objective and subjective enquiry into the Defendant‘s claim of necessity. Thus, it is also clear that the Court's statement of reasons for its “necessity finding of guilt”, are inadequate. Hence the finding of guilt needs to be set aside for further evidence to objectively and subjective evaluate the defendants necessity defence.<br />
<br />
g. Finally if the Courts statement of reasons remain uncorrected, they would set a bad precedent, encouraging other courts to deny necessity defendants their rights to an objective and subjective test of their necessity defence, including denying the defendant information clarifying upon whom the Onus of Proof in a defence of necessity lies.<br />
<br />
E. <i><b>Oslo Court: Breivik Defence of Necessity</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. On 17 April 2012, the Oslo Court tweeted to Journalists attending the Breivik trial: “Wrong translation in the 22-7 trial yesterday: Breivik said "nodrett", Correct translation: "Principle of Necessity", not "self defence".”<br />
<br />
b. The principle of Necessity is enshrined in Norwegian Law in Section 47 of the Penal Code : "No person may be punished for any act that he has committed in order to save someone's person or property from an otherwise unavoidable danger when the circumstances justified him in regarding this danger as particularly significant in relation to the damage that might be caused by his act."<br />
<br />
<br />
F. <i><b>Prosecutor Engh and Holden “Refuse to touch Breivik’s Principle of Necessity”</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. According to Document.NO , NRK , VG , NRK , the transcripts Prosecutor Engh and Holden violated their duty of objectivity in terms of (a) impartially enquiring into and/or responding to the Accuseds‘ Defence; and (b) providing the court with the Prosecution‘s evaluation and conclusion of the evidence for and against Breivik‘s invocation of his Necessity Defence.<br />
<br />
b. In her closing statement, Prosecutor Engh acknowledges that: (A) Norwegian prosecutors have a duty to conduct their investigation with objectivity; (B) Norwegian law allows for an accused to plead to necessity and/or self defence, (C) Where an accused does invoke necessity, it is the court and prosecutor‘s duty to investigate the accused‘s necessity defence arguments and evidence; (D) If an accused successfully invokes a necessity defence, this can and must result in either mitigation of sentence and/or a verdict of innocence; (E) Breivik invoked the defence of necessity; (F) Despite the fact that Breivik invoked the necessity defence, both Prosecutor Engh and Holden “refuse to touch the principle of necessity”.<br />
<br />
<br />
G. <i><b>Necessity in Norwegian Law</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. LAW-2005-05-20-28: Lov om straff (straffeloven). | Act on Punishment (Penal Code) , (Google Translation) says: § 17 Necessity: “An action that would otherwise be criminal, is legal when a) it is being undertaken to save lives, health, property or any interest from the danger of injury that can not be averted in any other reasonable manner, and b) the risk of injury is far greater than the risk of injury by the action.”<br />
<br />
b. LAW-1998-03-20-10-§ 5: Forskrift om sikkerhetsadministrasjon | Regulations relating to security management allows for “security breaches without criminal liability if the terms of the principle of necessity or self defence in criminal law law § 47 or § 48 is met.”<br />
<br />
<br />
H. <i><b>Norwegian Law Necessity Judgement: Subjective and Objective Test</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. In LE-2012-76983 Eidsivating Appeal – Judgment of 29 May 2012, an Eritrean man was accused of several Perjury related Immigration offences to help his sister to come to Norway. He admitted the facts, but claimed necessity. In court he was found guilty on all counts and sentenced to 90 days' imprisonment. The Court of Appeal suspended the appeal to test his conviction on one point (whether the court a quo had seriously enquired into his necessity defence).<br />
<br />
b. The Norwegian Court of Appeal agreed with the Defendant‘s argument that asserted that the court a quo had not considered the circumstances that were invoked as the basis for the existence of a principle of necessity situation. The judgement stated that it is clear that “the courts statement of reasons does not show that the court has considered this argument. Thus it is also clear that the Court‘s statement of reasons in so far are inadequate.”<br />
<br />
<br />
I. <i><b>Necessity Defence: International and Foreign Law</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. The rationale of the necessity defense is not that a person, when faced with the pressure of circumstances of nature, lacks the mental element which the crime in question requires. Rather, it is this reason of public policy: the law ought to promote the achievement of higher values at the expense of lesser values, and sometimes the greater good for society will be accomplished by violating the literal language of the criminal law. <br />
<br />
b. The principle of the necessity defence is rooted in common law and any accused pleading to necessity argues that their actions were justified or an exculpation for breaking the law. Defendants who plead to necessity – whether common law necessity, political necessity (civil disobedience) or military necessity - argue that they should not be held liable for their actions as being criminal, because their conduct was necessary to prevent some greater harm.<br />
<br />
<br />
J. As argued in <i>The Necessity Defense in Civil Disobedience Cases: Bring in the Jury</i>, by William P. Quigley:<br />
<br />
a. [..] The doctrine of necessity, with its inevitable weighing of choices of evil, holds that certain conduct, though it violates the law and produces harm, is justified because it averts a greater evil and hence produces a net social gain or benefit to society. <br />
<br />
b. Glanville Williams expressed the necessity doctrine this way: “[S]ome acts that would otherwise be wrong are rendered rightful by a good purpose, or by the necessity of choosing the lesser of two evils.” He offers this example: “Suppose that a dike threatens to give way, and the actor is faced with the choice of either making a breach in the dike, which he knows will result in one or two people being drowned, or doing nothing, in which case he knows that the dike will burst at another point involving a whole town in sudden destruction. In such a situation, where there is an unhappy choice between the destruction of one life and the destruction of many, utilitarian philosophy would certainly justify the actor in preferring the lesser evil.” <br />
<br />
K. In <i>Nuclear War, Citizen Intervention, and the Necessity Defense</i> , Robert Aldridge and Virginia Stark, document numerous cases of Common Law and Civil Disobedience Necessity Defence Cases which resulted in Innocence verdicts or severe Mitigation of Sentencing.<br />
<br />
L. <i><b>Common Law Necessity Defence Cases Resulting in Innocence Verdicts or Severe Mitigation of Sentencing</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. In <i>Regina v Dudley and Stephens</i> (1884) 14 QBD 273, three crew members and a cabin boy escaped a shipwreck to spend eighteen days on a boat, over 1,000 miles from land, with no water and only two one pound tins of turnips. After four days, they caught and ate a small turtle. That was the only food that they had eaten prior to the twentieth day of being lost at sea. Ultimately, two of the crew members killed the ailing cabin boy and “fed upon the body and blood of the boy for four days.” Four days later, they were rescued. Two of the men were charged with murder. The court found that the cabin boy would likely have died by the time they were rescued and that the crew members, but for their conduct, would probably have died as well. The Queen's Bench Division Judges held that the defendants were guilty of murder in killing the cabin boy and stated that their obvious necessity was no defence. The defendants were sentenced to death, but this was subsequently commuted to six months' imprisonment.<br />
<br />
b. In <i>Spakes v. State</i>, 913 S.W.2d 597 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996), the Texas Criminal Appeals Court allowed the jury to be instructed on the necessity defense before deliberating the verdict for an inmate whose three cellmates had planned an escape and threatened to slit his throat if he did not accompany them. The defendant inmate argued that because of the terribly violent crimes of which his cellmates had been convicted (one had bragged about chopping his girlfriend up with an ax), it was a necessity that he break the law, by accompanying them in their escape.<br />
<br />
c. In <i>United States v. Ashton</i>, 24 F. Cas. 873, 873-74 (C.C.D. Mass 1834) (No. 14,470), sailors prosecuted for mutiny were found not guilty, after arguing the necessity for their mutiny based upon the dangerously leaky ship and that this danger had been concealed from them until after they left port. Circuit Justice Story found them not guilty of mutiny.<br />
<br />
d. In <i>United States v. Holmes</i>, 26 F. Cas. 360 (E.D. Pa. 1842) (No. 15,383), Holmes was involved in a shipwreck, where the crew were charged with manslaughter for throwing sixteen passengers overboard in a frantic attempt to lighten a sinking lifeboat. The Prosecutor argued the passengers should be protected at all costs, whereas the Defence placed the jurors in the sinking lifeboat with the defendant. The Defendant was found guilty, but the jurors requested leniency, to which the court complied by sentencing the defendant to six months in prison and a fine of twenty dollars.<br />
<br />
e. In the 1919 Arizona decision of <i>State v. Wooten</i>, commonly referred to as the Bisbee Deportation case, Professor Morris describes the acquittal of a Sherrif based upon the “necessity” for committing Kidnapping.<br />
<br />
f. In <i>Surocco v. Geary</i>, 3 Cal. 69 (1853), a large fire threatened the unburned half of the then small town of San Francisco. A public officer ordered the destruction of houses to create a firebreak and was subsequently sued by one of the owners. On appeal, the California Supreme Court held that the action was proper because: “The right to destroy property, to prevent the spread of a conflagration, has been traced to the highest law of necessity, and the natural rights of man, independent of society and the civil government. "It is referred by moralists and jurists as the same great principle which justifies the exclusive appropriation of a plank in a shipwreck, though the life of another be sacrificed; with the throwing overboard goods in a tempest, for the safety of the vessel; with the trespassing upon the lands of another, to escape death by an enemy. It rests upon the maxim, Necessitas inducit privilegium quod jura private." [Necessity leads to privileges because of private justice].”<br />
<br />
M. <i><b>Civil Disobedience Political Necessity Defence Cases Resulting in Innocence Verdicts or Severe Mitigation of Sentencing</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. In the United States, 23 cases of left wing/liberal political protestors necessity defence cases have resulted in innocence or severe mitigation of sentencing, whereas only 1 case of right wing/conservative political protestors cases have resulted in innocence or severe mitigation of sentencing. <br />
<br />
b. Left Wing/Liberal: Anti Nuclear (10): State v. Mouer (Columbia Co. Dist. Ct., Dec. 12-16, 1977), People v. Brown (Lake County, Jan. 1979); People v. Block (Galt Judicial Dist., Sacramento Co. Mun. Ct., Aug. 14, 1979); California v. Lemnitzer, No. 27106E (Pleasanton-Livermore Mun. Ct. Feb. 1, 1982); State v. McMillan, No. D 00518 (San Luis Obispo Jud. Dist. Mun. Ct., Cal. Oct. 13, 1987); Massachusetts v. Schaeffer-Duffy (Worcester Dist. Ct. 1989); West Valley City v. Hirshi, No. 891003031-3 MC (Salt Lake County, Ut. Cir. Ct., W. Valley Dept. 1990); Washington v. Brown, No. 85-1295N (Kitsap County Dist. Ct. N. 1985); California v. Jerome, Nos. 5450895, 5451038, 5516177, 5516159 (Livermore-Pleasanton Mun. Ct., Alameda County, Traffic Div. 1987); Washington v. Karon, No. J85-1136-39 (Benton County Dist. Ct. 1985)<br />
<br />
c. Left Wing/Liberal: Anti US Central American Foreign Policy (3); Vermont v. Keller, No. 1372-4-84-CNCR (Vt. Dist. Ct. Nov. 17, 1984); People v. Jarka, Nos. 002170, 002196-002212, 00214, 00236, 00238 (Ill. Cir. Ct. Apr. 15, 1985); Colorado v. Bock (Denver County Ct. June 12, 1985)<br />
<br />
d. Left Wing/Liberal: Anti-Military Industrial Complex (4): Michigan v. Jones et al., Nos. 83-101194-101228 (Oakland County Dist. Ct. 1984); Michigan v. Largrou, Nos. 85-000098, 99, 100, 102 (Oakland County Dist. Ct. 1985); Massachusetts v. Carter, No. 86-45 CR 7475 (Hampshire Dist. Ct. 1987); Illinois v. Fish (Skokie Cir. Ct. Aug. 1987)<br />
<br />
e. Left Wing/Liberal: Anti-Apartheid (3): Chicago v. Streeter, Nos. 85-108644, 48, 49, 51, 52, 120323, 26, 27 (Cir. Ct., Cook County Ill. May 1985); Washington v. Heller (Seattle Mun. Ct. 1985); Washington v. Bass, Nos. 4750-038, -395 to -400 (Thurston County Dist. Ct. April 8, 1987)<br />
<br />
f. Left Wing/Liberal: Pro-Environment/Cycling (1): People v. Gray, 571 N.Y.S.2d 851, 861-62 (N.Y. Crim. Ct.1991)<br />
<br />
g. Left Wing/Liberal: AIDS: Clean Needles Campaign (2) California v. Halem, No. 135842 (Berkeley Mun. Ct. 1991); In 1993, a jury acquitted a Chicago AIDS activist charged with illegally supplying clean needles because of the necessity defense. <br />
<br />
h. Right Wing/Conservative: Anti-Abortion (1): In 1990, in Omaha, Nebraska, a jury acquitted seventeen anti-abortion protestors because of the necessity defense. The trial judge relied on the defense to overturn the trespassing convictions of an additional eighteen defendants. <br />
<br />
i. Neutral: Anti-Corruption (1): In 1988, a North Carolina court acquitted two Tuscarora Indians of charges in connection with their taking of twenty hostages at the office of a local newspaper to protest the alleged corruption of county officials. <br />
<br />
j. Neutral: Anti-Alcohol Advertising (1): In 1991, a Chicago jury acquitted a Catholic priest of criminal charges for damage to the inner-city neighborhood where he was pastor after he admitted painting over three tobacco- and alcohol-related billboards. The defendant argued he should not be convicted because of the necessity defense. The jury deliberated ninety minutes before acquitting the defendant. <br />
<br />
k. <i><b>Military Necessity and International Humanitarian Law</b></i>:<br />
<br />
l. <i>Crimes of War</i> and <i>Diakona</i> define military necessity as: “a legal concept used in international humanitarian law (IHL) as part of the legal justification for attacks on legitimate military targets that may have adverse, even terrible, consequences for civilians and civilian objects. It means that military forces in planning military actions are permitted to take into account the practical requirements of a military situation at any given moment and the imperatives of winning. The concept of military necessity acknowledges that even under the laws of war, winning the war or battle is a legitimate consideration, though it must be put alongside other considerations of IHL.”<br />
<br />
m. Luis Moreno-Ocampo, Chief Prosecutor at the International Criminal Court, investigated allegations of War Crimes during the 2003 invasion of Iraq and published an open letter containing his findings. In a section titled "Allegations concerning War Crimes" he did not call it military necessity but summed up the term: “Under international humanitarian law and the Rome Statute, the death of civilians during an armed conflict, no matter how grave and regrettable, does not in itself constitute a war crime. International humanitarian law and the Rome Statute permit belligerents to carry out proportionate attacks against military objectives, even when it is known that some civilian deaths or injuries will occur. A crime occurs if there is an intentional attack directed against civilians (principle of distinction) (Article 8(2)(b)(i)) or an attack is launched on a military objective in the knowledge that the incidental civilian injuries would be clearly excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage (principle of proportionality) (Article 8(2)(b)(iv).”<br />
<br />
N. <i><b>Military Necessity Justifies use of Nuclear Weapons for Self-Preservation</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. In the International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion of 8 July 1996, on The legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons , the final paragraph states “that such threat or use would generally be contrary to international humanitarian law. The opinion went on to state, however, that the court “cannot lose sight of the fundamental right of every State to survival, and thus its right to resort to self-defence . . . when its survival is at stake.” The court held, by seven votes to seven, with its president‘s casting vote, that it “cannot conclude definitively whether the threat or use of nuclear weapons would be lawful or unlawful in an extreme circumstance of self defence in which the very survival of a State would be at stake.”<br />
<br />
O. <i><b>Military Necessity in Nuremberg German High Command Trial</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. In the <i>Trial of Wilhelm von Leeb and Thirteen Others</i>: United States Military Tribunal, Nuremberg, 30th December, 1947 – 28 the October, 1948 <br />
<br />
b. Wilhelm von Leeb and the other thirteen accused in this case were former high-ranking officers in the German Army and Navy, and officers holding high positions in the German High Command (OKW) were charged with Crimes against Peace, War Crimes, Crimes against Humanity and with Conspiracy to commit such crimes. The War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity charged against them included murder and ill-treatment of prisoners of war and of the civilian population in the occupied territories and their use in prohibited work; discrimination against and persecution and execution of Jews and other sections of the population by the Wehrmacht in co-operation with the Einsatzgruppen and Sonderkommandos of the SD, SIPO and the Secret Field Police; plunder and spoliation and the enforcement of the slave labour programme of the Reich.<br />
<br />
c. They were acquitted of some of the charges, where it was ascertained that military necessity existed objectively and/or subjectively in the particular circumstances.<br />
<br />
d. The Tribunal argued that “The devastation prohibited by the Hague Rules and the usages of war is that not warranted by military necessity. This rule is clear enough but the factual determination as to what constitutes military necessity is difficult. Defendants in this case were in many instances in retreat under arduous conditions wherein their commands were in serious danger of being cut off. Under such circumstances, a commander must necessarily make quick decisions to meet the particular situation of his command. A great deal of latitude must be accorded to him under such circumstances. What constitutes devastation beyond military necessity in these situations requires detailed proof of an operational and tactical nature. We do not feel that in this case the proof is ample to establish the guilt of any defendant herein on this charge.”<br />
<br />
e. Thus, in dealing with Reinhardt's alleged responsibility for plunder and spoliation, the Tribunal said: “The evidence on the matter of plunder and spoliation shows great ruthlessness, but we are not satisfied that it shows beyond a reasonable doubt, acts that were not justified by military necessity.”<br />
<br />
P. <i><b>Military Necessity: The Rendulic Rule: Importance of the Subjective Test</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. In <i>The Law of Armed Conflict: International Humanitarian Law in War</i>, Gary D Solis provides an overview of the Rendulic Rule in evaluation of the subjective test in evaluating a defence of Military Necessity: <br />
<br />
b. “In October 1944, Generaloberst Lothar Rendulic was Armed Forces Commander North, which included command of Nazi Forces in Norway. (Between World Wars I and II, Rendulic had practiced law in his native Austria.) Following World War II, he was prosecuted for, among other charges, issuing an order “for the complete destruction of all shelter and means of existence in, and the total evacuation of the entire civilian population of the northern Norwegian province of Finmark...” Entire villages were destroyed, bridges and highways bombed, and port installations wrecked. Tried by an American military commission, Rendulic's defence was military necessity. He presented evidence that the Norwegian population would not voluntarily evacuate and that rapidly approaching Russian forces would use existing housing as shelter and exploit the local population's knowledge of the area to the detriment of retreating German forces. The Tribunal acquitted Rendulic of the charge, finding reasonable his belief that military necessity mandated his orders. His case offers one of the few adjudicated views of what constitutes military necessity.<br />
<br />
c. <i>From the Tribunals opinion</i>:<br />
<br />
d. “Military necessity has been invoked by the defendant's as justifying.. the destruction of villages and towns in an occupied territory... The destruction of property to be lawful must be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war... There must be some reasonable connection between the destruction of property and the overcoming of the enemy forces. It is lawful to destroy railways, lines of communication, or any other property that might be utilized by the enemy. Private homes and churches even may be destroyed if necessary for military operations. It does not admit the wanton devastation of a district or the wilful infliction of suffering upon its inhabitants for the sake of suffering alone...<br />
<br />
e. “The evidence shows that the Russians had very excellent troops in pursuit of the Germans. Two or three land routes were open to them as well as landings by sea behind German lines... The information obtained concerning the intentions of the Russians was limited.. It was with this situation confronting him that he carried out the "scorched earth" policy in the Norwegian province of Finmark.. The destruction was as complete as an efficient army could do it...<br />
<br />
f. “There is evidence in the record that there was no military necessity for this destruction and devastation. An examination of the facts in retrospect can well sustain this conclusion. But we are obliged to judge the situation as it appeared to the defendant at the time. If the facts were such as would justify the action by the exercise of judgement, after giving consideration to all the factors and existing possibilities, even though the conclusion reached may have been faulty, it cannot be said to be criminal. After giving careful consideration to all the evidence on the subject, we are convinced that the defendant cannot be held criminally responsible although when viewed in retrospect, the danger did not actually exist....<br />
<br />
g. “..... We are not called upon to determine whether urgent military necessity for the devastation and destruction in the province of Finmark actually existed. We are concerned with the question whether the defendant at the time of its occurrence acted within the limits of honest judgement on the basis of the conditions prevailing at the time. The course of a military operation by the enemy is loaded with uncertainties... It is our considered opinion that the conditions, as they appeared to the defendant at the time, were sufficient upon which he could honestly conclude that urgent military necessity warranted the decision made. This being true, the defendant may have erred in the exercise of his judgement but he was guilty of no criminal act. We find the defendant not guilty of the charge. <br />
<br />
h. The Rendulic standard remains unchanged. Fifty-four years later, in 2003, the ICTY wrote: “In determining whether an attack was proportionate it is necessary to examine whether a reasonably well-informed person in the circumstances of the actual perpetrator, making reasonable use of the information available to him or her, could have expected excessive civilian casualties to result from the attack.” <br />
<br />
Q. <i><b>Military Necessity: Rendulic Rule: Subjective Honesty in current Military Doctrine</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. In <i>Unexpected Consequences From Knock-On Effects: A Different Standard for Computer Network Operations?</i> , Eric Talbot Jensen writes:<br />
<br />
b. “The standard the Court held General Rendulic to was the requirement to give "consideration to all factors and existing possibilities" as they "appeared to the defendant at the time."”<br />
<br />
c. “Note that the requirement to give consideration to all factors and existing possibilities is balanced with the overarching constraint of taking facts as they appear at the time of the decision. Must the commander remain in inaction until he feels he has turned over every stone in search of that last shred of information concerning all factors and possibilities that might affect his decision? The answer must be "no." Instead, he must act in good faith and, in accordance with GPI, do everything feasible to get this information.”<br />
<br />
R. <i><b>Onus of Proof: Norwegian State or Breivik to Prove Necessity?</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. In South African law the Onus of Proof lies on the State in a defence of necessity, to rule out the reasonable possibility of an act of necessity.<br />
<br />
b. In <i>S v Pretorius</i> 1975 (2) SA 85 (SWA) Judge AJ Le Grange found that “The onus of proof in a defence of necessity as in self-defence rests on the State to rule out the reasonable possibility of an act of necessity. It is not for the accused to satisfy the court that she acted from necessity (p 293). .. (proceed) by gathering an objective view of the circumstances from the evidence itself, and the magistrate‘s finding whether the prevailing circumstances were “alarming” if viewed objectively…. Viewed objectively… was the accused confronted with a situation that …… lives were in danger….<br />
<br />
c. “[90] [If the evidence gives a picture of threatening danger and fear, which gave rise to necessity and which would have justified the accused‘s conduct, provided the accused did not exceed the limits of necessity…. Proceed to consider whether the proven circumstances satisfy the tests for necessity set out by B & Hunt at p. 285 of their work: (a) the threatening disaster endangered the accused‘s legal interests. This in fact gave rise to a duty to act. (b) the danger was threatening and imminent. The fact that symptoms relating to the danger may only appear later does not detract from the situation… if it cannot immediately be ascertained whether or not the symptoms are dangerous, necessity arises… (d) the chances that harm would have resulted and it would have been of a serious nature.. the greater the harm, the greater the necessity…”<br />
<br />
d. If Norwegian law also places the Onus of Proof to lie on the State in a defence of necessity, to rule out the reasonable possibility of an act of necessity; it would appear that the Prosecutor‘s decision to “refuse to touch the principle of necessity” should weigh heavily in the Defendant‘s favour.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.28 28 August – 06 September 2012: No Response from the Norwegian Supreme Court:</b><br />
<br />
A. On 28 August 2012, I contacted the Supreme Court Registrar with a request for a Case Number for my application for Review of the Oslo District Court’s Brievik Judgement.<br />
<br />
B. On 31 August 2012, I again contacted the Supreme Court Registrar with a request for a Case Number for my application for Review of the Oslo District Court’s Brievik Judgement.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.29 02 September 2012: Complaint to Parliamentary Ombudsman: Slow Case Processing by Supreme Court Registrar:</b><br />
<br />
A. On 02 September 2012, I submitted a complaint (PDF ) to the Parliamentary Ombudsman: Slow Case Processing / Failure to Provide Case Processing by Supreme Court Registrar; to Application for Review of ‘Breivik Judgement’. <br />
<br />
B. 10 September 2012: Response from Supreme Court Secretary General: Gunnar Bergby: No Legal Standing:<br />
<br />
a. On 11 September 2012, I was informed of the decision by Supreme Court of Norway: Secretary General: Gunnar Bergby in: Application for review of Oslo District Court Judgement of 24 August 2012 (2011-188627-24).<br />
<br />
b. Secretary General Bergby implied that my application was an ‘Appeal’, and stated that I lacked legal standing, because I was not a ‘party to the case’. Mr. Anders Behring Breivik and the prosecution authority “are the only parties in the specific case mentioned above, and the right of appeal is constricted to these”. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.30 11 Sep 2012: Response to Supreme Court: Secretary General:</b><br />
<br />
A. On 11 September 2012, applicant responded (PDF ) to Secretary General Gunnar Bergby. Applicant requested the Secretary General to provide her with the relevant statute in Norway that provides the Secretary General the authority to refuse to process a case, citing lack of locus standi/legal standing; thereby denying such applicant due process access to be heard by an impartial court? <br />
<br />
B. Applicant argued that it was for the court to decide the matter of locus standi, not the Secretary General; citing Scottish Salmon Growers Association Limited v. EFTA Surveillance Authority (Case E-2/94); Private Barnehagers Landsforbund v EFTA Surveillance Authority, supported by Kingdom of Norway (Case E-5/07) ; and Hans Chr. Bugge, Professor of Environmental Law at the Department of Public and International Law, University of Oslo, in his article: General background: Legal remedies and locus standi in Norwegian law : “There is no clear definition or delimitation of the concept. Whether a person has "legal interest" is decided discretionary in each case, and depends on individual circumstances.”<br />
<br />
C. Applicant clarified her application was not an ‘Appeal’, which ‘locus standi’ was restricted to the ‘parties in the specific case’, but one of Certiorari/Review, where her locus standi/legal standing was based upon her being a member of a group of activists: known as political necessity activists, who have ‘legal interest’ in the judgement, due to its violations of ECHR Article 13 and 14, and its necessity ruling was not sufficiently precise, as required in Lithgow & others v. United Kingdom , in order to allow Political Necessity Activists to regulate their activism in accordance with the law. <br />
<br />
D. The Oslo District Courts ‘Breivik Judgement’, discriminated against Breivik, by denying him a Free and Fair Subjective and Objective Test Enquiry into his Necessity evidence; and set a discriminatory legal precedent against future Norwegian Political Necessity activists, and furthermore due to the international prominence of the trial on the world stage, the Judgement sent a publicity message that a Court could deny an Accused pleading to Necessity, a Free and Fair Subjective and Objective Test Enquiry into their Necessity evidence, on the world stage. <br />
<br />
E. Denying Mr. Breivik his right to an objective and subjective test of his necessity evidence, set a legal precedent where environmental, immigrant, religious or other necessity activists are also denied their right to an objective and subjective examination of their necessity evidence (or can due to ignorance from the Breivik trial’s publicity, deny themselves, by lacking the knowledge to assert their right thereto).<br />
<br />
F. Applicants was consequently demanding her Article 13 Right to an Effective Remedy, and in terms of Article 14: to Prohibit this Discriminatory Erroneous Necessity Ruling against Breivik, herself and other Necessity Activists.<br />
<br />
G. The applicant confirmed that the principle of an Application for Review existed in Norwegian courts, as documented by (1) Former President of Norwegian Supreme Court Justice Carsten Smith , (2) Chief Justice of the Norway Supreme Court: Tore Schei ; and (3) Supreme Court Justice: Karen Bruzelius .<br />
<br />
H. Applicant requested that her Application be interpreted in terms of Article 13 ECHR read in conjunction with Protocol 7 ECHR and the EFTA Courts Judicial Review Posten Norge Judgement ; effectively interpreted as the Right to Judicial Review of an Administrative Decision or a Court Order.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.31 08 October 2012, 2nd Request to Secretary General Gunnar Bergby:</b><br />
<br />
A. Applicant sent a reminder request to Secretary General Bergby.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.32 03 November 2012: Parliamentary Ombudsman: Complaint of Supreme Crt Registrar Slow Case Processing:</b><br />
<br />
A. On 03 November 2012, applicant filed a complaint (PDF ) of Slow Case Processing by Supreme Court: Secretary General: Gunnar Bergby.<br />
<br />
14.33 15 November 2012: Parliamentary Ombudsman Rules that Norway Supreme Court: Secretary General: Gunnar Bergby’s ‘Administrative Decision’ is a “Decision of a Court of Law’:<br />
<br />
A. On 15 November 2012, the Parliamentary Ombudsman responded to Complaint on Supreme Court of Norway (PDF ), declining to investigate it, because “the Storting's Ombudsman for Public Administration, section 4, first paragraph, litra c), decisions of the courts of law can not be handled by the Ombudsman”. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.34 Contradictions between Parliamentary Ombudsman’s “Slow Case Processing” by Courts Administrative Officials of (a) 11 July 2012 Supervisory Committee for Judges: Secretariat: Espen Eiken, and (b) 15 November 2012: Supreme Court: Secretary General: Gunnar Bergby.</b><br />
<br />
A. In the 11 July 2012 Parliamentary Ombudsman ruling: Lack of Response from the Supervisory Committee for Judges; in response to a complaint of Slow case processing from the Supervisory Committee for Judges, the Ombudsman’s directions were to “submit "a written request to Tilsynsutvalget for dommere, where you call for answers to your applications. If you do not receive a response to this request within a reasonable time, you can contact the Ombudsman, with an enclosed copy of the last request to Tilsynsutvalget for dommere."”<br />
<br />
B. The Parliamentary Ombudsman clearly believed they had the authority to require the Supreme Court Administration: Supervisory Committee for Judges: Secretariat, to provide the applicant with due process, processing of her complaints against Judges Opsahl, Arntzen and Schei. <br />
<br />
C. In the 15 November 2012 the Parliamentary Ombudsman responded to Complaint on Supreme Court of Norway; in response to a complaint of “Slow Case Processing by Supreme Court: Secretary General: Gunnar Bergby: Re: Request for Statute Granting Sec Gen Authority to make ruling on Legal Standing”; the Ombudsman’s directions are that “decisions of the courts of law can not be handled by the Ombudsman.”<br />
<br />
D. Here the Parliamentary Ombudsman, chose to interpret the erroneous ‘locus standi’ administrative decision by Secretary General Gunnar Bergby, as a “decision of a court of law”, and hence to deny themselves the authority to require Secretary General Gunnar Bergby to provide Applicant with a response to her question requesting the Statute granting a Secretary General the authority to make a ruling on legal standing. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">III. Statement of alleged violation(s) of the Convention and/or Protocols and of relevant arguments</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
15.1 <i><b>Discrimination: Oslo District Court: Breivik Judgement</b></i>: <br />
<br />
15.2 The Oslo District Court: Breivik Judgement Ruling, by Judge’s Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen, Arne Lyng; and Lay Judges Ernst Henning Eielsen, Diana Patricia Fynbo and Anne Elisabeth Wisloff, delivered on 24 August 2012, violates Article 14 Prohibition of Discrimination and Article 6: Right to a Fair Trial. <br />
<br />
15.3 The Necessity ruling states that necessity statutes ‘prohibit the killing of government or politically active young people’; irrespective of the fact that:<br />
<br />
A. No reference was made during court proceedings by any party alleging that any Norwegian or International specific necessity criminal statute specifically prohibits the killing of government or politically active young people, in the event of objective and subjective reasonably determined necessity; and <br />
<br />
B. The Necessity Judgement ruling fails to cite any International or Norwegian specific necessity criminal statute specifically prohibiting the killing of government or politically active young people, in the event of objective and subjective reasonably determined necessity.<br />
<br />
C. Necessity criminal statutes do not specifically allow or disallow the killing of government or politically active young people, but provide for an objective and subjective test that examines each alleged criminal act to objectively and subjectively determine whether necessity existed, or the defendant honestly believed it existed, within the particular criminal act‘s relevant circumstances.<br />
<br />
14.35 The Necessity Judgement endorses the court, prosecution and defence counsel failure to conduct the required subjective and objective tests to examine the evidence for the Defendant‘s necessity motivations to determine (I) objectively whether the defendant‘s Necessity claims – simplistically rephrased as – “Titanic Europe is on a demographic/immigration collision course with Islam Iceberg” were reasonable; and (II) secondly whether the defendant subjectively sincerely perceived the Titanic Europe/Islam Iceberg circumstances this way, in accordance to the Military Necessity Rendulic Rule.<br />
<br />
14.36 The Judgement fails to disclose Norwegian law‘s Onus of Proof requirements in a case of necessity: i.e. upon which party – Defendant or State - does the Onus of Proof lie in case of Necessity? If the proof in a defense of necessity, ruling out the reasonable possibility of an act of necessity, lies on the State, and the State failed to rule out the reasonable possibility of an act of necessity, the accused claim of necessity stands.<br />
<br />
14.37 It is clear that the Court's statement of reasons does not show the results of the courts objective and subjective enquiry into the Defendant‘s claim of necessity. Thus, it is also clear that the Court's statement of reasons for its “necessity finding of guilt”, are inadequate. Hence the finding of guilt needs to be set aside for further evidence to objectively and subjective evaluate the defendants necessity defence.<br />
<br />
14.38 Finally if the Courts statement of reasons remain uncorrected, they would set a bad precedent, encouraging other courts to deny necessity defendants their rights to an objective and subjective test of their necessity defence, including denying the defendant information clarifying upon whom the Onus of Proof in a defence of necessity lies.<br />
<br />
14.39 The discriminatory ‘Necessity ruling’, in response to Prosecutor Engh and Holden’s refusal to “touch Breivik’s Principle of Necessity” sets a Norwegian legal precedent, which if upheld will set a legal precedent denying future necessity activists, a right to a fair trial, since it is based on two unequivocal legal falsehoods: (a) necessity activists have no right to an objective and subjective enquiry into their necessity defense evidence; and (b) necessity statutory provisions prohibit the killing of government officials or civilians.<br />
<br />
14.40 The Necessity ruling, also sets an international intellectual and psychological precedent, due to the international publicity it received, by publicizing these legal ‘Necessity’ trial falsehoods, as allegedly true and correct, and thereby educating citizens and future necessity activists that (a) they have no right to an objective and subjective enquiry into their necessity defense evidence; and (b) necessity statutory provisions prohibit the killing of government officials or civilians.<br />
<br />
14.41 The Necessity ruling – particularly as a result of the international uncritical publicity it received -- creates confusion and obfuscation by contradicting all other necessity precedents, but providing no legal precedent justifications for its conclusions; thereby the most well known necessity precedent for the average layperson, is the one based upon falsehoods and totally lacking in legal justifications. This is a violation of the Right to an Effective: clear, succinct, legally justified precedent, to enable laypersons and necessity activists to respectively effectively understand, plan and regulate their activism in accordance with the law.<br />
<br />
15.4 <i><b>Denied Right to an Effective Remedy by Supreme Court Sec. Gen. Bergby</b></i>:<br />
<br />
15.5 The 10 September 2012 administrative decision of Norway Supreme Court Secretary General Gunnar Bergby, denying Applicant Access to Court by refusing to process her 27 August 2012, Application for Review of the Oslo District Court: ‘Breivik Judgement were violations of applicants right to an Effective Remedy.<br />
<br />
15.6 Secretary General Bergby’s refusal to process my Application for Review, in the absence of a due process impartial enquiry into the merits of the application; by (1) pretending not to understand the difference between an Appeal and a Review, and (2) pretending that I had no locus standi (legal standing) to file an Application for Review, while refusing to provide me with the relevant Norwegian statute that provides the Secretary General the authority to refuse to process a case, citing lack of locus standi/legal standing; thereby denying such applicant due process access to be heard by an impartial court were violations of applicants right to an Effective Remedy.<br />
<br />
15.7 <i><b>Discrimination by Supreme Court Sec Gen. Bergby</b></i>: <br />
<br />
15.8 Secretary General Gunnar Bergby’s decisions and actions to refuse to process Applicants Application for Review, denying Applicant her right to an effective remedy to address the errors and irregularities regarding the Courts ‘Necessity’ judgement, were motivated acts of ideological discrimination against the ‘right wing’ or ‘cultural conservatives’, and against anyone – particularly anyone who is not ‘right wing’ -- who opposes, or objects to Ideological Discrimination against anyone, including Cultural Conservatives.<br />
<br />
15.9 Everyone, irrespective of their extreme left or extreme right ideology, who pleads to necessity should be entitled to an objective and subjective test of their respective necessity evidence. It is blatant discrimination for a Prosecutor and a Judge to publicly endorse the denial of a ‘right wing’ accused’s ‘necessity’ evidence to be subjectively and objectively examined. <br />
<br />
15.10 When a court sets such a discriminatory irregular and erroneous legal precedent, such a precedent can be used to deny other necessity activists their due process rights to an objective and subjective test of their necessity evidence. <br />
<br />
15.11 I subsequently filed a Complaint of Slow Case Processing to the Parliamentary Ombudsman<br />
<br />
15.12 <i><b>Denied Right to an Effective Remedy by Parliamentary Ombudsman</b></i>:<br />
<br />
15.13 The 15 November 2012 ruling by Parliamentary Ombudsman, that Secretary General’s Gunnar Bergby’s administrative decision denying Applicant’s access to the court and an effective remedy, was an official ‘judgement/decision by a court of law’, was a violations of applicants right to an Effective Remedy.<br />
<br />
15.14 Secretary General Bergby’s 10 September 2012 administrative decision to refuse to process Applicants application, due to alleged lack of ‘locus standi’; and subsequent refusal to provide any statutory authority granting him the right to deny applicant access to a court for a full due process impartial enquiry into the merits of her legal standing; was made without a full impartial due process enquiry into the merits of the application, therefore denying applicant an effective remedy to her application. <br />
<br />
15.15 The Parliamentary Ombudsman’s decision to refuse to order Secretary General Bergby to either (a) process applicants application, or (b) provide applicant with the relevant statutory authority granting him the authority to deny applicants application based upon an un-investigated allegation of lack of legal standing; denies applicant access to a court, and an effective remedy to impartially determine (a) the status of applicants legal standing, and if so (b) her allegations of irregularity regarding the Oslo Courts ‘Necessity’ judgement. <br />
<br />
15.16 <i><b>Discrimination by Parliamentary Ombudsman</b></i>:<br />
<br />
15.17 The Parliamentary Ombudsman’s (a) ruling of 11 July 2012, in the complaint of ‘Slow Case Processing’ by Courts Administration Official: Supervisory Committee for Judges: Secretariat: Espen Eiken, contradicts the (b) ruling of 15 November 2012, in the complaint of ‘Slow Case Processing’ by Courts Administration Official: Supreme Court: Secretary General: Gunnar Bergby.<br />
<br />
15.18 In the 11 July 2012 Parliamentary Ombudsman ruling they believed they had the authority to remedy slow case processing administrative decision making by the Supreme Court Administration: Supervisory Committee for Judges: Secretariat, yet in the 15 November 2012 the Parliamentary Ombudsman ruling they now believed that they did not have the authority to remedy slow case processing administrative decision making by the Supreme Court Administration.<br />
<br />
15.19 It is alleged the Parliamentary Ombudsman’s 15 November 2012 decision to refuse to address Applicants Slow Case Processing complaint by ordering Director General Bergby to either (a) process applicants application, or (b) provide applicant with the relevant statutory authority granting him the authority to deny applicants application based upon an un-investigated allegation of lack of legal standing; were motivated acts of ideological discrimination against the ‘right wing’ or ‘cultural conservatives’, and against anyone – particularly anyone who is not ‘right wing’ -- who opposes, or objects to Ideological Discrimination against anyone, including Cultural Conservatives.<br />
<br />
15.20 <i><b>Prohibition of Discrimination: Motive for Denial of Effective Remedy’s: Political & Ideological Discrimination</b></i>:<br />
<br />
15.21 Applicant asserts that Supreme Court, Deputy Secretary General Nygaard, Secretary General Bergby, the Supervisory Committee for Judges and the Parliamentary Ombudsman’s legal gymnastics decision-making are motivated by either their (A) own personal Liberal/Left Wing prejudice towards Breivik / right wing cultural conservatives, as alleged by Breivik, (B) their -- lack of intellectual backbone - inability to withstand Liberal/Left Wing Politically Correct Peer Pressure endorsing political, media, and legal discrimination against right wing conservatives, and anyone who speaks up for the rights of extreme right wing conservatives (Norway, Pakistan, India, Malaysia and South Korea are culturally the strictest conformists, with the least resistance to cultural and political or ideological peer pressure ). <br />
<br />
15.22 It is possible their discriminatory decision-making towards denying Applicant the ability to support the rule of law and a free and fair trial for a right wing conservative terrorist, are a result of their paranoid fear of impartially objectively and subjective investigating the evidence of Breivik’s necessity defense, (a) fearing that some of Breivik’s allegations may in fact be found to be factually correct; and/or (b) their knowledge that some of Breivik’s allegations are in fact factually correct, and/or (c) their conformist inability to resist the Norwegian Politically Correct narrative, and (d) hence the need to obediently conform and deny any investigation of Breivik’s allegations, which would expose these realities.<br />
<br />
15.23 If Norwegian Officials sincerely believed that Breivik’s Resist Eurabia ideology, discrimination against, and censorship of cultural conservatives allegations were an absolute bunch of nonsense, totally and utterly without any factual basis, their would be no need to fear an objective and subjective test of Breivik’s necessity defense evidence, since it would be exposed as erroneous and unjustified.<br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">V. Statement of the object of the application</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
[19.] <b>The Oslo District Courts 24 August 2012 Breivik Judgement Discriminatory Necessity ruling</b>:<br />
<br />
19.1 sets a Norwegian legal precedent, which if upheld will set a legal precedent denying future necessity activists, a right to a fair trial, since it is based on two unequivocal legal falsehoods: (a) necessity activists have no right to an objective and subjective enquiry into their necessity defense evidence; and (b) necessity statutory provisions prohibit the killing of government officials or civilians.<br />
<br />
19.2 creates confusion and obfuscation by contradicting all other International legally justified necessity precedents, but providing no legal precedent justifications for its conclusions – as a result of the international uncritical publicity it received -- therefore the most well known Internationally necessity precedent for the average layperson, is the one based upon falsehoods and totally lacking in legal justifications. <br />
<br />
19.3 sets an international intellectual and psychological Discriminatory precedent against all Political Necessity activists, due to the uncritical international publicity it received, by publicizing these legal ‘Necessity’ trial falsehoods, as allegedly true and correct, and thereby implying that necessity activists of any ideological, political, religious or cultural persuasion (a) have no right to an objective and subjective enquiry into their necessity defense evidence; and (b) and if, or where such necessity actions involve the killing of government officials or civilians, that International Human Rights law necessity statutory provisions prohibit the killing of government officials or civilians.<br />
<br />
19.4 The Norwegian Necessity Judgement – and its international publicity – discriminates against Necessity Activists, by denying them the Right to an Effective: clear, succinct, legally justified precedent, to enable laypersons and necessity activists to respectively effectively understand, plan and regulate their Necessity activism in accordance with accurate necessity jurisprudence .<br />
<br />
19.5 Consequently, Applicant requests the following Declaratory Orders Relief: <br />
<br />
19.6 The Oslo District Court: Breivik Judgement Necessity Ruling , by Judge’s Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen, Arne Lyng; and Lay Judges Ernst Henning Eielsen, Diana Patricia Fynbo and Anne Elisabeth Wisloff, delivered on 24 August 2012, violates Article 14 Prohibition of Discrimination and Article 6: Right to a Fair Trial, and consequently to: <br />
<br />
A. Set Aside the Judgements Discriminatory Irregular ‘Necessity (Nødrett) Ruling’ (pg.67 ) for (i) failing to provide any necessity criminal provisions that prohibit killing of Government Officials in case of Necessity; (ii) Erroneous interpretation of Necessity related criminal law provisions and international necessity related human rights law, (iii) Failure to conduct the required Objective and Subjective Tests of Defendant’s Necessity Defence evidence, renders it a (iv) Discriminatory Necessity Precedent for other Necessity activists to be denied the required Objective and Subjective tests of their necessity evidence, (v) Failure to Clarify upon which party the Onus of Proof lies in a Case of Necessity; and how or why their evidence was sufficient/insufficient; and (vi) ‘Extreme Political objectives’ conclusion is unsupported in the absence of an objective and subjective necessity test of the defendants necessity evidence. <br />
<br />
B. Set Aside Defendant’s Conviction (Finding of Guilt) for remittance to Oslo District Court for hearing of Further Evidence to conclude Objective and Subjective Necessity Test Evidentiary Enquiry.<br />
<br />
C. Alternatively, a Non-Precedent Setting Ruling: If Defendant Breivik prefers to abide by, and socio-politically profit from (as a political martyr), the Oslo District Courts discriminatory Necessity ruling against him, a declaratory order that the Defendant’s failure to uphold his demand that the court objectively and subjectively test his necessity defence evidence, that the Oslo courts discriminatory ‘Necessity Ruling’ is not to be deemed ‘Necessity precedent’, whereby other political activists can be denied their necessity rights for a court to objectively and subjectively test their necessity evidence.<br />
<br />
D. Furthermore, the (i) 10 September 2012, administrative decision of Norway Supreme Court Secretary General Gunnar Bergby, denying Applicant Access to Court by refusing to process her 27 August 2012, Application for Review of the Oslo District Court: ‘Breivik Judgement’; and (ii) the 15 November 2012 ruling by Parliamentary Ombudsman, that Secretary General’s Gunnar Bergby’s administrative decision, was a ‘judgement/decision by a court of law’, thereby justifying his refusal to order Secretary General Bergby to process Applicants Application for Review; were (iii) violations of applicants right to an Effective Remedy and an obstruction to the execution of a final judicial decision on the merits of her application, and (iv) were motivated by ideological prejudice towards people who are ‘right wing’, and/or against anyone – particularly anyone who is not ‘right wing’ -- who opposes, or objects to Ideological Discrimination against anyone, including Cultural Conservatives.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [Excerpts from <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/eu-court-human-rights.html">ECHR: Johnstone v Norway</a> :: <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/10-jan-13-application.html">Application</a>]</span></strong></blockquote><br />
<br />
<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327922598170048610" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JSpbgoKp8LA/SfCVX96zuGI/AAAAAAAAEIs/qqvoPLfHrLA/s400/400_BlackLine.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 7px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 620px;" /></div>Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-83912832153089559032013-04-02T12:01:00.003+03:002013-04-02T12:02:36.603+03:00How the invasion of immigrants into every corner of England has made a mockery of PM's promise to close the door<div align="justify"><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">How the invasion of immigrants into every corner of England has made a mockery of PM's promise to close the door</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">The greatest mass migration in our history has taken place | Marxist Revolutionaries of the Sixties to blame for seeing immigrants as allies | Rather than them adapting to their lifestyle, we are adapting to theirs<br />
</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">By Peter Hitchens | Daily Mail.UK | 31 March 2013</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<br />
<table align="right" border="0" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" style="width: 375px;"><tbody>
<tr><td width="375"><div align="center"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-q5LwQKrP6XQ/UVqbdlEuu1I/AAAAAAAAhbk/yqavvICAwzE/s1600/UK_Boston.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-jA1e0C_0qJM/UVqbHXAiTPI/AAAAAAAAhbY/Hspjtb7PgRM/s1600/UK_Boston_375x249.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 249px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 375px;" /></a><strong><span style="font-size: 80%;">Shock: The Lincolnshire town of Boston has seen an influx of immigration form Eastern Europe</span></strong></div></td></tr>
</tbody></table><blockquote>Was this Britain? Every group of people I passed was speaking Russian. The shops were full of black bread, pickled cucumbers and vodka, the faces were Slavic. The advertisements in the windows were in the Cyrillic script I had come to know so well when I lived, many years before, in Moscow.<br />
<br />
Yet here I was in the shadow of a lovely English Gothic church tower, half-way to dear old Skegness, surrounded by fields of English turnips, leeks and sugar beet, under an English heaven.<br />
<br />
This was Boston, Lincolnshire, which I had first seen three decades ago as a somnolent, slightly shabby market town where a kindly traffic warden had found me a parking space, saying: ‘We can always find room for a foreigner.’<br />
<br />
In those days, a visitor from London was about as foreign as it got in Boston. Now they were talking Portuguese in the pubs, Polish in the cafes, Latvian and Estonian on the buses. If I had fallen into the river and called out ‘Help!’, I couldn’t even have been sure that anyone would have understood.</blockquote><a name='more'></a><div align="center"><a href="http://fleur-de-lis.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-__b6nnsrEpQ/UQqve4pxolI/AAAAAAAAg-U/74EyJkDE6MA/s1600/IdleNoMore-IndigenousRights_598x126.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 119px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 598px;" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<blockquote>Somehow this transformation was more of a shock, more disturbing and perplexing, than any of the other migration-driven changes I had seen. And that tended to be the attitude of the older residents – not anger, hatred or hostility, we are not like that – but bafflement that such a huge thing could have erupted into their peaceful lives, without anyone warning or asking them.<br />
<br />
We had all got used to London being different, long ago. The former mill towns of Yorkshire and Lancashire, with their huge new mosques and veiled women, were a place apart. But Lincolnshire? If it could come here, into Deep England, then it would come to everywhere.<br />
<br />
It really is not much good the Prime Minister turning round now and saying to the people of Boston ‘this must stop’. <br />
<br />
Even if anyone believed he can or will do anything (and his various schemes are as firmly based as Theresa May’s promises to get rid of Abu Qatada), the event has happened.<br />
<br />
The greatest mass migration in our history has taken place. The newcomers are lawfully here. They have the jobs, live in the houses, use the NHS. Their children are in the schools. Come to that, they are paying tax.<br />
<br />
Our leaders only had to go to Boston, any time in the past five years, and they would have known. But all our leading politicians were afraid of knowing the truth. If they knew, they would at least have to pretend to act. And the truth was, they liked things as they were.<br />
<br />
And it was at least partly my own fault. When I was a Revolutionary Marxist, we were all in favour of as much immigration as possible. It wasn’t because we liked immigrants, but because we didn’t like Britain. We saw immigrants – from anywhere – as allies against the staid, settled, conservative society that our country still was at the end of the Sixties. Also, we liked to feel oh, so superior to the bewildered people – usually in the poorest parts of Britain – who found their neighbourhoods suddenly transformed into supposedly ‘vibrant communities’. If they dared to express the mildest objections, we called them bigots.<br />
<br />
Revolutionary students didn’t come from such ‘vibrant’ areas (we came, as far as I could tell, mostly from Surrey and the nicer parts of London). We might live in ‘vibrant’ places for a few (usually squalid) years, amid unmown lawns and overflowing dustbins.<br />
<br />
But we did so as irresponsible, childless transients – not as homeowners, or as parents of school-age children, or as old people hoping for a bit of serenity at the ends of their lives. When we graduated and began to earn serious money, we generally headed for expensive London enclaves and became extremely choosy about where our children went to school, a choice we happily denied the urban poor, the ones we sneered at as ‘racists’. <br />
<br />
</blockquote><table align="center" border="0" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" style="width: 600px;"><tbody>
<tr><td width="375"><div align="center"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-12a_A0kfrLs/UVqc8kMI9xI/AAAAAAAAhcA/BQ6jiDS8RYQ/s1600/UK_Boston_ImmigWorkers.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-D9ozr0zp1BQ/UVqcviRvCNI/AAAAAAAAhb0/VPw4XEqWF70/s1600/UK_Boston_ImmigWorkers_600x397.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 397px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 600px;" /></a><strong><span style="font-size: 80%;">Changing faces: Immigrant workers in the fields near Boston</span></strong></div></td></tr>
</tbody></table><blockquote><br />
What did we know, or care, of the great silent revolution which even then was beginning to transform the lives of the British poor? To us, it meant patriotism and tradition could always be derided as ‘racist’. And it also meant cheap servants for the rich new middle-class, for the first time since 1939, as well as cheap restaurants and – later on – cheap builders and plumbers working off the books.<br />
<br />
It wasn’t our wages that were depressed, or our work that was priced out of the market. Immigrants didn’t do the sort of jobs we did. They were no threat to us. The only threat might have come from the aggrieved British people, but we could always stifle their protests by suggesting that they were modern-day fascists.<br />
<br />
I have learned since what a spiteful, self-righteous, snobbish and arrogant person I was (and most of my revolutionary comrades were, too).<br />
<br />
I have seen places that I knew and felt at home in, changed completely in a few short years. I have imagined what it might be like to have grown old while stranded in shabby, narrow streets where my neighbours spoke a different language and I gradually found myself becoming a lonely, shaky-voiced stranger in a world I once knew, but which no longer knew me.<br />
<br />
I have felt deeply, hopelessly sorry that I did and said nothing in defence of those whose lives were turned upside down, without their ever being asked, and who were warned very clearly that, if they complained, they would be despised outcasts. And I have spent a great deal of time in the parts of Britain where the revolutionary unintelligentsia don’t go. Such people seldom, if ever, visit their own country. Their orbits are in fashionable London zones, and holiday destinations. They are better acquainted with the Apennines of Italy than with the Pennines of their own country.<br />
<br />
</blockquote><table align="right" border="0" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" style="width: 306px;"><tbody>
<tr><td width="306"><div align="center"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-n_3mFSLkPA4/UVqdoYoZuDI/AAAAAAAAhco/opwrElvKZUU/s1600/UK_DGoodhart.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-n_3mFSLkPA4/UVqdoYoZuDI/AAAAAAAAhco/opwrElvKZUU/s1600/UK_DGoodhart.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 423px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 306px;" /></a><strong><span style="font-size: 80%;">David Goodhart is one of the few Left-wing journalists from the Sixties generation to have recognised he was wrong about immigration</span></strong></div></td></tr>
</tbody></table><blockquote>But, unlike me, most of the Sixties generation still hold the views I used to hold and – with the recent, honourable exception of David Goodhart, the Left-wing journalist turned Think Tank boss who recognises he was wrong – they will not change.<br />
<br />
The worst part of this is the deep, deep hypocrisy of it. Even back in my Trotskyist days I had begun to notice that many of the migrants from Asia were in fact not our allies. They were deeply, unshakably religious. They were socially conservative. Their attitudes towards girls and women were, in many cases, close to medieval. <br />
<br />
Many of them were horribly hostile to Jews, in a way which we would have condemned fiercely if anyone else had expressed it, but which we somehow managed to forgive and forget in their case.<br />
<br />
We have recently seen this in the distressing and embarrassing episode of Lord Ahmed’s outburst against a phantom Jewish conspiracy.<br />
<br />
But I recall ten years ago, in a Muslim bookshop in the backstreets of Burnley, seeing on open display a modern edition of Henry Ford’s revolting anti-Jewish diatribe The International Jew, long ago disowned by Ford himself. It is unthinkable that any mainstream shop in any High Street could sell this toxic tripe.<br />
<br />
Many of these new arrivals, though we revolutionaries welcomed them, knew and cared nothing of the great liberal causes we all supported. Or they were hostile to them.<br />
<br />
Many on the Left still lie to themselves about this. George Galloway, the most Left-wing MP in Parliament, owes his seat to the support of conservative Muslims. Yet he voted in favour of same-sex marriage. It would be interesting to be at any meetings where Mr Galloway discusses this with his constituents.<br />
<br />
Of course, all political parties are compromises, but there is a big difference between splitting the difference and flatly ignoring a profound clash of principles.<br />
<br />
This sort of cynicism has been at the heart of the deal. Immigrants have been used by those who wanted to transform the country. They have taken the parts of them they liked, and made much of them. They have ignored the parts they did not like.<br />
<br />
Mr Galloway likes the Muslims’ opposition to the Iraq War and their scorn for New Labour (and good luck to him). But he does not like their views on sexual morality.<br />
<br />
The same is true of many others. One of the most striking characteristics of the majority of migrants from the Caribbean is their strong, unashamed Christian faith, and their love of disciplined education.<br />
<br />
Yet the arrival of many such people in London was never used as a reason to say our society should become more Christian, or our schools should be better-ordered.<br />
<br />
At that time, the revolutionary liberals were hoping to wave goodbye to the Church, and were busy driving discipline out of the state schools. So nobody ever said ‘Let us adapt our society to the demands of these newcomers’. They had the wrong sort of demands.<br />
<br />
</blockquote><table align="center" border="0" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" style="width: 600x;"><tbody>
<tr><td width="375"><div align="center"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-RS0qjcIh2vg/UVqdUXY_g1I/AAAAAAAAhcY/rlyWJL2ECKg/s1600/UK_GeorgeGalloway.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-55EtyUjfnK0/UVqdIrChnnI/AAAAAAAAhcM/bqAELW1BSCI/s1600/UK_GeorgeGalloway_600x311.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 311px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 600px;" /></a><strong><span style="font-size: 80%;">MP George Galloway shares his Mulsim supporters views on the Iraq War but does he like their views on sexual morality?</span></strong></div></td></tr>
</tbody></table><blockquote><br />
Instead, the authorities made much of the behaviour of a minority of such migrants, often much disliked by their fellow Afro-Caribbeans – men who took and sold illegal drugs and who were not prepared to respect British law. If proper policing of such people could be classified as ‘racist’, then the drug laws as a whole could be weakened, and the police placed under liberal control.<br />
<br />
This is why the so-called ‘Brixton Riots’ of April 1981 were used as a lever to weaken the police and undermine the drug laws, rather than as a reason to restore proper law and peace to that part of London.<br />
<br />
Something very similar happened with the Macpherson Report into the murder of Stephen Lawrence. Few noticed that the report openly urged that people from different ethnic groups should be policed in different ways – and actually condemned ‘colour-blind’ policing.<br />
<br />
In whose interests was this? And wasn’t this attitude, that different types of behaviour could be expected from different ethnic groups, racially prejudiced? But what did that matter, if it suited the revolutionary liberal agenda of purging the police of old-fashioned conservative types? The same forces destroyed Ray Honeyford, a Bradford headmaster who – long before it was fashionable – tried to stand up against political correctness in schools. He was driven from his job and of course condemned as a ‘racist’.<br />
<br />
Yet it would have been very much in the interests of integration and real equality in Bradford if his warnings had been heeded and acted upon. As it is, as any observant visitor finds, Bradford’s Muslim citizens and its non-Muslim citizens live in two separate solitudes, barely in contact with each other. Much of the Islamic community is profoundly out of step with modern Britain.<br />
<br />
Once again, revolutionary liberals had formed a cynical alliance to destroy conservative opposition.<br />
<br />
Their greatest ally has always been the British Tory politician Enoch Powell who, in a stupid and cynical speech in 1968, packed with alarmist language and sprinkled with derogatory expressions and inflammatory rumour, defined debate on the subject of immigration for 40 years.<br />
<br />
Thanks to him, and his undoubted attempt to mobilise racial hostility, the revolutionary liberals have ever afterwards found it easy to accuse any opponent of being a Powellite.<br />
<br />
Absurdly, even when Britain’s frontiers were demolished by the Blair Government and hundreds of thousands of white-skinned Europeans came here to work, it was still possible to smear any doubters as ‘racists’.<br />
<br />
It couldn’t have been more obvious that ‘race’ wasn’t the problem. The thing that made these new residents different was culture – language, customs, attitudes, sense of humour. <br />
<br />
Rather than them adapting to our way of life, we were adapting to theirs. This wasn’t integration. It was a revolution. Yet nobody – especially their elected representatives – would listen to them, because they were assumed to be Powellite bigots, motivated by some sort of unreasoning hatred.<br />
<br />
I now believe that the unreasoning hatred comes almost entirely from the liberal Left. Of course, there are still people who harbour stupid racial prejudices. But most of those concerned about immigration are completely innocent of such feelings.<br />
<br />
The screaming, spitting intolerance comes from a pampered elite who are ashamed of their own country, despise patriotism in others and feel none themselves. They long for a horrible borderless Utopia in which love of country has vanished, nannies are cheap and other people’s wages are low.<br />
<br />
What a pity it is that there seems to be no way of turning these people out of their positions of power and influence. For if there is to be any hope of harmony in these islands, then it can only come through a great effort to bring us all together, once again, in a shared love for this, the most beautiful and blessed plot of earth on the planet.<br />
<br />
<div align="center">************</div><br />
<b>700,000 EASTERN EUROPEAN HAVE MOVED TO UK</b><br />
<br />
It is impossible to calculate the precise scale of mass immigration into the UK. However, about 2.5 million Commonwealth immigrants have settled here since 1962, and the most cautious estimate of East European migrants now is around 700,000.<br />
<br />
The only other two concentrated waves of immigration since the Norman invasion of 1066 are almost negligible by comparison: 50,000 French Protestant Huguenot refugees around 1670, and about 120,000 Jews from Russia and what is now Poland, between 1881 and 1914. Comparably small numbers of Poles and Hungarians came as refugees from Communist tyranny in the 1940s and 1950s.<br />
<br />
Many Irish people have come to England and Scotland and about two million live here. But Ireland was part of the UK until 1922, so it is hard to equate this with migration from Eastern Europe, Africa or Asia.<br />
<br />
Large-scale migration from EU countries began in 2004. It is controlled by EU directives, which Britain has no choice but to obey. Britain could have restricted arrivals to some extent until 2011 (many EU countries did). But Britain’s traditionally free society makes it difficult to keep track of EU nationals once they have arrived here, which they can do without restriction as they hold EU passports.<br />
<br />
Migrationwatch UK, a body calling for immigration restrictions, says 36 per cent of housing demand is created by immigrants – 200 new homes a day over the next 25 years. It says the UK will have a population of 70 million by 2028 (it is now 61m), needing a new Birmingham-sized city every three years.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [<a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2301743/How-invasion-immigrants-corner-England-mockery-PMs-promise-close-door.html">DailyMail.UK</a>]</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327922598170048610" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JSpbgoKp8LA/SfCVX96zuGI/AAAAAAAAEIs/qqvoPLfHrLA/s400/400_BlackLine.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 7px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 620px;" />Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-41733660162171508682013-03-10T23:55:00.000+02:002013-03-10T23:55:57.073+02:00Aarhus CCC: Norways Censorship of Media's Population-Environment-Terrorism Connection during Breivik Trial<div align="justify"><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Aarhus CCC: Norways Censorship of Media's Population-Environment-Terrorism Connection during Breivik Trial</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Communication to the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee – Alleged Non-Compliance by Kingdom of Norway with the obligations under the Aarhus Convention: Rejection of Request for Access to Environmental Information from (a) Newspaper Editors, and (b) Bar Association; by Norwegian Environment Appeals Committee and Parliamentary Ombudsman.</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Andrea Muhrrteyn | EcoFeminist vs. Breivik | 11 March 2013</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9tGYM6esGl4/UTz_LSlnvpI/AAAAAAAAhVw/ve72GEym3Vg/s1600/unece_aarhus_655x445.PNG"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-dCWE4NYzzNI/UTz_CHCgKNI/AAAAAAAAhVk/C8uJIn7261A/s1600/unece_aarhus_375x255.PNG" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 255px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 375px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote><span style="font-size: 95%;"> Overview of Communication: <br />
<br />
[1.1] Non-compliance to Access to Information (Article 4 (1) & (7)), by Media Editors: Adresseavisen: Editor: Arne Blix; Aftenposten: Editor: Hilde Haugsgjerd; Bergens Tidende: Editor: Trine Eilertsen; Dagbladet: Editor: John Arne Markussen; NRK: Editor: Hans Tore Bjerkaas; TV2: Editor: Alf Hildrum; VG: Editor: Torry Pedersen.<br />
<br />
[1.2] A general failure to implement, or implement correctly, the General (Article 3(1)) and Collection and Dissemination of Environmental Information (Article 5(1)) provisions of the Convention; by the Bar Association (Advokatforeningen): Disciplinary Committee and Disciplinary Board for Advocates (Disiplinærnemnden for advokater).<br />
<br />
[1.3] Non-Compliance to Access to Justice (Article 9 (1) & (4)), by the Environmental Appeals Board (Klagenemnda for miljøinformasjon): Erroneous ‘Environmental Information’ definition, Denied Due Process and Effective Remedy. <br />
<br />
[1.4] Non-Compliance to Access to Justice (Article 9 (1) & (4)), by the Parliamentary Ombudsman: Denied Due Process & Effective Remedy. <br />
</span></blockquote><a name='more'></a><div align="center"><a href="http://fleur-de-lis.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-__b6nnsrEpQ/UQqve4pxolI/AAAAAAAAg-U/74EyJkDE6MA/s1600/IdleNoMore-IndigenousRights_598x126.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 119px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 598px;" /></a></div><br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 110%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Communication to the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee – Alleged Non-Compliance by Kingdom of Norway with the obligations under the Aarhus Convention: Rejection of Request for Access to Environmental Information from (a) Newspaper Editors, and (b) Bar Association; by Norwegian Environment Appeals Committee and Parliamentary Ombudsman.</span></span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><b>Summary -- 11 March 2013</b></blockquote></div><br />
<blockquote><b>Oslo & Utoya Attacks: Population, Resource Scarcity & Conflict:</b> <br />
<br />
On 22 July 2011, a fertilizer truck bomb exploded in Oslo within Regjeringskvartalet, in front of the office of Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg, at 15:25:22 (CEST), killing eight and injuring at least 209; and ninety minutes later, a mass shooting occurred at a summer camp organized by the AUF, the youth division of the ruling Norwegian Labour Party (AP) on the island of Utøya in Tyrifjorden, Buskerud, by a gunman dressed in a homemade police uniform, killing 69, and injuring at least 110. The accused, Anders Breivik, admitted to the acts, as justified by necessity. His necessity justifications were two-pronged: (1) Resist Eurabia; (2) Gov & Media Censorship of debate and discussion of the consequences of Demographic/Immigration issues required Ultra violence to Access International Publicity. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Æquilibriæx CommonSism -- Scarcity as Cause of Conflict -- Activism:</b><br />
<br />
Communicator is neither anthropocentrically liberal nor conservative, but an EcoFeminist Guerrylla Law Sustainable Security Radical Honoursty Transparency Primitivist. She is the founder of the CommonSism ideology -- Common Sense Guerrylla Laws for a Sustainable Commons -- and Æquilibriæx Jurisprudence, which is Equal & balanced -- Eco/Anthropocentric – law; as well as the unregistered Yshmael Guerrylla Law Political Party. <br />
<br />
CommonSism’s Guerrylla Laws – based upon Aquilibriæx Jurisprudence – regulate human procreation and resource utilization behaviour, by means of legally defining the procreation and consumption difference, and consequent related Sustainable Rights/Penalties, between a Leaver and a Taker, to ensure sustainability; because Ecological Overshoot is a consequence of all other left and right wing ideologies and their adherents failure to legally (a) define the difference between sustainable and unsustainable procreation and consumption behaviour; and (b) provide legal rights to sustainable practices, and legal penalties to unsustainable individuals, corporations and organisations. <br />
<br />
Sustainable Security Policy: Sustainability is Security: “There is no security without sustainability”: In the absence of an international new moral order where Æquilibriæx Jurisprudence confronts the Military Doctrine reality of Environmental Resource Scarcity induced conflict and resource wars, and implements laws to regulate and reduce human procreation and resource utilization behaviour; towards a sustainable, pre-industrial lifestyle paradigm; “overpopulation” and resource scarcity will result in conflict and war (perhaps nuclear) confronting regions at an accelerated pace, and “collapse of the global economic system and every market-oriented national economy” by 2050.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>30 Nov 2011: Application for Writ of Habeus Mentem:</b><br />
<br />
On 30 November 2011, communicator filed an Application for a writ of Habeus Mentem to the Oslo District Court. Copies sent to: 680 EU MP’s; 330 Norwegian Gov. Officials; and 1,283 Norwegian Editors and Journalists. <br />
<br />
Among others, the Application argued that the roots of ‘left’ or ‘right’ wing terrorism are a result of the Mainstream Media’s censorship of non-violent problem solving to facilitate a socio-political pressure cooker reality for their “If it Bleads, It Leads” corporate propaganda profits from terrorism violence. <br />
<br />
The Norwegian media totally censored information about the application filed to the Oslo District Court, from the Norwegian people. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>15 Apr 2012: Application to Proceed as Amicus Curiae: </b><br />
<br />
On 15 April 2012, communicator filed an Application to proceed as an Amicus Curiae, to the Oslo District Court. Copies sent to 1,384 Norwegian Editors and Journalists.<br />
<br />
The Amicus provided the court with – among others – an EcoFeminist Jurisprudence perspective how Egotistical Masculine Insecurity, not Feminism, was a direct and indirect root cause and aggravating factor for most of the worlds problems, including the destruction of Western Civilization, due to (A) obstructing Radical Transparency communication problem solving, (B) being the cognitive foundation of the anti-Meritocratic Parasite Leeching Leadership (sic) Paradigm; (C) hence propagandizes an exponential growth of Parasite Leeching – “breeding war procreation” overpopulation and “egotist consumer” Consumptionism -- worldview.<br />
<br />
Again the media chose to censor the information from the Norwegian public. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>10 May 2012: Application for Review to Norway Supreme Court: </b><br />
<br />
On 10 May 2012, Communicator filed an Application for Review to the Norway Supreme Court. On 15 May 2012, Deputy Secretary General Kjersti Buun Nygaard refused to process the application, or the appeal.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>13 May 2012: Media’s Population-Terrorism Connection Report: </b><br />
<br />
From 24 April to 14 May communicator sent copies of the 22 April 2012: Earth Day report: Acquittal or Firing Squad: If it Bleeds, it Leads, Media's Population Terrorism Connection to: 677 EU MP’s; 863 UK Lords and MP’s; 1,230 Univ. of Oslo Law Prof’s, 482 Law Prof’s & Lawyers, 1,278 Editors and Jouros, PM Stoltenberg and 1676 Gov. Officials, 104 NGO Officials and 258 Psychologists. <br />
<br />
The “If It Bleads, It Leads :: Media Population-Terrorism Connection”, Report argued that Mainstream Access-to-Discourse Editors censorship of non-violent political grievances and problem solving activism facilitate a pressure cooker socio-political reality for the media’s “If it Bleads, It Leads” corporate propaganda profits, by (1) censoring the Scarcity (due to Overpopulation and Overconsumption) causes of violent resource war conflict; (2) that media abuse their publicity power in terms of their censorship of Ecocentric arguments submitted to courts; and by abusing public discourse/free speech resources; by providing certain parties with preferential and special access to such public discourse, and severely restricting or denying others any access to such public discourse; (3) Mainstream media avoid addressing or enquiring into root causes of problems as reported in Dr. Michael Maher’s report How and Why Journalists Avoid Population - Environment connection.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>25 May 2012: Request for Access to Environment & Health Info:</b><br />
<br />
On 25 May 2012, a Request for Environmental & Health Information was submitted to: Adresseavisen: Editor: Arne Blix; Aftenposten: Editor: Hilde Haugsgjerd; Bergens Tidende: Editor: Trine Eilertsen; Dagbladet: Editor: John Arne Markussen; NRK: Editor: Hans Tore Bjerkaas; TV2: Editor: Alf Hildrum; VG: Editor: Torry Pedersen; requesting the Editors to clarify their “editorial decision-making to censor information about the Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection, during a Norwegian Terrorism trial being publicized by international media on the international stage; and their decision-making to censor information regarding the EcoFeminist Applications to the Oslo District Court on behalf of a free and fair trial, for the Feminist hating ‘right wing’ terrorist, from their readers.” The editors refused to provide the requested information.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Disciplinary Complaints to Bar Association / Advokat Foreningen:</b><br />
<br />
From 28 May to 18 June 2012, Communicator filed 170 Disciplinary Complaints with the Norwegian Bar Association: Disciplinary Committee and Disciplinary Board for Advocates, against attorneys representing Defendant Anders Breivik, as well as the 22 July victims families; for alleged violations of the CCBE Code of Ethics: Obstruction of Justice Participation in a StaliNorsk Political Psychiatry Show Trial to (1) deny Defendant his Political Necessity Treason Trial; and (2) support Corruption of the Court to deny submittal to the Court of Controversial Evidence related to: [1] Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection; [2] Norway’s endorsement of Political Psychiatry & Psychiatric Fraud, etc.<br />
<br />
On 19 June, the Disciplinary Committee and Board refused to process the Complaints, signed and submitted to them in digital format, per email, demanding they be printed and sent by landmail, in duplicate.<br />
<br />
On 20 June, communicator filed a Request for their ‘Environmental Complaints Decision Making Justifications’ “demanding complainants waste paper, ink and non-renewable transportation resources by printing, signing and mailing complaints to the Bar Association; and refusing digitally signed complaints submitted by email, which are much more beneficial to the environment, and are exact environmentally digital copies of print versions?”. <br />
<br />
On 10 July, the Bar Association responded that they have no Environmental Justifications for their resource wasting Complaints policy, but insist that it be followed, irrespective of lacking any environmental justifications for it. <br />
<br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zNE9ZvXcUfk/UT0BC7j46oI/AAAAAAAAhWI/php6vY0YoAU/s1600/unece_aarhus_rh-norway_795x450.PNG"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mXUPLQPExQs/UT0A4ZEnzhI/AAAAAAAAhV8/YvmGg5Ob1D0/s1600/unece_aarhus_rh-norway_600x340.PNG" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 340px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
<br />
<b>19 June 2012: Env. Appeal Board: Media Editors Environment Info:</b><br />
<br />
On 19 June 2012, communicator submitted an Appeal to the Environmental Appeals Board: Request for Access to Environment and Health Information; RE: Censorship in Norway’s Media: (I) Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection; (II) Norway’s Stalinesque Political Psychiatry Tyranny. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>16 Aug 2012: Env. Appeal Board: Bar Association Environment Info:</b><br />
<br />
On 16 August 2012, communicator filed an Appeal to the Environmental Appeals Board, for an “Order that the Disciplinary Board and Committee: Provide their Complaints Environmental Principles decision-making justifications” for their resource wasting complaints policy<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>10 Sep 2012: Env. Appeal Board Rulings: ‘Unjustified’: </b><br />
<br />
On 10 September 2012, the Secretariat of the Environmental Appeals Board (EAB) issued a ruling – in violation of due process principles, without having received any statements from any media editors, or Bar Association parties – that Communicator’s Appeals were ‘unjustified’. On 11 Sep, Communicator requested reasons for the EABs violations of general procedures of impartial enquiry and due process. On 18 Sept, the EAB responded that complainant was denied due process because her Appeals ‘clearly had to be denied’. On 08 Oct, Communicator requested clarify on why her Appeals ‘clearly had to be denied’, and the EAB’s ‘Environment’ definitions. On 03 Nov, Communicator submitted another request to the EAB, requesting clarification why her appeal ‘clearly had to be denied’ due process. On 06 Nov, the EAB denied Communicator’s request for clarification. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>11 Nov 2012: Appeal of Environmental Appeal Board’s Rulings to Parliamentary Ombudsman:</b><br />
<br />
On 11 Nov 2012, Communicator filed an Appeal of the EAB’S ruling to the Parliamentary Ombudsman: Erroneous Decision by Environment Appeals Board in Environmental Information Appeals re: [I] Editorial Decision-Making: Censorship of Media’s ‘Population-Environment-Terrorism’ Connection; [II] Bar Association: Anti-Environmental Complaints Policy. <br />
<br />
On 27 November 2012, the Parliamentary Ombudsman ruled that “The Ombudsman has reviewed your complaint and the enclosed documents, and your complaint does not give reasons to initiate further investigations regarding the Appeals Board case processing or decision.”<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [Summary Excerpt: <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/unece-aarhus-comp-comm.html">Aarhus CCC: Johnstone v. Norway</a>]</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327922598170048610" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JSpbgoKp8LA/SfCVX96zuGI/AAAAAAAAEIs/qqvoPLfHrLA/s400/400_BlackLine.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 7px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 620px;" />Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-56612739366063725022013-02-27T23:30:00.001+02:002013-03-11T00:01:01.661+02:00White Guilt and Black Fear of Responsibility: A Toxic Devastating Cocktail for Blacks<div align="justify"><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Victims of the Left: Black Americans</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;"></span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">John Perazzo | June 2008 | Discover the Networks</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-B7J0RzklP3E/US56pH0LmII/AAAAAAAAhRE/EgIeGmM1PXY/s1600/AyaanHirsiAli_WhiteGuiltRacism.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-WXiuGFFH0X4/US56jqLuk5I/AAAAAAAAhQ8/BHhWRT9BDFQ/s1600/AyaanHirsiAli_WhiteGuiltRacism_375x266.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 266px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 375px;" /></a><blockquote>This essay examines specifically how the left, in its self-identified quest to elevate African Americans by means of myriad social justice campaigns, has in fact done incalculable harm to the black community in the United States.<br />
<br />
Table of Contents:<br />
<br />
1) How the Left Created Black Victimology and Black Rejection of American Values<br />
<br />
2) Affirmative Action: How the Left Has Harmed Blacks through the Bigotry of Low Expectations<br />
<br />
3) How the Left Consigns Blacks to Substandard Education<br />
<br />
4) How the War on Poverty Devastated the Black Community<br />
<br />
5) How the Failed Crusade of “Sex Education” Harmed the Black Community<br />
<br />
6) The Crime Wave that Has Decimated Black America<br />
<br />
7) How Blacks Have Been Victimized by Leftist Policies Concerning AIDS<br />
<br />
8) How the Left Demands Black Conformity of Thought<br />
<br />
9) Notes</blockquote><a name='more'></a><div align="center"><a href="http://fleur-de-lis.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-__b6nnsrEpQ/UQqve4pxolI/AAAAAAAAg-U/74EyJkDE6MA/s1600/IdleNoMore-IndigenousRights_598x126.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 119px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 598px;" /></a></div><br />
<blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">1) How the Left Created Black Victimology and Black Rejection of American Values:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
At the dawn of the civil rights era of the 1950s and 60s, Americans came face to face with the defining social and political issue of their time: the need to address their country’s lingering racial injustices. Those inequities were particularly abhorrent in the South, where, following the long epoch of slavery, Jim Crow laws mandating segregation treated blacks as less than fully human from the 1890s through the early 1960s. Conditions for blacks in the North, though not nearly ideal, were considerably better. While northern blacks also encountered plenty of prejudice and discrimination, they at least had an elementary sense of personal security and were treated with far more respect than their southern counterparts.[1]<br />
<br />
Around the middle of the twentieth century, there were hints that racial justice would become the trend of America’s future from border to border. Membership in the <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6160">NAACP</a> increased tenfold during World War II,[2] reflecting a growing awareness—among both blacks and whites—of the urgent need for reform. Two years after the war’s end, Jackie Robinson broke major league baseball’s color bar. A year later, President Harry Truman announced that segregation would be eliminated from the nation’s armed forces. Truman also appointed blacks to numerous government posts in his administration. Many whites, particularly in the South, were reluctant to accept black Americans’ ever-growing inclusion in once exclusively-white realms. Nevertheless, white racial attitudes were gradually but indisputably evolving in every region of the country. Consider the following: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>* In 1942, opinion polls found that the proportion of whites favoring school integration was just 30 percent, and a paltry 2 percent in the South. By 1956, these figures had grown to 49 percent and 15 percent, and by 1963 they stood at 62 percent and 31 percent.[3]<br />
<br />
* In 1942, about 44 percent of all whites, and only 4 percent of southern whites, favored the racial integration of passengers on streetcars and buses. By 1956, these numbers had swelled to 60 percent and 27 percent, and in 1963 they reached 79 percent and 52 percent.[4]<br />
<br />
* In 1942, scarcely 35 percent of whites nationwide, and 12 percent of whites in the South, were comfortable having a black person of the same income and education move onto their block. By 1956, the corresponding figures had grown to 51 percent and 38 percent, and in 1963 they stood at 64 percent and 51 percent.[5]<br />
<br />
* Between 1942 and 1956, the proportion of all whites who viewed blacks as their intellectual equals rose from 41 percent to 77 percent; in the South the shift was from about 21 percent to 59 percent.[6]<br />
<br />
* Between 1944 and 1963, the overall proportion of whites who felt that blacks “should have as good a chance as white people to get any kind of job” doubled, from 42 percent to 83 percent.[7]</blockquote><br />
Clearly, from the World War II era through the early 1960s white Americans’ racial attitudes grew decidedly more enlightened. This was reflected not only in polls, but also in the fact that Lyndon Johnson, when contemplating a possible run for the presidency in 1960, publicly pushed for the passage of new civil rights legislation—well aware that no longer could a candidate perceived to have segregationist ideals win a national election in the United States.[8] In short, the steady and inexorable transformation of white attitudes toward blacks had set the stage for the golden years of a civil rights movement that would make powerful appeals to America’s conscience. In December 1956, after a court order officially desegregating Montgomery, Alabama’s buses took effect in response to the boycotts inspired by the famous Rosa Parks incident, Martin Luther King, Jr. declared: “There is a new Negro in the South, with a new sense of dignity and destiny.”[9]<br />
<br />
In 1956, in large part because of King’s charismatic presence and gifted oratory, media coverage of racial issues grew to unprecedented levels. <i>Time</i>, <i>Life</i>, and Newsweek tripled their coverage of civil rights topics that year.[10] Civil rights reform was on America’s mind, as evidenced by a massive wave of demonstrations in the late 1950s and early 1960s. These rallies were led by such organizations as the NAACP, the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), and the newly formed <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6998">Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC)</a>.[11] Boycotts, sit-ins, voter-registration drives, and protest marches spread like wildfire across the American South. In 1960 alone, some 70,000 students staged sit-ins in about 100 southern cities, occupying seats in such traditionally segregated facilities as lunch counters, restaurants, and libraries. And the media took notice. Whereas during 1959 <i>The New York Times</i> had given coverage to just 10 civil rights demonstrations in the entire country, in 1960 that figure grew to 414.[12]<br />
<br />
Over a ten-week span in mid-1963, some 758 civil rights demonstrations took place in 186 American cities, with many white participants. The summer of 1963 alone saw 50 southern cities agree to desegregate their public facilities.[13] Without a doubt, the psychological transformation that civil rights leaders had hoped for was well underway.<br />
<br />
Because he recognized the unmistakably evolving racial attitudes of white Americans, Dr. King based his appeals for racial justice on the increasingly self-evident premise that it was morally imperative. Committed to helping perpetuate the remarkable social and economic gains that blacks had made during the 1940s and 1950s, King foresaw an America where one day racial unity would render segregation nothing more than a distant, unhappy memory. And indeed the continuing evolution of white attitudes during subsequent decades has demonstrated beyond any doubt that King’s confidence in that vision was well founded. Virtually all contemporary polls of white Americans show that well over 90 percent now favor integrated schools and public accommodations; that almost all oppose employment discrimination against members of any race or ethnicity;[14] that nearly 90 percent approve of interracial marriage;[15] and that more than 90 percent would be willing to vote for a black presidential candidate.[16]<br />
<br />
But even as such major attitudinal changes were occurring, key positions in the civil rights movement’s leadership were being claimed by a cadre of anti-American leftists who uniformly characterized the United States as a veritable snake pit of racist vipers. In the names of “social justice” and “liberalism,” they pledged to defend blacks from whites, whom they depicted uniformly as reactionaries intent on restoring Jim Crow. White America, they explained, was racist to its rotten, capitalist core, and the only solution would be to revolt against its traditions, its values, and its institutions. Their assertion that American society was irredeemable, and that nothing short of a revolutionary transformation could rectify the nation’s moral inadequacies, became the dominant vision of the new civil rights movement. Among the notable figures in this development were <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1516">Stokely Carmichael</a>, <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2265">H. Rap Brown</a>, and their Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee; <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1524">Huey Newton</a>, <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1621">Bobby Seale</a>, and their <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7375">Black Panther Party</a>; and Malcolm X and his <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6600">Nation of Islam</a>. They preached Black Power, racial hatred, and violent revolution against a satanic white America.<br />
<br />
In a related development, the 1960s saw the emergence of a hateful, anti-white creed known as black liberation theology, whose foremost promoter was the <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2315">Rev. James Cone</a>. Cone’s views served to lend the Black Power Movement’s radicalism the implied legitimacy of a spiritual and theological framework. Claiming that “black values” were superior to American values, Cone’s writings posited a black Jesus who would lead his African American disciples in rebellion against an oppressive United States. “This country was founded for whites, and everything that has happened in it has emerged from the white perspective,” Cone wrote. “What we need is the destruction of whiteness, which is the source of human misery in the world.”[17]<br />
<br />
Cone characterized white society as the antichrist, and the white church as an institution that was racist in toto. Thus he posited “a desperate need for a black theology, a theology whose sole purpose is to apply the freeing power of the gospel to black people under white oppression.”[18] In his landmark book <i>Black Theology and Black Power</i>, Cone wrote: “All white men are responsible for white oppression.... Theologically, Malcolm X was not far wrong when he called the white man ‘the devil.’”[19] In that same volume, Cone penned these sentiments about universal black goodness and white evil: “Whiteness, as revealed in the history of America, is the expression of what is wrong with man. It is a symbol of man’s depravity. God cannot be white even though white churches have portrayed him as white…. The coming of Christ means … destroying the white devil in us.”[20]<br />
<br />
In his book <i>A Black Theology of Liberation</i>, Cone advanced the notion of a deity that sided with blacks, and against whites: “Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the Black community. If God is not for us and against White people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of Black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the Black community ... Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy.”[21]<br />
<br />
During the same period, there emerged in America a New Left movement that despised the country and everything for which it stood. As a logical outgrowth of this hatred, the New Left sought to create a new socialist order—for which a prerequisite would be to wipe clean the slate of the old order.<br />
<br />
Toward this end, the left initiated a campaign to invert the nation’s power hierarchy, i.e. to help blacks unseat whites as the “privileged” race of a new social order. The pursuit of this objective required the left to eschew Dr. King’s dream of a color-blind society, which it did. As Dinesh D’Souza observed in 1995, “It is no exaggeration to say that a rejection of [King’s’ vision] of a regime in which we are judged solely based on the content of our character is a virtual job qualification for leadership in the civil rights movement today.”[22] Boston University law professor Andrew Kull concurred that “the color-blind consensus, so long in forming, was abandoned with surprising rapidity.”[23]<br />
<br />
A few examples will serve to illustrate just how far from King’s ideals some of today’s leading activists and leftist scholars have strayed:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>* Eleanor Holmes Norton, former chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), has advised that we “stop quoting dead saints” like King.[24]<br />
<br />
* <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=687">Jesse Jackson</a> has used the term “intellectual terrorism” to describe the suggestion that King, were he alive today, would oppose racial preferences for blacks in employment and education.[25]<br />
<br />
* Legal scholar Charles Lawrence urges blacks to lobby for racial preferences and to “combat the ideology of equal opportunity.”[26]<br />
<br />
* Lawrence’s colleague Patricia Williams supports “some measure of enforced equality” of results, rather than “blindly formalized constructions of equal opportunity.”[27]<br />
<br />
* In <i>Rethinking the American Race Problem</i>, Roy Brooks contends that “there is nothing intrinsically wrong with using race in lawmaking or policy formulation.”[28]<br />
<br />
* Philosopher Bernard Boxill writes that while southern segregation laws were “certainly wrong,” other “color conscious policies like busing and affirmative action could be correct.”[29]<br />
<br />
* Benjamin Hooks, the NAACP’s former Executive Director, says, “The Constitution itself has recognized that there is color in this world. So from time to time we must use those [racial] categories to achieve the Constitution’s goals.”[30]<br />
<br />
* <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2177">Mary Frances Berry</a>, former Chair of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, claims that “civil rights laws were not passed to give civil rights protection to <i>all</i> Americans.”[31]<br />
<br />
* Afrocentric scholar Molefi Asante charges that “integration makes us cultural hostages [and] threatens our existence as a people.”[32]</blockquote>Because such views have diffused widely throughout the black community, it is hardly surprising that, as historian David Garrow observes, “there is less integrationist sentiment in black America now than at any time since King’s death.”[33] Along the same lines, black scholar David Bositis sees “something of a movement in the African American community away from integration.”[34] Black columnist Michael Meyers agrees that “Dr. King’s integrationist approach to tearing down America’s racial walls is no longer in vogue.”[35]<br />
<br />
King’s vision was shattered not by conservatives seeking to “turn back the clock” vis a vis civil rights; indeed conservative Republicans supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act in greater numbers than did their Democrat counterparts.[36] Rather, the vision was destroyed by the legions of prominent leftists who took the reins of the civil rights movement and began to flood the halls of academia—individuals who were influential in shaping public opinion because of their perceived authority on the subject of race. In recent decades they and their successors have assiduously cultivated the notion that African Americans are the hapless victims of a status quo that oppresses blacks at every turn. High-profile figures such as <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1527">Al Sharpton</a>, Jesse Jackson, and <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1325">Louis Farrakhan</a>, along with organizations like the NAACP, uniformly depict whites as racists. Meanwhile they assure blacks that their country loathes and mistreats them as egregiously as ever. This message, quite predictably, has bred a sense of defeatism, bitterness, resentment, and victimhood in much of the black community—needlessly consigning millions of otherwise talented people brimming with potential, to unproductive, miserable lives.<br />
<br />
A notable illustration of how the left invariably continues to assume the very worst about whites was provided by the infamous <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/List%20of%20Gang%20of%2088%20Duke%20Professors3.html">“Group of 88”</a> <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6656">Duke University</a> professors who signed and published a full-page “listening statement” in the April 6, 2006 edition of the <i>Duke Chronicle</i>, quoting several black Duke students who had complained about the supposedly rampant racism on their campus, and condemning three of Duke’s white lacrosse players who recently had been accused of rape by a local black stripper. (The charges eventually would be proven entirely false.) Presuming the athletes to be guilty from the outset, the professors solemnly pondered “the anger and fear of many students who know themselves to be objects of racism and sexism, who see illuminated in this moment’s extraordinary spotlight what they live with everyday.”[37]<br />
<br />
Academia is replete with eminent professors who, like Duke’s “Group of 88,” view the United States as a nation that is bigoted to its core:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>* Consider University of Pennsylvania professor <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2192">Michael Eric Dyson</a>, who laments the “miserable plight of black men in America,”[38] and who in January 2008 expressed his hope that the “psychic, internal emotional turmoil that black people struggle against will somehow be lessened by seeing the image of a black man [<a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1511">Barack Obama</a>] in charge” of the executive branch of the U.S. government.[39]<br />
<br />
* In his book <i>Faces at the Bottom of the Well</i>, NYU law professor <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2175">Derrick Bell</a> claimed that “few whites are ready to actively promote civil rights for blacks”; that “white society … condemns all blacks to quasi citizenship as surely as it segregated our parents”; and that “African Americans must confront and conquer the otherwise deadening reality of our permanent subordinate status.”[40]<br />
<br />
* Writes Columbia University professor <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2229">Manning Marable</a>: “The main pillars of structural racism throughout American history as well as today have been white prejudice, power, and privilege. By ‘prejudice,’ I mean a deep and unquestioned belief in the natural superiority of white people over nonwhites…. In our [blacks’] daily lives, racism presents itself as a virtually endless series of ‘racialized moments,’ in which part of our humanity is stolen or denied.”[41]<br />
<br />
* Ivy League professor <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=813">Cornel West</a> brands the United States a “racist patriarchal”[42] nation where “white supremacy” still defines everyday life.[43] “White America,” he writes, “has been historically weak-willed in ensuring racial justice and has continued to resist fully accepting the humanity of blacks.”[44] Professor West attributes most of the black community’s problems to “existential angst derive[d] from the lived experience of ontological wounds and emotional scars inflicted by white supremacist beliefs and images permeating U.S. society and culture.”[45] He explains that “the accumulated effect of the black wounds and scars suffered in a white-dominated society is a deep-seated anger, a boiling sense of rage, and a passionate pessimism regarding America’s will to justice.”[46] “It goes without saying,” he adds, “that a profound hatred of African people … sits at the center of American civilization.”[47]<br />
<br />
* Appearing at a 2005 <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7147">United Nations</a>-sponsored seminar called “Confronting Islamophobia,” SUNY College president <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1935">Calvin Butts</a> asserted that “whether Muslims like it or not, Muslims are labeled people of color in the racist U.S. … they [whites] won’t label you by calling you a nigger but they’ll call you a terrorist.”[48]<br />
<br />
* Emory University lecturer <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2250">Kathleen Cleaver</a> has stated that “racist and white supremacist and exploitative practices are engrained” in American society and government, and that the “inability to treat Black people in a humane fashion” has “become part of the identity of the United States.”[49]<br />
<br />
* According to CCNY professor Leonard Jeffries: “Western civilization is nothing more than an institutionalized, sophisticated form of barbarism” characterized by “domination, destruction, and death.”[50] Convinced that America is founded on a “system of white supremacy,” he has accused Republicans and the Democrats alike of seeking to bring about the “destruction of the black community.”[51]<br />
<br />
A number of black academic leftists like <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2220">Leonard Jeffries</a> and <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2222">Maulana Karenga</a> (the founder of the holiday <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=536">Kwanzaa</a>) have created African Studies programs that cultivate racial grievance related to the perception that black contributions to American society have gone unrecognized by the majority culture. Critical Race Theory, wherein race plays the same role as class plays in the Marxist paradigm, underpins their teachings.</blockquote><br />
Other notables have joined this chorus of professors lamenting America’s alleged bigotry:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>* Columnist E.R. Shipp has called white racism “the most serious obstacle to the social progress of blacks in this country and the greatest threat to [their] personal freedom.”[52] “In the United States,” she adds, “racism flows as naturally as mother’s milk from one generation to the next, perpetuating the notion that entitlement or exclusion is dictated by one’s skin color.”[53] According to Shipp, “you can never be sure when you will be punished for [the crime of] Living While Black.”[54]<br />
<br />
* “This is still a profoundly racist country,” says author and lecturer <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1545">Paul Robeson, Jr.</a>, “meaning [that] the majority of white people are still racist, to one degree or another.”[55]<br />
<br />
* Former NAACP Executive Director Benjamin Chavis has asserted that “racism is worse today than it was in the 60s.”[56]<br />
<br />
* “Everybody of Caucasian descent,” says political scientist Andrew Hacker, “believes that we [whites] belong to a superior strain. Most white people believe that persons with African ancestries are more likely to carry primitive traits in their genes.”[57]<br />
<br />
* The self-described “antiracist activist” <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1874">Tim Wise</a>, who is white, chastises “rich white people” for their impulse to “blame the dark-skinned for [whites’] hardship.” He declares: “Whites … take most everything for granted in this country; which makes perfect sense, because dominant groups usually have that privilege. We take for granted that we won’t be racially profiled even when members of our group engage in criminality at a disproportionate rate, whether the crime is corporate fraud, serial killing, child molestation, abortion clinic bombings or drunk driving. And indeed we won’t be.”[58]<br />
<br />
* <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2307">Rev. Jeremiah Wright</a> laments “the social order under which we [blacks] live, under which we suffer, under which we are killed.”[59] Depicting blacks as a politically powerless demographic, he complains that “African Americans don’t run anything in the Capital except elevators.”[60] He attributes the high unemployment rate of African Americans to “the fact that they are black.”[61] Vis a vis the criminal justice system, he likewise explains that “the brothers are in prison” chiefly because of their skin color.[62]</blockquote><br />
According to polling data, black Americans at large seem to agree with the foregoing assessments. A December 2006 poll conducted by the Opinion Research Corporation for CNN found that 49 percent of black respondents said that racism was a “very serious” problem in America, and another 35 percent called it “somewhat serious.” In other words, 84 percent of blacks viewed racism as a concern meriting the qualifier “serious.”[63]<br />
<br />
Similarly, a March/April 2008 poll conducted by CNN, <i>Essence</i> magazine, and the Opinion Research Corporation asked respondents this question: “How serious a problem do you think racial discrimination against blacks is in this country: a very serious problem, a somewhat serious problem, not too serious, or not at all serious?” Some 43 percent of black respondents said that discrimination was a “very serious” problem in America, and another 44 percent called it “somewhat serious.” Put another way, 87 percent of blacks viewed discrimination as a concern meriting the qualifier “serious.”[64]<br />
<br />
This belief has profound implications for black Americans—causing them to view themselves as a demographic whose unique history will forever set them apart from mainstream American culture, and to believe that they must be perpetually on guard against the culture’s relentless assaults upon their rights and their dignity. Such an outlook leads them, quite naturally, to seek to distance themselves from the culture. It also leads them to reject its norms—vis a vis such variables as dress, speech, behavior, and demeanor—and to view these as illegitimate constructs imposed upon blacks by a hostile oppressor race.<br />
<br />
Among the most notable “white” norms rejected by many contemporary blacks is the notion that success in school is a laudable achievement in which they can take great pride. Black anthropologist Signithia Fordham, for one, has observed that many black students intentionally perform poorly in school for fear of incurring the disapproval of their black peers who construe striving for academic excellence as an attempt to “act white.” “Kids are worried about being cut off by their own community,” she elaborates, “and uncertain about being accepted by the other [white] community…. They choose to avoid adopting attitudes and putting in enough time and effort in their schoolwork because their peers (and they themselves) would interpret their behavior as ‘white.’” According to Fordham, black youngsters are also reluctant to speak standard English, be punctual, attend the opera or ballet, study in the library, do volunteer work, and visit museums—all to avoid the appearance of “acting white.”[65]<br />
<br />
Concurring with these remarks, a black assistant principal has said, “I have run across blacks who do not want to seem white. [They fear that] if they achieve, they might fall into that category.”[66] Illustrative of this observation was one particular outstanding black high-school student in Washington, DC who, while receiving a special scholarship, stepped to the podium and told the parents and teachers in attendance that his black classmates had nicknamed him “whitey” because of his diligent study habits.[67] Similarly, a black UC Berkeley student recalled that during high school, “I got a lot of criticism about speaking proper speech…. They [other youngsters] would say, ‘Why do you talk like you’re white?’”[68] A successful black middle-school student in Oakland told Time magazine that her low-achieving black peers, who generally accused studious blacks of acting like whites, often threatened her with violence.[69]<br />
<br />
Cedric Jennings, a hardworking District of Columbia high-school student, reported a similar experience to <i>The Wall Street Journal</i>. Most of his classmates, he explained, were poor students and considered him a traitor to his race because he studied a great deal. “The charge of wanting to be white, where I’m from, is like treason,” said Jennings. “Doing well [academically] here means you better not show your face.”[70]<br />
<br />
In July 1999 <i>The New York Times</i> quoted an eighteen-year-old black student who explained: “When you’re on the streets, you speak Ebonics…. When you’re in school, you speak proper English. But when you talk too proper, your peers will call you white and say you’re a cracker.”[71] <br />
<br />
In his book <i>Losing the Race</i>, John McWhorter, a black professor of linguistics at UC Berkeley, expands upon this theme:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“As I have noted, it is a long-established and well-documented feature of black American culture for children to tease and harass black kids who show an affinity for school. We recall … a middle-class black student opting for advanced placement classes in Evanston, Illinois, recounted being told ‘Oh, you’re an oreo’ because ‘getting good grades was always connected to white people.’ … Berkeley High School principal Theresa Saunders (who is black) notes, ‘We see it time and time again: [black] kids come in quite talented, and by the end of ninth grade year, they’re goofing off. The peer culture is such that it doesn’t acknowledge or reward academic achievement.”[72]</blockquote><br />
According to McWhorter, “These [black] students are not stupid or willfully lazy—they are simply victims of a fundamental association of school with an ‘other’ culture sensed as oppressive.” He explains that their “resistance to standard English”—which in many black communities has taken “a particularly pointed, hostile tenor—represents part of a general rejection of whites.”[73]<br />
<br />
Positing a cause-and-effect relationship between this black rejection of “white” norms and a “widespread cult of anti-intellectualism” among blacks, McWhorter writes:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“Consider the data: even in middle-class suburbs, increasing numbers of middle-class black students tend to cluster at the bottom of their schools in grades and test scores…. Why? All through modern black American culture, even throughout black academia, the belief prevails that learning for learning’s sake is a white affair and therefore inherently disloyal to a proper black identity. Studying black-related issues is okay, because learning about oneself is authentic. But this impulse also implicitly classifies science as irrelevant, which is the direct cause of the under representation of minorities in the hard sciences. The sense that the properly ‘black’ person only delves into topics related to himself is also why you can count on one hand the number of books by black Americans that are not on racial topics.<br />
<br />
“The belief that blacks and school don’t go together has its roots in slavery’s refusal to let blacks be educated. But it gained strength in the mid-1960s, when black separatism rejected traits associated with whites as alien, and black students, in this spirit, began teasing their fellows who strove to excel in school as ‘acting white,’ a much harsher taunt than merely dismissing them as nerds….<br />
<br />
“The ‘acting white’ charge—which implies that you think yourself different from, and better than, your peers—is the prime reason that blacks do poorly in school. The gifted black student quickly faces a choice between peer group acceptance and intellectual achievement. Most, out of an utterly human impulse, choose the former. Even if they open themselves to schooling in college or later, their performance all too often permanently suffers from the message they long ago internalized that ‘the school thing’ is an add-on, not a mix-in.”[74]</blockquote><br />
A related phenomenon that has drawn the notice of social and behavioral scientists is the physical posture which many young black males assume when they are out in public. Black psychologist Richard Majors, for instance, deems the characteristic aloof swagger or “cool pose” of inner-city black teenagers “a tactic for psychological survival,” a coping mechanism designed to insulate their psyches from the choking yoke of white oppression. Enabling them to “appear competent and in control in the face of adversity,” the cool pose purportedly affords them “a source of dignity and worth, a mask that hides the sting of failure and frustration.” Dr. Majors explains that the cool pose is characterized by a combination of speech, mannerisms, gestures, and movements that “exaggerate or ritualize masculinity.” The “essence of cool,” he adds, “is to appear in control, whether through a fearless style of walking, an aloof facial expression, the clothes you wear, a haircut, your gestures, or the way you talk. The cool pose shows the dominant culture that you are strong and proud, despite your status in American society.”<br />
<br />
In an article outlining Dr. Majors’ conclusions, <i>The New York Times</i> stated, “While the cool pose is often misread by teachers, principals, and police officers as an attitude of defiance, psychologists who have studied it say it is a way for black youths to maintain a sense of integrity and suppress rage at being blocked from usual routes to esteem and success.” This rage is heightened, according to Majors, by the fact that black males in America are becoming “an endangered species.”[75]<br />
<br />
Implicit in the related themes of the “cool pose” and the black aversion to “acting white,” is the planted axiom that whites generally are evil and, consequently, that their culture is something to be despised or defied rather than embraced. The significance of all this can hardly be overstated. It is a mindset that virtually guarantees unhappiness and failure; people who largely reject the norms and traditions of the society in which they live, have little chance of succeeding economically, professionally, or academically.<br />
<br />
Unfortunately, thanks to the relentless drumbeat of the left, the notion that America is a land of unyielding white racism has become an article of faith for large numbers of blacks. In his Winter 2001 article “What’s Holding Blacks Back?,” John McWhorter writes that in the 1990s, which he personally deemed an era “of bracing progress for my race,” he himself “came to realize that this feeling made me odd man out among most black Americans.” Says McWhorter:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“In every race-related debate—whether over Rodney King, O. J. Simpson, the Million Man March, Ebonics, or affirmative action—almost every black person I knew, many with backgrounds as comfortable as my own, started from the fierce conviction that, decades after the Civil Rights Act, whitey’s foot remains pressed upon all black Americans’ necks. For most black Americans, the rapid increase of the black middle class, of interracial relationships and marriages, and of blacks in prestigious positions has no bearing on the real state of black America. Further, they believe, whites’ inability to grasp the unmistakable reality of oppression is itself proof of racism, while blacks who question that reality are self-deluded…. These beliefs, rather than what remains of racism itself, are the biggest obstacle to further black progress in today’s America. And all are either outright myths or severe distortions of truth.”[76]</blockquote><br />
McWhorter laments what he terms “a deeply felt cult of victimology that grips the entire black community”:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“The victimology cult has … engendered a cult of black separatism. Inspired by the Black Power movement of the 1960s, which violently rejected whites as terminally evil, today’s separatism, in the same vein, flirts disastrously with the idea that, because white racism ineluctably drives black people outside the bounds of civic virtue, blacks shouldn’t be seriously punished or morally condemned for criminal behavior. Black transgressiveness is understandable, even ‘cool.’ A typical consequence of this view was the feting of the four black youths who maimed several people in Los Angeles after the Rodney King verdict, with the Nation of Islam setting up a defense fund for the ‘L.A. Four.’ [Another] recent manifestation of the idea was Jesse Jackson’s intervention when a Decatur, Illinois, high school suspended for two years seven black teenagers who injured bystanders during a gang fight at a school football game. Jackson painted this response to thuggery as a racist attempt to deny ‘our children’ an education.”[77]</blockquote><br />
In McWhorter’s estimation:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“Victimology, separatism, and anti-intellectualism underlie the general black community’s response to all race-related issues.… Today, these three thought patterns impede black advancement much more than racism; and dysfunctional inner cities, corporate glass ceilings, and black educational underachievement will persist until such thinking disappears. In my experience, trying to show many African-Americans how mistaken and counterproductive these ideas are is like trying to convince a religious person that God does not exist: the sentiments are beyond the reach of rational, civil discourse.”[78]</blockquote><br />
The left today encourages blacks not only to view themselves as victims, but also to exploit the implied moral superiority conferred by that status. Hoover Institution Senior Fellow Shelby Steele, who is black, explores the roots of this phenomenon:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“The most obvious and inarguable source of black innocence is the victimization that blacks endured for centuries at the hands of a race that insisted on black inferiority…. Like all victims, what blacks lost in power they gained in innocence—innocence that, in turn, entitled them to pursue power. This was the innocence that fueled the civil rights movement of the sixties and that gave blacks their first real power in American life—victimization metamorphosed into power via innocence. But this formula carries a drawback that I believe is virtually as devastating to blacks today as victimization once was. It is a formula that binds the victim to his victimization by linking his power to his status as a victim. And this, I’m convinced, is the tragedy of black power in America today. It is primarily a victim’s power, grounded too deeply in the entitlement derived from past injustice and in the innocence that Western/Christian tradition has always associated with poverty.”[79]</blockquote><br />
In a similar vein, Steele criticizes the left’s continuing depiction of whites as “exploiters”:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“In the sixties, blacks and white liberals often engaged in something that might be called the harangue-flagellation ritual. Blacks felt anger, white liberals felt guilt, and when they came together blacks would vent their anger by haranguing the whites, who often allowed themselves to be scourged as a kind of penance. The ‘official’ black purpose of this was to ‘educate’ whites on the issue of race, and in the sixties this purpose may sometimes have been served. But [today], after a marked decline in racism and … decades of consciousness-raising, the rite had become both anachronistic and, I think, irresponsible….”[80]</blockquote><br />
“Possibly white guilt’s worst effect,” Steele wrote in 2006, “is that it does not permit whites—and nonwhites—to appreciate something extraordinary: the fact that whites in America, and even elsewhere in the West, have achieved a truly remarkable moral transformation. One is forbidden to speak thus, but it is simply true. There are no serious advocates of white supremacy in America today, because whites see this idea as morally repugnant. If there is still the odd white bigot out there surviving past his time, there are millions of whites who only feel goodwill toward minorities.”[81]<br />
<br />
A similar sentiment is expressed by the black Harvard sociologist Orlando Patterson, who writes: “America, while still flawed in its race relations … is now the least racist white-majority society in the world; has a better record of legal protection of minorities than any other society, white or black; [and] offers more opportunities to a greater number of black persons than any other society, including all of Africa.”[82]<br />
<br />
But insights like those of McWhorter, Steele, and Patterson are anathema to those African Americans who have long imbibed the endlessly repeated leftist falsehood which claims that white society will forever oppose black progress and racial equity. Blacks who accept that premise can be expected with great certainty to reject the society’s values and traditions, to see themselves as “outsiders” who are not accepted by the white majority, and to consequently refuse to engage fully in the society’s traditions or the opportunities it affords.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">2) Affirmative Action: How the Left Has Harmed Blacks through the Bigotry of Low Expectations:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
The anti-intellectual mindset discussed in the previous section results largely from the fact that many blacks have rejected such “white” values as studying, excelling in school, and speaking standard English. Not surprisingly these students, as a group, have lagged far behind their white peers in terms of academic achievement. But true to form, the left ascribes their underachievement to inequities allegedly inherent in American society, education, and standardized testing—rather than to its own relentless drumbeat of defeatism and anti-Americanism. And, to help rectify the problem of black failure in school, the left passionately advocates a system of racial preferences most commonly known as affirmative action.<br />
<br />
The concept of affirmative action originally grew out of the premise that the racist barriers preventing talented blacks from getting good jobs and attending good schools should be eliminated, and that a condition of genuine equal opportunity—without preferential treatment or lowered standards—should be instituted. The precursors of the term “affirmative action” were such phrases as “positive effort” and “affirmative program,” which by 1960 were already in wide use among civil rights activists.[83] The seemingly innocuous entry of “affirmative action” into the American lexicon occurred on March 9, 1961 when President John F. Kennedy issued Executive Order 10925,[84] which stated that because discrimination was “contrary to the Constitutional principles and policies of the United States,” federally funded projects should “take affirmative action” to ensure that their hiring and employment practices were untainted by bias with regard to “race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.” <br />
<br />
“As initially presented,” writes sociologist Thomas Sowell, “affirmative action referred to various activities, such as monitoring subordinate decision-makers to ensure the fairness of their hiring and promotion decisions, and spreading information about employment or other opportunities so as to encourage previously excluded groups to apply—after which the actual selection could be made without regard to [group] membership.”[85] Affirmative action, in other words, was synonymous with equal opportunity, not equal outcomes.<br />
<br />
But before long, prominent leftwing organizations were offering alternative definitions of what was meant by “affirmative action.” In 1961, for instance, a <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6593">National Urban League</a> official announced that “being colorblind … is no longer a virtue. What we need to be is positively color-conscious.”[86] A year later, the Congress of Racial Equality began pressuring employers to give hiring preferences to blacks as compensation for past discrimination, while Urban League President Whitney Young candidly recommended, for similar reasons, “a decade of discrimination in favor of Negro youth.”[87] The NAACP also joined the chorus of those pushing for preferences, just a few years after having passionately advocated colorblindness in the <i><a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=AFFA4806-58FE-4A72-BB5E-E3CA148C4E70%20%5C%20_blank">Brown v. Board of Education</a></i> case.[88]<br />
<br />
Soon the distinction between equal <i>opportunities</i> and equal <i>outcomes</i> would not only blur, but would actually shift in favor of the aforementioned, color-conscious ideal favored by the NAACP, CORE, and the National Urban League. In the mid-1960s, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) changed the legal standards by which employment discrimination was to be judged, tacitly endorsing the idea that unequal outcomes were <i>prima facie</i> evidence of unfair labor practices.[89] Soon thereafter, both private and public institutions began implementing policies that gave preference—by means of racially distinct standards and rating systems—to minorities, particularly blacks, in an effort to raise their representation in a given workplace.[90]<br />
<br />
Beginning cautiously and secretively, this process was driven principally by the courts and the federal government’s newly created civil-rights divisions, among which were the EEOC, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP), and the Office of Civil Rights. These new agencies were staffed, for the most part, with black activists and white leftists. The policies they endorsed were generally signed into law behind closed doors, without democratic debate, by judges and bureaucrats.[91]<br />
<br />
In light of the fact that the 1964 Civil Rights Act’s underlying ideal of colorblindness had recently won the hearts and minds of most Americans, advocates of racial preferences well understood that only under a veil of secrecy could their blatantly <i>color-conscious</i> proposals gain a foothold in the United States.[92] As Stephan and Abigail Thernstrom explain in their book <i>America in Black and White</i>, “[T]he move toward race-conscious preferential policies was quiet, gradual and subtle—not the sort of tale that makes for headline news. Regulatory guidelines and executive orders governing such matters as federal contracting rules are low-visibility items.” In short, the public had no idea that such enormous changes were furtively taking place.[93]<br />
<br />
Today affirmative action (which began as a <i>liberal</i> ideal for equal <i>opportunity</i>) is synonymous with the <i>leftist</i> ideal of achieving equal <i>outcomes</i> by any means necessary, including group preferences and double standards. Defenders of preferences claim that these policies are little more than “tie-breakers,” designed merely to tip the scales in favor of a minority applicant over a white applicant of basically equivalent credentials. They dismiss any suggestion that preferences sacrifice a commitment to excellence in favor of “diversity.” Former Equal Employment Opportunity Commission chairman Clifford Alexander, for one, says that affirmative action “has nothing to do with finding unqualified black men or women. It is about finding qualified black people who … have been overlooked.”[94] Historian John Hope Franklin heartily agrees that the policy “makes no compromise with respect to ability.”[95]<br />
<br />
There is a large body of evidence, however, showing that preferential policies bear far less resemblance to “tie-breakers” than to the virtual abandonment of standards. Thus the left, in the name of “social justice” and “civil rights,” has resurrected from yesteryear the practice of racial discrimination—the only difference being that the roles of “oppressor” and “victim” have been reversed. Paralleling the classic leftist/Marxist model, whites fulfill the role of the “ruling class” that must be overthrown, while blacks represent the proletariat that must rise up to forcibly demand its rights and depose its oppressors. Under the banner of “liberalism,” the left has become the passionate advocate of policies that were neither endorsed nor even foreseen by the pioneers of “affirmative action” in the Sixties.<br />
<br />
In recent decades, the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores of white applicants to American colleges and universities have been, on average, about 200 points higher than those of their black counterparts.[96] Nonetheless, black students have been admitted to most academically competitive schools at much higher rates than whites. At Amherst College in 1995, for instance, 51 percent of black applicants were admitted vs. just 19 percent of white applicants.[97] At Rice University that same year, the corresponding numbers were 52 percent and 25 percent for blacks and whites, respectively.[98] At Bowdoin College, the figures were 70 percent and 30 percent.[99] In their 1998 book <i>The Shape of the River</i>, Ivy League professors William Bowen and Derek Bok report that at five of our country’s most elite universities, black applicants whose SAT scores fell within the 1200 to 1249 range had a 60 percent chance of admission, whereas whites with similar scores had just a 19 percent chance.[100]<br />
<br />
A 1998 CEO study of six public colleges and universities in North Carolina found that the “degree of preference in admissions given to blacks over whites” ranged from a ratio of 177.1 to 1 at NC State, to 3.4 to 1 at Chapel Hill.[101]<br />
<br />
At America’s top law schools, blacks have been admitted at fully 17.5 times the rate that a colorblind process would allow.[102] At UCLA Law School in 1994, a black applicant with a college Grade Pont Average (GPA) between 2.5 and 3.5, and a Law School Admissions Test (LSAT) score between 60 and 90, had a 61 percent chance of admission. The corresponding rates for similarly qualified Asians and whites were 7 percent and 1 percent, respectively.[103] Consider also Texas Law School, which in 1992 rejected 668 white applicants before rejecting a single black. Fully 100 percent of blacks who scored between 189 and 192 in the school’s academic rating system were admitted, as compared to just 6 percent of whites.[104]<br />
<br />
According to a 2002 CEO study of Virginia law schools:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“The law schools at the University of Virginia and William & Mary give massive preference to black applicants over their Hispanic, white, and Asian counterparts. The relative odds of admission of a black over a white applicant for UVA, controlling for other factors, were almost 650 to 1 in 1998 and 730 to 1 in 1999…. At William & Mary, black-white odds ratios were roughly 350 to 1 in 1998 and 170 to 1 in 1999.… At UVA, with an LSAT score of 160 and a GPA of 3.25, a black in-state male applicant in 1998 would have had a 96 percent chance of admission, versus only a 3 percent chance for identical Hispanic and white applicants, and a 7 percent chance for an identical Asian applicant.”[105]</blockquote><br />
At medical schools the situation is much the same. The Medical College Admissions Test (MCAT) scores of blacks who are accepted are actually lower than those of whites who are rejected.[106]<br />
<br />
According to a 2001 Center for Equal Opportunity (CEO) study of admissions at the University of Maryland Medical School, “The relative odds of admission of a black over a white applicant were 61.5 to 1 in 1996, 35.9 to 1 in 1997, 40.7 to 1 in 1998, and 20.6 to 1 in 1999.”[107] This study also found: “For 1999, the probability of admission of a black applicant with a total MCAT score of 45 and a science GPA of 3.5 was 90 percent, as compared to 31 percent for a similar white applicant, 23 percent for an Asian applicant, and 53 percent for a Hispanic applicant.”[108]<br />
<br />
Another 2001 CEO study examined admissions patterns at the medical schools of Michigan State University, SUNY Brooklyn, the University of Washington, and the Medical College of Georgia. The study explained that in order for schools to admit a higher proportion of students from a demographic group that under-performs in comparison to other groups, “admission officers must essentially reach down into the applicant pool and pull up certain students, a practice that results in at least some students with better credentials than [others] being rejected … despite their superior qualifications.”<br />
<br />
The extent of these preferences is nothing short of shocking. In 1996, for instance, black applicants were 19 times likelier than equally qualified whites to be admitted to Georgia Medical College. That same year blacks were 23 times likelier than academically equivalent whites to be admitted to SUNY Brooklyn, and a year later blacks were 30 times likelier than comparable whites to be admitted to the University of Washington. In some years at each school, the disproportions were not quite so extreme. But in general, black students were still between 4 and 14 times likelier to be admitted to a given medical school than were their white counterparts of equivalent credentials.[109]<br />
<br />
The CEO researchers also calculated—in terms of absolute percentages—the likelihood of admission for black, white, Hispanic, and Asian applicants with the same test scores and grades. Again, the results were startling. For example, consider those students with MCAT scores of 30 and GPAs of 3.25. At the Medical College of Georgia in 1996, black applicants with such credentials had a 51 percent chance of admission. For Hispanics, whites, and Asians, the corresponding figures were 14 percent, 5 percent, and 2 percent.[110]<br />
<br />
At Michigan State College of Human Medicine in 1999, black applicants with the aforementioned credentials had a 43 percent chance of admission. The corresponding numbers for other groups were: 26 percent for Hispanics, 5 percent for whites, and 3 percent for Asians.[111]<br />
<br />
For similarly qualified applicants to SUNY Brooklyn in 1999, the likelihood of admission was 25 percent for blacks, 13 percent for Hispanics, 3 percent for whites, and 3 percent for Asians.[112]<br />
<br />
At the University of Washington in 1997, the numbers were 61 percent for blacks, 20 percent for Hispanics, 5 percent for whites, and 4 percent for Asians.[113]<br />
<br />
A 2001 CEO study of the University of Maryland School of Medicine (UMSM) reported the following:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“UMSM generally admits blacks with much lower test scores and science GPAs as compared with whites, Hispanics, and Asians…. The relative odds of admission of a black over a white applicant were 61.5 to 1 in 1996, 35.9 to 1 in 1997, 40.7 to 1 in 1998, and 20.6 to 1 in 1999. The odds ratios translate into massive preferences favoring blacks over other groups. For example, in 1996, the probability of admission for a black applicant with a total MCAT score of 45 and a science GPA of 3.5 was 97 percent—roughly three times the probability of a similarly qualified white, Asian, or Hispanic…. For 1999, the probability of admission of a black applicant with a total MCAT score of 45 and a science GPA of 3.5 was 90 percent, as compared to 31 percent for a similar white applicant, 23 percent for an Asian applicant, and 53 percent for a Hispanic applicant. These statistics control for sex, residency, and whether the person had a parent graduating from UMSM.”[114]</blockquote><br />
In 2006 a CEO study of admissions at the University of Michigan Medical School (UMMS) found that the school “awarded a very large degree of preference to blacks over whites and Asians with the same credentials and background for every year analyzed (1999, 2003, 2004, and 2005).” “In every year,” said the researchers, “odds ratios favoring black over white candidates in admission—controlling for test scores, grades, Michigan residency, sex, and alumni connections—were very large. In 1999, the odds favoring blacks over whites with the same background and credentials were 38 to 1; they remained high (21 to 1) in 2005.” The study calculated that the probability of admission for an in-state male candidate, with no parent[al] connection to UMMS and with an MCAT score and science GPA equal to the medians for black admittees, was 72 percent if he was black, 17 percent if he was Hispanic, 6 percent if he was white, and 2 percent if he was Asian.[115]<br />
<br />
Obviously these immense double standards in the admissions process hurt those non-black students who are casualties of academia’s quest for “diversity.” But there are lamentable consequences also for those black students who are preferentially admitted. Because they are often enrolled in schools for which they are academically under-prepared, these students’ college careers are commonly beset with failure.<br />
<br />
Consider the example of Berkeley, where one year the average composite SAT scores of incoming black freshmen was 952 -- well above the national average of 900, but far below the 1,232 average of Berkeley’s first-year white students and the 1,254 average of its Asian freshmen.[116] That same year, the median high-school grade-point-average (GPA) of Berkeley’s entering black freshmen was 3.52, significantly lower than the 4.0 median of their white and Asian counterparts.[117] In fact, from the early 1970s to the mid-1990s it was standard procedure for blacks to be admitted to Berkeley with comparatively weak scholastic credentials. It is not surprising, then, that their dropout rate during that period was about 70 percent—much higher than that of their non-black peers.[118]<br />
<br />
Notwithstanding anti-affirmative action measures that some states have introduced in recent years, a scenario of extreme double standards continues to pervade most of American higher education. Fully two-thirds of blacks who started college after 1979 have dropped out and failed to graduate.[119] In a major study examining the performance of students at some 300 major colleges and universities, the respective graduation rates of white and black students were 57 percent and 34 percent.[120]<br />
<br />
Common sense tells us that black students who meet their schools’ normal admissions criteria should fare better academically than those who are recruited mainly for their skin color—and indeed experience bears this out. Between 1982 and 1987, for example, 42 percent of blacks admitted to Berkeley under normal standards graduated, while only 18 percent of those admitted on affirmative action did the same. The picture was similar for Hispanics: Those admitted under the regular standards had a 55 percent graduation rate, as compared to 22 percent for the affirmative action “beneficiaries.”[121]<br />
<br />
The strong connection between SAT scores and graduation rates suggests that any school which admits a particular subset of students under artificially low standards does those students a great disservice, virtually condemning them to scholastic failure. One study found that among Berkeley’s entering freshmen, fully 88 percent of those with SAT scores in the 1,300s eventually graduated. For students with scores in the 1,100s, 900s, 800s, and 700s, the corresponding graduation rates were 83 percent, 72 percent, 62 percent, and 58 percent—whatever their race.[122]<br />
<br />
With regard to black students in particular, the pattern is just as clear. Blacks with SAT scores between 851 and 1,000 have a 77 percent graduation rate from colleges whose overall SAT average is 900. By contrast, blacks who score between 700 and 850 on the SAT graduate from those same schools only 56 percent of the time, and blacks whose SAT scores are below 700 have just a 38 percent chance of graduating.[123]<br />
<br />
According to Heritage Foundation sociologist Thomas Sowell, “where the racial preferences in admissions are not as great, the differences in graduation rates are not as great.” “Racial preferences,” he writes, “reduce the prospects of black students graduating.” Sowell points out that at the University of Colorado at Boulder, where test score differences between black and white students have been more than 200 points, the respective graduation rates for black and white students were 39 percent and 72 percent. By contrast, at the University of Colorado at Denver, where the SAT score difference was a mere 30 points, the black vs. white graduation rates were also very similar: 50 percent for blacks and 48 percent for whites. “You are not doing anybody a favor by sending them where they are more likely to fail, rather than where they are more likely to succeed,” Sowell explains.[124]<br />
<br />
Dr. Sowell elaborates further on affirmative action’s negative consequences for its intended beneficiaries:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“For people on the left,… blacks are trophies or mascots, and must therefore be put on display…. The problem with being a mascot is that you are a symbol of someone else's significance or virtue. The actual well-being of a mascot is not the point…. In academia, lower admissions standards for black students is about having them as a visible presence, even if mismatching them with the particular college or university produces high dropout rates.<br />
<br />
“The black students who don’t make it are replaced by others, and when many of them don't make it, there are still more others. The point is to have black faces on campus, as mascots symbolizing what great people there are running the college or university. Many, if not most, of the black students who do not make it at big-name, high-pressure institutions are perfectly qualified to succeed at the normal range of colleges and universities. Most white students would also punch out if admitted to schools for which they don't have the same qualifications as the other students. But nobody needs white mascots.”[125]</blockquote><br />
It should also be noted that the negative consequences of placing students in colleges for which they are unprepared persist long after their schooling is over. One study found that by the age of thirty-two, blacks who had dropped out of upper-echelon colleges were earning about 25 percent less than blacks who had <i>graduated</i> from <i>less-selective</i> colleges. In other words, schools that tried to demonstrate racial “virtue” by admitting under-qualified black students actually did considerable long-term harm to those very students.[126]<br />
<br />
Apart from the issue of how affirmative action does a disservice to black and non-black students alike, it is important to address the question of whether such policies were ever necessary in the first place—even as a temporary measure to rectify historic discriminations.<br />
<br />
Proponents of racial preferences generally turn a blind eye to the fact that black progress was already well underway, and proceeding at a brisk pace, long before the era of affirmative action. In fact, between 1940 and 1960 African Americans were, in many ways, improving their social and economic position faster than they would after the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, or after the dawn of far-reaching affirmative action programs in the early 1970s.[127] The pre-1960 economic progress of blacks was in large part a result of their massive migration from the rural south to northern cities, where the employment and earning opportunities open to them were far superior. Without a doubt, the strides they made in the space of just two decades must be ranked among the greatest achievements of any demographic group in American history—an ascent they began from the very bottom rung of the social ladder.<br />
<br />
Whereas in 1940 only 10 percent of black men held middle-class jobs, by 1960 this figure had more than doubled, reaching 23 percent.[128] Between 1940 and 1950 the earnings of the average black man, in real dollars adjusted for inflation, grew by a remarkable 75 percent (about twice the rate at which white male incomes grew), and increased by another 45 percent during the 1950s. By 1960, black male incomes were 2.5 times greater than they had been twenty years earlier,[129] and black female incomes were 2.3 times greater.[130] In two decades, the black poverty rate had virtually been cut in half.[131]<br />
<br />
Apart from income, there were additional barometers of black Americans’ growing prosperity. For instance, between 1940 and 1960 the percentage of blacks who owned homes rose by 65 percent, as compared to a 42 percent rise for whites.[132] In 1940 black life expectancy at birth was just 53 years, fully 11 years lower than the white figure. By 1960 the black average had risen by ten and a half years, while the corresponding white figure had increased by only half that much.[133] During that same twenty-year period, the percentage of blacks who attained high-school diplomas more than tripled, while the corresponding figure for whites grew at only one-fifth that rate.<br />
<br />
Clearly, it is intellectually dishonest to credit “affirmative action” for setting in motion trends that were already well underway and gaining momentum long before that term ever made its first appearance in the American lexicon.<br />
<br />
Few Americans are aware that by 1971, black couples with two working spouses were earning 5 percent more than white couples of the same description in every part of the United States except the South. Notably, this was before affirmative action became widespread and, more importantly, before it became synonymous with racial preferences.[134] Since 1981, black families with two college-educated, working spouses have earned slightly more than white families of the same description in every age group and in every region of the country.[135] As scholar and author Charles Murray writes, “There’s hardly a single outcome—black voting rights, access to public accommodation, employment, particularly in white-collar jobs—that couldn’t have been predicted on the basis of pre-1964 trend lines.”[136]<br />
<br />
Nevertheless, the left saw those trend lines as fertile ground in which to sow the seeds of its own utopian vision. Reasoning from the premise that any situation where blacks still lagged behind whites was <i>prima facie</i> evidence of lingering societal discrimination, the left created affirmative action, a policy tailor-made to embitter blacks and whites alike by:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>(a) sending the message that race-based double standards of immense proportions were necessary to shield blacks from the ravages of America’s persistent and pervasive white bigotry;<br />
<br />
(b) encouraging blacks to become obsessively conscious of their racial identity, and to view themselves primarily as members of a victimized, aggrieved demographic rather than as individuals or as Americans;<br />
<br />
(c) causing whites to resent the fact that they were judged for employment and academic opportunities by a set of standards wholly different from those by which blacks were judged;<br />
<br />
(d) harming the designated beneficiaries of affirmative action, as in the case of black students who are preferentially admitted to universities for which they are academically unprepared, and who consequently flunk out of school at disproportionately high rates; and<br />
<br />
(e) taking the focus off the major causes of black poverty, criminality, and underachievement, wrongly ascribing such things to discrimination or racism while ignoring the devastating effects of fatherlessness and illegitimacy (which are discussed later in this essay) in the black community.</blockquote><br />
By so doing, the left has prevented millions of blacks from accurately identifying the principal cause of their social and economic ills, and thus from taking the steps necessary to cure those ills.<br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">3) How the Left Consigns Blacks to Substandard Education:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
The left commonly identifies socioeconomic factors as the cause of racial gaps in academic performance. One New York newspaper, for instance, reported in February 1999: “Research continues to demonstrate the link between wealth and academic performance. The United Negro College Fund found that 53 percent of college-bound black students taking the SAT in 1996 had family incomes below $30,000, compared with 18 percent of whites.”[137] This implies that if economic inequalities could be eliminated, differences in test scores would diminish or disappear altogether.<br />
<br />
Plausible though this theory sounds, however, it is discredited by hard evidence. Non-black students from families with yearly incomes of under $10,000 score 44 points higher than the overall black average.[138] White students from families earning $10,000 to $20,000 outscore black students from families earning $70,000 or more.[139] Asian American students whose families earn $6,000 or less score higher on the math SAT than black students whose family incomes are $50,000 or more.[140]<br />
<br />
It appears that black scholastic underachievement has nothing whatsoever to do with income, and a great deal to do with: (a) what Professor John McWhorter calls an “anti-intellectual” mindset; and (b) the black community’s widespread rejection of so-called “white” values such as studying (as discussed previously).<br />
<br />
Consider, as evidence of this, the research of Stanford sociologist S.M. Dornbush. Intrigued by the scholastic excellence of impoverished Asian American students, Dornbush found that they simply “work a heck of a lot harder” than their peers to raise their SAT scores and school grades.[141] His findings about study habits are consistent with those of a survey which found that 21 percent of black twelfth-graders watched five or more hours of television per weekday, more than triple the viewing time of their white peers. In addition, 20 percent of blacks reported spending at least an hour per day playing video games, nearly twice the corresponding percentage for whites.[142]<br />
<br />
In another study, Harvard researcher Ronald Ferguson found that black high-school students “watch twice as much TV as white kids—three hours a day as opposed to one and a half hours a day.”[143] A 1996 survey of fourth-graders yielded similar results: 69 percent of blacks but just 37 percent of whites watched four or more hours of television daily, and blacks were three times likelier than whites to watch at least six hours of TV per day.[144] The respective television viewing habits of black and non-black children may well reflect deep cultural differences in attitudes toward education. In national studies asking students to name the lowest grade they could receive without angering their parents, blacks consistently name lower grades than whites or Asians.[145]<br />
<br />
George Mason University professor Walter E. Williams, who is black, puts it this way:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“At one time in black history, there was a high value placed on education, so much so that blacks risked punishment to acquire education in areas of our country where black education was prohibited…. I know there was a time when schools and black parents cooperated with one another to see to it that children behaved in school and did their work. In principle, the solution to black education problems is not rocket science. The problem is summoning the will.”[146]</blockquote><br />
Leftists commonly claim that there is inadequate funding of the big-city public schools that most black test-takers attend. Such schools, they claim, are starved for money, whereas white students are likelier to attend comparatively wealthy suburban schools. Yet such assertions are entirely unfounded. Research in fact shows that the higher the percentage of minority students in a school district, the <i>higher</i> the per-pupil expenditures. Mostly-minority school districts spend fully 15 percent more money on each student than districts where minority enrollment is below 5 percent. Moreover, per-pupil spending in the central cities of metropolitan areas—regardless of race—is identical to spending levels in the surrounding suburbs.[147]<br />
<br />
Notwithstanding the large expenditures on black students’ schooling, those youngsters have essentially nothing to show for it. Throughout their educational careers, black students as a whole perform very poorly in comparison to their white peers. For example, black 17-year olds lag several years behind their white peers in terms of their proficiency in reading (3.9 years), math (3.4 years), science (5.4 years), and writing (3.3 years). In other words, they function at the level of white children who are roughly three-and-a-half to five-and-a-half years younger.[148]<br />
<br />
Nationwide, only 13 percent of black fourth-graders and 11 percent of black eighth-graders score as “proficient” in exams that measure their reading abilities. Fully 59 percent of black fourth-graders and 49 percent of black eighth-graders score “below basic,” meaning that they do not possess the necessary knowledge and skills. In math, only 12 percent of black fourth-graders score “proficient,” and 40 percent score “below basic.” For black eighth graders, the corresponding figures are 8 percent “proficient” and 59 percent “below basic.”[149]<br />
<br />
Money alone cannot solve this problem. Consider the Washington, DC school budget, which allocates some $15,000 per year—more than any other American city—to the education of each pupil (the vast majority of whom are black). Notwithstanding this immense financial investment, black student academic achievement in DC ranks as the lowest in the United States. In reading, just 7 percent of the city’s black fourth-graders score “proficient,” while 71 percent score “below basic.” For DC eighth-graders, the numbers are 6 percent “proficient” and 58 percent “below basic.” In math, the black fourth-graders score 5 percent “proficient” and 59 percent “below basic”; eighth-graders are 3 percent “proficient” and 73 percent “below basic.”[150]<br />
<br />
Writes Walter E. Williams:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“Racial discrimination has nothing to do with what’s no less than an education meltdown within the black community. Where black education is the very worst, often the city mayor is black, city council dominated by blacks, and often the school superintendent is black, as well as most of the principals and teachers, and Democrats have run the cities for decades. I'm not saying there's a causal connection, just that one would be hard put to chalk up the rotten education to racial discrimination.”[151]</blockquote><br />
Though public schools have done such a poor job of educating black youngsters (many of whom are already hamstrung by the previously discussed anti-intellectual biases present in many sectors of the black community), the left nonetheless opposes proposals that would allow parents to divert a portion of their tax dollars away from the public school system, and to use those funds instead to help cover the tuition costs for private schools to which they might prefer to send their children. For example, the <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7428">National Education Association (NEA)</a> contends that voucher programs “compromise the Association's commitment to free, equitable, universal, and quality public education for every student.”[152] (Helping the NEA to lobby against vouchers and parental choice have been such leftist stalwarts as <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6400">People for the American Way</a>, the <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6145">American Civil Liberties Union</a>, and the <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6160">NAACP</a>.)<br />
<br />
Extolling vouchers as a means of promoting free-market competition among schools, the economist Friedrich von Hayek once wrote:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“As has been shown by Professor Milton Friedman … it would now be entirely practicable to defray the costs of general education out of the public purse without maintaining government schools, by giving the parents vouchers covering the cost of education of each child which they could hand over to schools of their choice. It may still be desirable that government directly provide schools in a few isolated communities where the number of children is too small (and the average cost of education therefore too high) for privately run schools. But with respect to the great majority of the population, it would undoubtedly be possible to leave the organization and management of education entirely to private efforts, with the government providing merely the basic finance and ensuring a minimum standard for all schools where the vouchers could be spent.”[153]</blockquote><br />
Many black DC parents desperately wish to take their children out of their city’s abysmal public school system and enroll them in private schools; unfortunately the cost of doing so is prohibitive for most. Each year thousands of low-income black students in DC apply for 100 partial scholarships (offered by the Washington Scholarship Fund) to private local schools. Parents have been known to camp for several days outside the school of their choice in order to secure an opportunity to reserve an admission slot for their child.<br />
<br />
Other black DC families view home schooling as a viable alternative to the public schools. According to the National Home Educators Research Institute, the largest recent increase in home schooling in America has occurred in Prince George’s County, which borders DC’s east side and is the nation’s largest majority-black county.[154]<br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">4) How the War on Poverty Devastated the Black Community:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
When the “War on Poverty” officially started in 1964, the number of Americans living below the official poverty line had been declining continuously since the beginning of the decade and was only about half of what it had been in 1950.[155] Between 1950 and 1965, the proportion of people whose earnings put them below the poverty level—without counting government benefits—decreased by more than 30 percent.[156] Nonetheless, the left saw this state of affairs as fertile ground in which to sow the seeds of interventionism. President Johnson explained that the goal of his “War” was not simply to provide more material goods to the poor, but to reduce dependency, “break the cycle of poverty,” and make “taxpayers out of tax eaters.”[157] Johnson further claimed that his programs would bring to an end the “conditions that breed despair and violence,” those being “ignorance, discrimination, slums, poverty, disease, not enough jobs.”[158] He assured Americans that the investment, over time, would pay huge dividends for society. <br />
<br />
But if we use President Johnson’s own stated goals as a measure of the War on Poverty’s effectiveness, we can only conclude that the undertaking was a monstrous failure. Dependency on the government did not decline, but skyrocketed. Between the mid-Sixties and the mid-Seventies, the dollar value of public housing rose nearly fivefold and the amount spent on food stamps rose more than tenfold. From 1965 to 1969, government-provided benefits increased by a factor of 8; by 1974 such benefits were an astounding 20 times higher than they had been in 1965. Also as of 1974, federal spending on social welfare programs amounted to 16 percent of America’s GNP, a far cry from the 8 percent figure of 1960. By 1977 the number of people receiving public assistance had more than doubled since 1960.[159] By 1994 the number stood at about 5 million, five times the 1965 figure.[160]<br />
<br />
Conventional welfare programs were founded on the premise that all social and behavioral problems—such as crime, drug abuse, illegitimacy, and child abuse—could ultimately be traced to material poverty or low family income. The focus of such programs, consequently, was to boost low incomes with an infusion of taxpayer cash, under the assumption that this would greatly diminish, if not entirely eliminate, the related pathologies.[161] <br />
<br />
But the proponents of this basic assumption entirely ignored the historical record as regards poverty and social problems. Heritage Foundation Senior Research Fellow Robert Rector explains:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“In 1950 around one third of Americans were poor; back in the 1920s more than half of Americans were poor by today's standards. If having a low income were the key cause of crime, illegitimacy, drugs, or child abuse, for example, then earlier periods should have been simply awash in those problems. Instead the opposite is the case, most social problems seem to have gotten worse as incomes rose. Clearly poverty is not the cause behind the growth of these social problems. Instead, it is the ethos within families that is critical; the norms and values imparted to children concerning: marriage, work, education, and self-control. Conventional welfare, by undermining this ethos (especially with regard to work and marriage), has increased rather than diminished most social problems.”[162]</blockquote><br />
There is, indeed, voluminous evidence of welfare’s counter-productivity. In a study that controlled for all relevant social and economic factors (such as race, family structure, mothers’ IQ, mothers’ education, family income, and neighborhood), Dr. June O’Neill and Anne Hill found that the more time a child spent on welfare, the lower that child’s IQ and overall cognitive abilities were, making it “clear that it is not poverty but welfare itself which has a damaging effect on the child.”[163]<br />
<br />
A similar study by University of Michigan researchers Mary Corcoran and Roger Gordon found that boys who are raised in welfare-dependent families grow up to have greatly diminished success in employment and earnings, as compared to boys raised in non-welfare families.<br />
<br />
Research further shows that teenage girls raised in welfare-dependent homes are two to three times more likely to drop out of high school than are their peers (of similar race and socioeconomic background) who are raised without welfare.[164] As Robert Rector puts it: “Analysis shows that these effects are caused by welfare per se, not simply poverty; a poor child without welfare will do better than a similar poor child with welfare.”[165]<br />
<br />
Coinciding precisely with the rise of the welfare state, in the mid-1960s the out-of-wedlock birth rate (which stood at 7.7 percent at the time) began a rapid and relentless climb across all demographic lines, a climb that would continue unabated until 1994, when the Welfare Reform Act put the brakes on that trend. Today the overall American illegitimacy rate is about 33 percent (26 percent for whites). For blacks in particular, it hovers at near 70 percent—approximately three times the level of black illegitimacy that existed when the War on Poverty began.[166]<br />
<br />
Illegitimacy is a profoundly important topic because it has a great influence on all statistical indicators of a population group’s progress or decline. In 1987, for the first time in the history of any American racial or ethnic group, the birth rate for <i>unmarried</i> black women surpassed that for <i>married</i> black women, and that trend continued uninterrupted until the passage of welfare reform.[167] The black out-of-wedlock birth rates in some inner cities now exceed 80 percent.[168] In Washington, DC, 97 percent of all babies born to black teens are out of wedlock.[169] Because unmarried teenage mothers—whatever their race—typically have no steady employment, nearly 80 percent of them apply for welfare benefits within five years after giving birth to their first child.[170] No group can withstand such a calamitous breakdown of its family structure without experiencing devastating social consequences.<br />
<br />
Not surprisingly, father-absent families—black and white alike—generally occupy the bottom rung of our society’s economic ladder.[171] Unwed mothers, regardless of their race, are four times more likely to live in poverty than the average American.[172] Female-headed black families earn only 36 percent as much as two-parent black families, and female-headed white families earn just 46 percent as much as two-parent white families.[173] Not only do unmarried mothers tend to earn relatively little, but their households are obviously limited to a single breadwinner—thus further widening the income gap between one-parent and two-parent families.[174] Fully 85 percent of all black children in poverty live in single-parent, mother-child homes.[175]<br />
<br />
The absence of marriage and family life is the single most reliable predictor of a self-perpetuating underclass. Says Robert Rector:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“Out-of-wedlock childbearing and single parenthood are the principal causes of child poverty and welfare dependence in the U.S…. Children born out-of-wedlock to never-married women are poor fifty percent of the time. By contrast children born within a marriage which remains intact are poor 7 percent of the time. Thus the absence of marriage increases the frequency of child poverty 700 percent.”[176]</blockquote><br />
The dissolution of the black family has had a profound effect not only on the number of black female welfare recipients, but also on the incomes of black males. Divorced, separated, and single men of all races work 20 percent fewer hours and earn 30 percent less money than married men. The fact that there are proportionately twice as many unmarried black men as unmarried white men has enormous implications for the relative incomes of each race.[177] Yet when we compare the earnings of similarly educated men living in similar family structures, the racial income gap not only disappears but actually shifts in favor of blacks.[178]<br />
<br />
While the overall black poverty rate remains about two-and-a-half times higher than the white poverty rate (24 percent vs. 10 percent),[179] the “face” of black poverty has changed dramatically in recent decades. At one time, almost all black families were poor, regardless of whether one or both parents were present. Today, however, two-parent black families are rarely poor. Among black families where both the husband and wife work full-time, the current poverty rate is a mere 2 percent.[180] Moreover, the relatively small (13 percent) income disparity between black and white two-parent families completely disappears when we take into account such factors as occupational choices, educational attainment, age, geographic location, and comparative skills.[181] <br />
<br />
The clear lesson is that intact families are far more likely to be prosperous than are fatherless families, regardless of their race. As social commentator George Gilder explains, “poverty stems mainly from the breakdown of family responsibilities among fathers.”[182] “If work effort is the first principle of overcoming poverty,” he adds, “marriage is the prime source of upwardly mobile work.”[183] Gilder elaborates on this theme:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“It is love that changes the short horizons of youth and poverty into the long horizons of marriage and career. When marriages fail, the man often returns to the more primitive rhythms of singleness. On the average, his income drops by one-third and he shows a far higher propensity for drink, drugs, and crime. But when marriages in general hold firm and men in general love and support their children, lower-class style changes into middle-class futurity.<br />
<br />
“The key to the intractable poverty of the hardcore American poor is the dominance of single and separated men in poor communities. Black 'unrelated individuals' are not much more likely to be in poverty than white ones. The problem is neither race nor matriarchy in any meaningful sense. It is familial anarchy among the concentrated poor of the inner city, in which flamboyant and impulsive youths rather than responsible men provide the themes of aspiration. The result is that male sexual rhythms tend to prevail, and boys are brought up without authoritative fathers in the home to instill in them the values of responsible paternity: the discipline and love of children and the dependable performance of the provider role…. [A] condition of widespread illegitimacy and family breakdown can be a sufficient cause of persistent poverty, separating men from the extended horizons embodied in their children.”[184]</blockquote><br />
Former National Urban League president Hugh Price concurs that black economic progress—like the economic advancement of any other group—is largely contingent on family solidarity. He observes, for instance, that “[b]lacks blessed with strong family and community support, solid education and social skills, personal drive and a dose of good luck have surged into the social and economic mainstream.”[185] “There are three things black parents must persuade their teenagers to do,” adds Price. “First, get their high-school diploma. Second, get married before having their first child. Third, hold off on having their first child until after they turn twenty themselves. Only about 8 percent of children raised in households that follow these rules experience poverty. By contrast, 80 percent of youngsters that ignore these rules end up poor.”[186]<br />
<br />
Articulating a similar theme many years ago, Martin Luther King, Jr. said, “Nothing is so much needed as a secure family life for a people to pull themselves out of poverty.”[187]<br />
<br />
Indeed, without stable families to provide their children with emotional support, physical safety, and ethical codes by which to live, the poor are destined to remain poor—whatever their race. In the absence of families, whites and blacks alike tend to grow up economically and morally deprived. It is not white racism, but the cataclysmic breakdown of the black family, that has created what we call the black underclass—a growing entity whose constituents differ qualitatively from members of the also-growing black middle class. Cleve Freeman, a middle-class black from Los Angeles, described this cultural divide: “Even though I am black and [was] raised in a tough part of this city, there are two different cultures of black people. They [in the underclass] are operating in a different world. We don’t know them.”[188]<br />
<br />
Children in single-parent households are raised not only with economic, but also social and psychological, disadvantages. For instance, they are four times as likely as children from intact families to be abused or neglected; much likelier to have trouble academically; twice as prone to drop out of school; three times more likely to have behavioral problems; much more apt to experience emotional disorders; far likelier to have a weak sense right and wrong; significantly less able to delay gratification and to control their violent or sexual impulses; two-and-a-half times likelier to be sexually active as teens; approximately twice as likely to conceive children out-of-wedlock when they are teens or young adults; and three times likelier to be on welfare when they reach adulthood.[189]<br />
<br />
In addition, growing up without a father is a far better forecaster of a boy’s future criminality than either race or poverty.[190] Regardless of race, 70 percent of all young people in state reform institutions were raised in fatherless homes, as were 60 percent of rapists, 72 percent of adolescent murderers, and 70 percent of long-term prison inmates.[191] As Robert Rector has noted, “Illegitimacy is a major factor in America's crime problem. Lack of married parents, rather than race or poverty, is the principal factor in the crime rate.”[192]<br />
<br />
A major study of 11,000 individuals confirmed that “the percentage of single-parent households with children between the ages of 12 and 20 is significantly associated with rates of violent crime and burglary.”[193] Using data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, Dr. June O’Neill likewise has found that young black men raised in one-parent homes are twice as likely to commit crimes when compared to black men raised by intact families—even after controlling for a wide range of variables such as family income, urban residence, neighborhood environment, and parents’ education. O’Neill further reports that if young males raised by one parent reside in a neighborhood with many other single-parent families, they are fully three times likelier to engage in criminal activity than are their peers with two parents.[194]<br />
<br />
Since the black illegitimacy rate is so high, obviously the aforementioned pathologies plague blacks more than they affect any other demographic. “Even if white people were to become morally rejuvenated tomorrow,” writes Walter E. Williams, “it would do nothing for the problems plaguing a large segment of the black community. Illegitimacy, family breakdown, crime, and fraudulent education are devastating problems, but they are not civil rights problems.”[195]<br />
<br />
The left, however, paints a very different picture. Playing its all-purpose trump card, it characterizes such problems as nothing more than by-products of white racism. Unfortunately that view, through decades of constant repetition, has won the minds of many black Americans. “Instead of admitting that racism has declined,” observes Shelby Steele, “we [blacks] argue all the harder that it is still alive and more insidious than ever. We hold race up to shield us from what we do not want to see in ourselves.”[196]<br />
<br />
Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson of Los Angeles, who has counseled many black teenagers in youth detention centers, has witnessed firsthand the struggles faced by fatherless youngsters. “When I observed and spoke to those young men,” says Peterson, “I could see that truly their need was not for affirmative action, not welfare, not programs, but the crucial need in the lives of those young men was the attention of a father. It was, finally, heartwarming to observe some of the boys … who stood and shared the need they felt for a close father figure.”[197]<br />
<br />
The left commonly ascribes the black community’s high rates of broken homes and teenage pregnancies to a phenomenon they call the “legacy of slavery,”[198] whose underlying assumption is that these pathologies were inflicted on the black race by the transatlantic slave trade. Black scholars Alvin Poussaint, Patricia Williams, and Molefi Asante, to name just a few, trace the currently high rate of out-of-wedlock black births back to slavery.[199] Presumably, the numberless black families torn asunder by slavers, coupled with the horrid degradation suffered by the race as a whole, somehow damaged black people’s ability to form and preserve family units.[200]<br />
<br />
As Daniel Patrick Moynihan expressed it in 1965, “It was by destroying the Negro family that white America broke the will of the Negro people.”[201] Three centuries of “injustice,” he added, had caused a “tangle of pathology” that had left “deep-seated structural distortions in the life of the Negro American.”[202] “In its lasting effects on individuals and their children,” Moynihan explained, American slavery was “indescribably worse than any recorded servitude, ancient or modern.”[203] Two years earlier, Moynihan and Professor Nathan Glazer had written, “The experience of slavery left as its most serious heritage a steady weakness in the Negro family.”[204]<br />
<br />
“The most rudimentary type of family organization,” asserted another writer of the period, “was not permitted to survive [under slavery], to say nothing of the extensions of the family. The mother-child family, with the father either unknown, absent, or, if present, incapable of wielding influence, was the only type of family that could survive.”[205]<br />
<br />
More recently, Professor Orlando Patterson lamented that “275 years of assault” by white slavers “on the key roles of father and husband … messed up the gender relations of African American men and women, and they’re still very fragile.”[206]<br />
<br />
Though this plausible-sounding theory has gained wide public acceptance, it is utterly discredited by weighty evidence. Throughout the epoch of slavery and into the early decades of the twentieth century—when discrimination was much greater than it is today—most black children grew up in two-parent households. An unmarried teenage girl raising a child alone was rare among blacks.[207]<br />
<br />
Post-Civil War studies revealed that most black couples in their forties had been together for at least twenty years.[208] In southern urban areas around 1880, nearly three-fourths of black households were husband-or father-present; in southern rural settings, the figure approached 86 percent.[209] During the ensuing half-century, this norm remained essentially unchanged. In 1925 New York City, for example, about 85 percent of kin-related black households were headed by two parents; no more than 8 percent of black females aged twenty-five to forty headed father-absent households; and more than 80 percent of black children under the age of six lived with both parents.[210] As of 1940, the illegitimacy rate among blacks was approximately 15 percent[211]—a far cry from the current figure of 70 percent.<br />
<br />
As late as 1950, black women nationwide were more likely to be married than white women, and only 9 percent of black families with children were headed by a single parent.[212] In the 1950s, black children had a 52 percent chance of living with both their biological parents until age seventeen; by the 1980s those odds had dwindled to a mere 6 percent.[213] In 1959, only 2 percent of black children were reared in households in which the mother never married; today that figure approaches 60 percent.[214]<br />
<br />
Without question something has gone terribly wrong in recent years, but clearly it has nothing to do with slavery. During the nine decades between the Emancipation Proclamation and the 1950s, the black family remained a strong, stable institution. It is intellectually irresponsible to ascribe its current crisis to some residual influence of slavery. <br />
<br />
There is far more evidence that the cataclysmic destruction of the black family was set in motion by the left, which for decades has encouraged blacks to view themselves as outcasts from a hostile American society; to identify themselves as perpetual victims who are entitled to compensatory privileges designed to “level the playing field” in a land where discrimination would otherwise run rampant; and to reject “white” norms and traditions as part and parcel of the “racist” culture that allegedly despises blacks. It is not inconceivable that one of those traditions which many blacks have chosen to abjure is the institution of marriage. In their book <i>America in Black and White</i>, Stephan and Abigail Thernstrom make this profoundly important observation:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“In the past three decades the proportion of intact married-couple families has declined precipitously even though the fraction of black women aged fifteen to forty-four who were divorced, separated, or widowed also went down.… It is thus not divorce but the failure to marry that has led to such a momentous change in black family patterns. The marriage rate for African Americans has plummeted in the past third of a century. In 1960 … [b]lack women were only a shade less likely to marry than white women; 72 percent of black females and 76 percent of white females had married. …Today a clear majority of African American women aged fifteen to forty-five have never been married, as compared with just a third of their white counterparts….[B]y the time they reach their late twenties, …seven out of ten white women today have married. The figure for black females of the same age is only four out of ten. Many fewer black women are marrying, and yet they continue to have children—which was not the case in an earlier era.”[215]</blockquote><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">5) How the Failed Crusade of “Sex Education” Harmed the Black Community:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
As of 1966, fertility rates among teenage girls in the United States had been declining steadily for about a decade. Rates of venereal disease had been declining as well: the rate of infection for gonorrhea declined every year from 1950 to 1959, and the rate of syphilis infection in 1960 was less than half of what it had been ten years earlier.[216] Unwilling to leave well-enough alone, however, the left demanded that sex education be added to public-school curricula nationwide, and that government-funded “family planning” (abortion) services be made more widely available.[217] The <i>American School Board Journal</i> stressed the urgency of combating “illegitimacy and venereal disease,” while the head of <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7083">Planned Parenthood</a> spoke of the need to reduce “the incidence of out-of-wedlock births and early marriage necessitated by pregnancy.”[218]<br />
<br />
By 1968, almost half of all American schools—public and private, religious and secular—had instituted sex education programs for their students; these programs continued to spread widely throughout the American educational system in the 1970s.[219] “Family planning” clinics proliferated exponentially from the mid-Sixties to the mid-Seventies. In the late Sixties, federal expenditures for “family planning” and “population” legislation grew from $16 million annually to about $200 million; by 1978 the figure stood at $279 million. Whereas in 1969 fewer than 250,000 teenagers used the services provided by abortion clinics, by 1976 their number had risen to 1.2 million. By the early 1980s, almost two thirds of the funding received by “family planning” agencies came from the federal government.[220]<br />
<br />
Did any of these measures have a beneficial effect on society? The numbers tell the story: Between 1970 and 1980, the pregnancy rate among 15- to 19-year-olds rose by more than 40 percent. Among unmarried girls aged 15 to 17, birth rates rose 29 percent between 1970 and 1984—even as the number of abortions more than doubled during the same period. According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, the percentage of unmarried teenage girls who were sexually active rose dramatically during these years. The rate of teenage gonorrhea in 1975 was three times higher than it had been in 1956.[221]<br />
<br />
As noted earlier, today the illegitimacy rate among African Americans is nearly 70 percent, a figure far higher than had ever existed even in the days of Jim Crow segregation or, before that, slavery. The corresponding figures for Hispanics and whites are 46 percent and 26 percent, respectively. While considerably lower than the black rate, these numbers, too, are astronomical in comparison to the era before the left had foisted upon the United States its special insights vis a vis human sexuality.<br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">6) The Crime Wave that Has Decimated Black America:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
Black victims of violent crime constitute a most noteworthy category of people who have been devastated by the brainstorms of the left. Consider this: The number of murders committed in the United States in 1960 was lower than in 1950, 1940, or 1930. The 1960 murder rate, in proportion to population, was less than half of what it had been a quarter-century earlier.[222] Nonetheless, in the 1960s the left decided that it was time to inject its own utopian insights into the criminal-justice system in order to rid humanity of crime entirely, once and for all. As Thomas Sowell has pointed out in his book <i>The Vision of the Anointed</i>, the major players in this crusade included Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren, U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, the chief judge of the powerful DC Circuit Court of Appeals David Bazelon, and U.S. President Lyndon Johnson.[223]<br />
<br />
Each of these individuals favored a “therapeutic” approach to criminal justice, stressing the “rehabilitation,” rather than the punishment, of offenders. Judge Bazelon explained, for example, that the real problem was not “the so-called criminal population” but rather society’s “vindictiveness,” its “primitive” and “highly irrational” “need to punish” people for its own “social failure,” a failure for which the “criminal serves as a scapegoat.” The “dehumanizing process” of punishment, said Bazelon, results in a “social branding” that only promotes more crime.[224] In response to this perspective, which was widely embraced by the aforementioned individuals and a plethora of additional “experts” in the fields of criminal justice and social science, in 1963 the U.S. Supreme Court imposed rules on confessions and searches that accompanied a popular sentiment increasingly opposed to capital punishment—and in 1972 struck down the death penalty as an “arbitrary and capricious” practice.[225]<br />
<br />
Thomas Sowell elaborates:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“A series of landmark Supreme Court decisions in the 1960s changed the course of criminal justice in the United States. <i>Mapp v. Ohio</i> (1961), <i>Escobido v. Illinois</i> (1964), and <i>Miranda v. Arizona</i> (1966) successively expanded the rights of criminals in the custody of the police by making their convictions invalid if the procedures specified by the courts were not followed in detail by the police. <i>Gideon v. Wainwright</i> (1963) required states to provide free attorneys to criminal defendants, subject to the threat that their convictions would be overturned, even if their guilt was unquestioned, when such attorneys were not provided. In California, even when state-appointed attorneys were supplied, if these attorneys’ defense strategies were second-guessed by appellate judges and considered inadequate, convictions could be overturned on grounds of denial of the constitutional right to counsel.”[226]</blockquote><br />
These and many additional anti-punishment measures, coupled with the aforementioned trend toward an ever-escalating illegitimacy rate and a rejection of American institutions (such as law-enforcement), resulted in a sudden and dramatic rise in crime rates nationwide. Between 1961 and 1974, the murder rate in the U.S. more than doubled. The rate at which citizens were victimized by violent crimes tripled.[227] Those who were most affected included blacks and the poor, in whose names the “inequities” of an allegedly discriminatory justice system had been overhauled. In other words, tens of thousands of black lives were sacrificed at the altar of leftist dogma.<br />
<br />
In 2006, according to the <i>Uniform Crime Reports</i> (which are prepared annually by the FBI), blacks, who make up roughly 13 percent of the U.S. population, accounted for 39 percent of all arrests for violent crimes—including 41 percent of weapons violations, 34.5 percent of aggravated assaults, 56 percent of robberies, 32.5 percent of rapes, and 51 percent of murders/manslaughters. Blacks were also arrested for 29 percent of all property crimes—including 29 percent of burglaries, 35 percent of motor vehicle thefts, 22 percent of arsons, 30 percent of fraud cases, and 32 percent of embezzlements.[228] <br />
<br />
Given these statistics, it is not surprising that some 42 percent of all prison inmates in the United States are black.[229] In some urban areas, the figures are much higher. This results in an enormous amount of lost potential in the black community.<br />
<br />
To many leftists, merely stating such facts is equivalent to race-bashing. Hillary Clinton, for one, has claimed that media reports about the misdeeds of black outlaws perpetuate negative “stereotypes” about black criminality.[230] White author Maurice Berger, denying that black criminality is even a problem worthy of concern, derides “the myth of the danger” that is “associated with blackness.”[231] Black author Ralph Wiley puts it somewhat more crudely: “When they [whites] want to say <i>niggers</i>, they say <i>crime</i>.”[232]<br />
<br />
It is similarly common for leftists to view the foregoing statistics as evidence of racism in America’s criminal-justice system. At a presidential primary debate in January 2008, for instance, Senator Barack Obama asserted that blacks and whites “are arrested at very different rates, are convicted at very different rates, [and] receive very different sentences … for the same crime.”[233] Hillary Clinton, meanwhile, condemned the “disgrace of a criminal-justice system that incarcerates so many more African-Americans proportionately than whites.”[234]<br />
<br />
But such claims are unfounded, As Heather MacDonald explains in an important April 2008 article:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“The black incarceration rate is overwhelmingly a function of black crime…. From 1976 to 2005, blacks committed more than 52% of all murders in America. In 2006, the black arrest rate for most crimes was two to nearly three times blacks' representation in the population. Blacks constituted 39.3% of all violent-crime arrests, including 56.3% of all robbery and 34.5% of all aggravated-assault arrests, and 29.4% of all property-crime arrests.<br />
<br />
“The advocates acknowledge such crime data only indirectly: by charging bias on the part of the system’s decision makers…. But in fact, cops don’t over-arrest blacks and ignore white criminals. The race of criminals reported by crime victims matches arrest data. No one has ever come up with a plausible argument as to why crime victims would be biased in their reports.<br />
<br />
“Racial activists also allege that prosecutors overcharge and judges oversentence blacks…. In 1997, criminologists Robert Sampson and Janet Lauritsen concluded that ‘large racial differences in criminal offending,’ not racism, explained why more blacks were in prison proportionately than whites and for longer terms.<br />
<br />
“A 1994 Justice Department survey of felony cases from the country’s 75 largest urban areas discovered that blacks actually had a lower chance of prosecution after a felony than whites did and that they were less likely to be found guilty at trial. After conviction, blacks were more likely to receive prison sentences, however—an outcome that reflected the gravity of their offenses as well as their criminal records.”[235]</blockquote><br />
Not only are blacks far more likely than whites to commit violent crimes, but they are also significantly more prone to be victims of such offenses. Black males are about twice as likely as white males to be robbed or assaulted. As of 2004, the homicide rate for black males aged fifteen to twenty-four was 77.6 per 100,000 – as compared to 5.9 per 100,000 for Americans as a whole.[236] Among black males aged fifteen to thirty-four, homicide is now the leading cause of death.[237] Black females are killed far less frequently than black males, but are still sent violently to early graves at five times the rate of white females.[238] Overall, blacks constitute about half of all homicide victims in the United States each year,[239] and are eight times more likely to be murdered than whites.[240]<br />
<br />
This high incidence of violence against blacks, it should be noted, has almost nothing to do with whites. Of all black homicide victims in the United States, 94 percent are slain by other blacks.[241] Of all the violent crimes committed each year against blacks nationwide, about 75 percent are perpetrated by fellow blacks, and only 12 percent by whites.[242]<br />
<br />
The statistics on interracial crime are also worthy of note, particularly because of what they may reveal about the depth of anti-white animus that African Americans have developed as a direct result of the left’s incessant claims that whites as a whole seek to oppress and abuse black people. FBI and Justice Department data reveal that: (a) black perpetrators commit more violent crimes against whites, who are 45 percent of their victims, than against other blacks, who are 43 percent of their victims; (b) statistically, the “average” black is approximately 39 times more likely to violently attack a white person than vice versa, and 136 times more likely to rob a white person than vice versa; and (c) black-on-white rape is 115 times more common than white-on-black rape.[243]<br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">7) How Blacks Have Been Victimized by Leftist Policies Concerning AIDS:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
In the first five years of the AIDS epidemic in the 1980s, sexually transmitted AIDS was almost entirely confined to the white homosexual communities in three major cities—New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco. In the name of “civil rights,” leftist gay leaders and their Democratic Party allies who controlled these cities politically, enacted policies to prevent public health officials from implementing methods that had proven effective in combating epidemic diseases in the past—methods such as testing, reporting, contact tracing, and infection-site closing. In the calculus of the gay left, any attempt by public health authorities to close the public bathhouses wherein AIDS was being spread, posed a “threat” to “gay liberation.”<br />
<br />
Janice Shaw Crouse, Senior Fellow at the Beverly LaHaye Institute, observes:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“We treat HIV/AIDS differently from any other public health threat. While doctors are required by law to report nearly 50 communicable diseases (including tuberculosis, measles, syphilis, meningitis), and people with those communicable diseases are ordered by law to get treatment or go to jail, United States laws prohibit disclosure of anyone’s HIV status. Even the HIV tests use a code name to avoid identifying any infected persons. Thus, the only way anyone knows that a person has the virus is if that information is voluntarily given. Yet, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) repor[t] that in the United States there are 40,000 new HIV cases per year and about 900,000 people living with the disease, with nearly 250,000 of those people unaware that they are infected. In response, the CDC recommends that the public be non-judgmental and [identifies] racism, discrimination, stigma and homophobia as reasons for the spread of the epidemic!”[244]</blockquote><br />
Many thousands of people have died as a result of such policies, and no demographic has been affected more disastrously than blacks, among whom the prevalence of AIDS has risen more sharply than among the members of any other group in the past two decades. Today African Americans, who represent about 13 percent of the U.S. population, account for approximately half of all newly diagnosed AIDS cases. In 2005, the AIDS case rate per 100,000 black adults/adolescents was 10 times that of whites.[245]<br />
<br />
Jesse Jackson offers this perspective on the problem:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“Because of poverty, ignorance and prejudice, AIDS has been allowed to stalk and kill black America like a serial killer. ... But we have also been a compliant victim, submitting through inaction.... It is now time for us to fight AIDS like the major civil rights issue it is.”[246]</blockquote><br />
But Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson rejects Jackson’s assertion:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“When Jackson calls anything a civil rights issue, you know he's exploiting black immorality for personal gain. I would like Jackson to explain how AIDS is a civil rights issue. In reality, it is a moral issue. It will not be cured until black Americans stop listening to their immoral leaders.”[247]</blockquote><br />
In Peterson’s view, the root cause of the black AIDS epidemic is related to African Americans’ widespread rejection of the traditional (sexual) norms of a society they view as racist and unworthy of their respect. Says Peterson:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“No one, not even the ‘evil white man,’ is forcing black people to have rampant, irresponsible sex. AIDS punishes anyone who is sexually immoral; it does not care about skin color. The solution to the black AIDS epidemic is simple…. It requires nothing more than a return to God, family and responsibility. The AIDS problem would almost disappear if blacks would take responsibility for their out-of-control lifestyles.”[248]</blockquote><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">8) How the Left Demands Black Conformity of Thought:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
A hallmark of classical liberalism was its spirit of toleration for different beliefs and ideas, and its respect for individual freedom of thought. Yet in modern leftism, we find precisely the opposite: <i>intolerance</i> of opposing viewpoints, and the promotion of <i>groupthink</i>. The left interprets as treason any deviation from its own intellectual orthodoxy, if exhibited by a member of a so-called “victim” group who theoretically ought to occupy a place in the phalanx of revolutionary agitators. We see this phenomenon manifested with particular clarity by leftist leaders in the African American community. A few examples will serve to illustrate: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>* In 2002, NAACP chairman <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=642">Julian Bond</a> referred to Ward Connerly, a black California Board of Regents member who had led the fight to end affirmative action in California’s public sector, as a “fraud” and a “con man.”[249] Bond likened black conservatives in general to “ventriloquists’ dummies” who “speak in their puppet-master’s voice.”[250]<br />
<br />
* Jesse Jackson has called Connerly a “house slave” and a “puppet of the white man.”[251] He also has condemned Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’s vote to place limits on affirmative action programs, characterizing Thomas as an “enem[y] of civil rights” and likening his black judicial robes to the white sheets of Klansmen.[252]<br />
<br />
* The late columnist Carl Rowan sarcastically suggested, “If you give Thomas a little flour on his face, you’d think you had [former Klansman] David Duke.”[253]<br />
<br />
* San Francisco mayor Willie Brown called Thomas not only “a shill and cover for the most insidious form of racism,”[254] but also a man whose views are “legitimizing of the Ku Klux Klan.”[255] Brown added that Thomas “should be reduced to talking only to white conservatives,” and “must be shut out” by the black community.[256]<br />
<br />
* Political scientist Manning Marable asserts that Thomas has “ethnically ceased being an African American.”[257]<br />
Movie director Spike Lee calls Thomas “a handkerchief-head, chicken-and-biscuit-eating Uncle Tom.”[258]<br />
<br />
* Author June Jordan characterizes Thomas as a “virulent Oreo phenomenon,” a “punk-ass,” and an “Uncle Tom calamity.”[259]<br />
<br />
* The late Haywood Burns, who was chairman emeritus of the National Conference of Black Lawyers, called Thomas a “counterfeit hero”[260] whose ideals had “crushed or forever deferred” the dreams of millions of blacks.[261]<br />
<br />
* Columnist Julianne Malveaux told a television audience, “I hope [Thomas’s] wife feeds him lots of eggs and butter, and he dies early, like many black men do, of heart disease…. He’s an absolutely reprehensible person.”[262]<br />
<br />
* From the podium of an NAACP convention, Thomas was denounced as a “pimp” and a “traitor” to the black community.[263]<br />
<br />
* The Reverend Joseph Lowery of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference once said he was “ashamed” of Thomas because he “has become to many in the African-American community what Benedict Arnold was to the United States, a deserter; what Judas was to Jesus, a traitor, and what Brutus was to Caesar, an assassin.”[264]<br />
<br />
* Missouri Democrat William Clay labeled black conservatives as “Negro wanderers” whose goal is to “maim and kill other blacks for the gratification and entertainment of ultraconservative white racists.”[265] Clay described black conservative Gary Franks—when the latter was a Connecticut congressman—as a “Negro Dr. Kevorkian who gleefully assists in suicidal conduct to destroy his own race,” and who exhibits a “'foot-shuffling, head-scratching ‘Amos and Andy’ brand of ‘Uncle Tom-ism.’”[266]<br />
<br />
* Former NAACP Executive Director Benjamin Hooks denounces black conservatives as “a new breed of Uncle Tom” and “some of the biggest liars the world ever saw.”[267]<br />
<br />
* Afrocentric historian John Henrik Clarke has called black conservatives “frustrated slaves crawling back to the plantation.”[268]</blockquote><br />
Such “liberalism” in no way resembles the classical liberalism of which toleration was a most visible emblem. Yet every one of the foregoing speakers would identify him or her self as a liberal.<br />
<br />
So today we have a situation where blacks who otherwise would venture to think for themselves and to challenge the leftist dogmas that have so decimated their race, are prevented from doing so by the fear that they will be branded as sell-outs, “Uncle Toms,” and race-traitors. This is a classic illustration of how the totalitarian left aims to control the very thoughts of those on whose behalf it professes to act.<br />
<br />
Shelby Steele puts it this way:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“Today a public ‘black conservative’ will surely meet a stunning amount of animus, demonization, misunderstanding, and flat-out, undifferentiated contempt. And there is a kind of licensing process involved here in which the black leadership—normally protective even of people like Marion Barry and O. J. Simpson—licenses blacks and whites to have contempt for the black conservative. It is a part of the group’s manipulation of shame to let certain of its members languish outside the perimeter of group protection where even politically correct whites (who normally repress criticism of blacks) can show contempt for them.”[269]</blockquote><br />
<b><i>This essay was authored by John Perazzo in June 2008.</i></b><br />
<br />
<br />
NOTES:<br />
<br />
[1] Stephan Thernstrom and Abigail Thernstrom, <i>America in Black and White</i> (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1997), p. 55.<br />
<br />
[2] Dinesh D’Souza, <i>The End of Racism</i> (New York: The Free Press, 1995), p. 191.<br />
<br />
[3] William G. Mayer, <i>The Changing American Mind: How and Why American Public Opinion Changed Between 1960 and 1988</i> (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1993), p. 366. Paul B. Sheatsley, “White Attitudes Toward the Negro,” <i>Daedalus</i> (Winter 1966), pp. 219, 222.<br />
<br />
[4] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[5] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[6] Thernstrom, <i>America in Black and White</i>, p. 104.<br />
<br />
[7] William G. Mayer, <i>The Changing American Mind: How and Why American Public Opinion Changed Between 1960 and 1988</i> (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1993), p. 366. Paul B. Sheatsley, “White Attitudes Toward the Negro,” <i>Daedalus</i> (Winter 1966), pp. 219, 222.<br />
<br />
[8] Thernstrom, <i>America in Black and White</i>, p. 150.<br />
<br />
[9] Martin Luther King, Jr., <i>Stride Toward Freedom: The Montgomery Story</i> (New York: Harper & Row, 1958), p. 190.<br />
<br />
[10] Gerald N. Rosenberg, <i>The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring about Social Change?</i> (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991), pp. 114-115.<br />
<br />
[11] Thernstrom, <i>America in Black and White</i>, p. 113.<br />
<br />
[12] David R. Goldfield: <i>Black, White, and Southern: Race Relations and Southern Culture, 1940 to the Present</i> (Baton Rouge, Louisiana State University Press, 1990), p. 120. Gerald N. Rosenberg, <i>The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring about Social Change?</i>, p. 134.<br />
<br />
[13] Taylor Branch, <i>Parting the Waters: America in the King Years, 1954-1963</i> (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1988), p. 825.<br />
<br />
[14] Dinesh D’Souza, <i>The End of Racism</i>, p. 253.<br />
<br />
[15] Micah Altman and Philip Klinkner, <a href="http://maltman.hmdc.harvard.edu/papers/MeasuringRacialDiffs.pdf">“Measuring the Difference between White Voting and Polling on Interracial Marriage.”</a> 2006.<br />
<br />
[16] Stephen A. Holmes, “A Rose-Colored View on Race,” <i>The New York Times</i> (June 15, 1997). <br />
<br />
[17] Kathy Shaidle, “<a href="http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=30CD9E14-B0C9-4F8C-A0A6-A896F0F44F02">Obama’s Church: Gospel of Hate</a>,” FrontPageMag.com (April 7, 2008).<br />
<br />
[18] Lee Cary, “<a href="http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/02/obamas_mentors_mentor.html">Obama’s Mentor’s Mentor</a>,” American Thinker (February 22, 2008).<br />
<br />
[19] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[20] Andrew Bostom, “<a href="http://www.andrewbostom.org/blog/2008/03/19/the-racist-theology-of-obama%E2%80%99s-church-breaking-the-james-cone-of-silence/">The Racist Theology of Obama’s Church: Breaking the James Cone of Silence</a>,” AndrewBostom.org (March 19, 2008).<br />
<br />
[21] “<a href="http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/JC18Aa01.html">The Peculiar Theology of Black Liberation</a>,” Asia Times (March 18, 2008).<br />
<br />
[22] Dinesh D’Souza, <i>The End of Racism</i>, p. 165.<br />
<br />
[23] Andrew Kull, <i>The Color-Blind Constitution</i> (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1992), p. 183.<br />
<br />
[24] William J. Bennett, <i>The De-Valuing of America</i> (New York: Summit Books, 1992), p. 191.<br />
<br />
[25] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[26] Charles Lawrence, “<i>The Id, the Ego and Equal Protection: Reckoning with Unconscious Racism</i>,” Stanford Law Review 49 (1987), pp. 317, 326.<br />
<br />
[27] Patricia Williams, <i>The Alchemy of Race and Rights</i> (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1980), pp. 49, 101, 120.<br />
<br />
[28] Roy Brooks, <i>Rethinking the American Race Problem</i> (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990), pp. 89, 165-166.<br />
<br />
[29] Bernard Boxill, <i>Blacks and Social Justice</i> (Lanham, Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield, 1992), p. 11.<br />
<br />
[30] William Allen, Drew Days, Benjamin Hooks, and William Bradford Reynolds, “Affirmative Action and the Constitution” seminar at the American Enterprise Institute, Washington, DC (May 21, 1985), p. 3. Cited by Dinesh D’Souza, <i>The End of Racism</i>, p. 164.<br />
<br />
[31] Statement of Commissioners Blandina Ramirez and Mary Frances Berry, <i>Toward an Understanding of Stotts, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (January 1985). Cited by Dinesh D’Souza, The End of Racism</i>, p. 165.<br />
<br />
[32] Dinesh D’Souza, <i>The End of Racism</i>, p. 167.<br />
<br />
[33] Jim Sleeper, “<i>The Decline and Rise of Bigotry</i>,” Cosmopolitan (June 1994), p. 208.<br />
<br />
[34] Rochelle Stanfield, “<i>The Split Society</i>,” National Journal (April 2, 1994), p. 764.<br />
<br />
[35] Michael Meyers, “<i>A King Day Snubfest</i>,” New York Post (January 20, 1998), p. 29.<br />
<br />
[36] Michael Zak, “<a href="http://www.gopusa.com/opinion/mz_0808p.shtml">Credit Where Credit Is Due: The Republicans Passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act</a>,” GOPUSA (August 8, 2003).<br />
<br />
[37] “<a href="http://johnsville.blogspot.com/2006/11/duke-case-listening-statement.html">Duke Case: The ‘Listening’ Statement</a>,” The Johnsville News (November 10, 2006).<br />
<br />
[38] Michael Eric Dyson, <i>The Michael Eric Dyson Reader</i> (2004), p. 20.<br />
<br />
[39] Michael Eric Dyson, “<a href="http://www.thepiratescove.us/2008/01/05/ny-times-now-in-to-black-obama/">NY Times Now in to Black Obama</a>,” ThePiratesCove.us (January 5, 2008).<br />
<br />
[40] Derrick Bell, <i>Faces at the Bottom of the Well</i> (New York: Basic Books, 1992), p.<br />
<br />
[41] Manning Marable, “<a href="http://www.manningmarable.net/works/pdf/oct02c.pdf">The Death of White Racism</a>,” (October 2002).<br />
<br />
[42] Cornel West, <i>Race Matters</i> (New York: Vintage Books, 1993), p. 130.<br />
<br />
[43] Angela C. Allen and Andy Geller, “<i>Harsh Words Justified by Harsh Times: Youths</i>,” New York Post (September 6, 1998), p. 2.<br />
<br />
[44] Cornel West, <i>Race Matters</i>, p. 40.<br />
<br />
[45] Ibid., p. 27.<br />
<br />
[46] Ibid., p. 28.<br />
<br />
[47] Ibid., p. 106.<br />
<br />
[48] Fred Lucas, “<a href="http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200801/POL20080124d.html">Pastor Got $1.5 Million in Clinton Earmarks before Endorsement</a>,” CNS News (January 24, 2008).<br />
<br />
[49] Aaron Shuman, “<a href="http://bad.eserver.org/issues/2002/60/cleaver.html">A Sit-Down with Kathleen Cleaver</a>,” Bad.eserver.org (April 2002).<br />
<br />
[50] “<i>Anti-Defamation League: Tatum’s a Force for Evil</i>,” New York Post (March 16, 1993), p.8.<br />
<br />
[51] Leonard Jeffries, “<a href="http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2007/01/351812.shtml">The State of the Black World: The Struggle Continues</a>” (January 8, 2007).<br />
<br />
[52] E.R. Shipp, “<i>A ‘New Era,’ Yes, but Gov Also Faces a New Racist Tide</i>,” New York Daily News (January 4, 1995), p. 27.<br />
<br />
[53] E.R. Shipp, “<i>Camille Cosby’s Right – And Wrong</i>,” New York Daily News (July 21, 1998), p. 29.<br />
<br />
[54] E.R. Shipp, “<i>Racial Profiling Is Old News to Us</i>,” New York Daily News (March 11, 1999).<br />
<br />
[55] Informed Sources television program (Public Broadcasting Services), New York, Channel 13 (February 17, 1996).<br />
<br />
[56] “<i>Fighting Racism</i>,” USA Today (January 21, 1991), p. 9A.<br />
<br />
[57] Andrew Hacker, <i>Two Nations: Black and White, Separate, Hostile, Unequal</i> (New York: Ballantine Books, 1992), p. 24.<br />
<br />
[58] Tim Wise, “<a href="http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2004-04/20wise.cfm">White Whine: Reflections on the Brain-Rotting Properties of Privilege</a>,” ZNet (April 20, 2004).<br />
<br />
[59] Jeremiah Wright, <i>When Black Men Stand up for God</i> (Chicago: African American Images), 1996, p. 17.<br />
<br />
[60] Ibid., p. 102.<br />
<br />
[61] Ibid., p. 17.<br />
<br />
[62] Ibid. [Notwithstanding Wright’s implication that the harsh anti-crack penalties were instituted by racist legislators for the purpose of incarcerating as many blacks as possible, the <i>Congressional Record</i> shows that such was not at all the case. In 1986, when the strict, federal anti-crack legislation was being debated, the <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7126">Congressional Black Caucus</a> (CBC)—deeply concerned about the degree to which crack was decimating the black community—strongly supported the legislation and actually pressed for even harsher penalties. In fact, a few years earlier CBC members had pushed President Reagan to create the Office of National Drug Control Policy. See John DiIulio, Jr., “My Black Crime Problem, and Ours,” City Journal (Spring 1996), pp. 19-20.]<br />
<br />
[63] U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, “<a href="http://www.eeoc.gov/initiatives/e-race/why_e-race.html">Why Do We Need E-RACE?</a>” (January 31, 2008).<br />
<br />
[64] “<a href="http://www.pollingreport.com/race.htm">Race and Ethnicity</a>,” PollingReport.com (April 2008).<br />
<br />
[65] Seth Mydans, “<i>Black Identity vs. Success and Seeming ‘White,’</i>” The New York Times (April 25, 1990), p. B9.<br />
<br />
[66] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[67] N. Jeremy Duru, “<i>You’re Just Trying to Act White</i>,” Washington Post (May 19, 1991).<br />
<br />
[68] Lise Funderberg, <i>Black White, Other: Biracial Americans Talk about Identity</i> (New York: William Morrow, 1994), pp. 115-116.<br />
<br />
[69] “<i>The Hidden Hurdle</i>,” Time (March 16, 1992), p. 44.<br />
<br />
[70] Ron Susskind, “<i>In Rough City School, Top Students Struggle to Learn – and Escape</i>,” The Wall Street Journal (May 26, 1994), pp. A1, A8.<br />
<br />
[71] Pam Belluck, “<i>Reason Is Sought for Lag by Blacks in School Effort</i>,” The New York Times (July 14, 1999), p. 15.<br />
<br />
[72] John McWhorter, <i>Losing the Race</i> (New York: The Free Press, 2000), p. 127.<br />
<br />
[73] John McWhorter, <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=Ug2_WRJPZmoC&pg=PA231&lpg=PA231&dq=mcwhorter+and+%E2%80%9Ca+particularly+pointed%22&source=web&ots=oewWaVHov_&sig=Dj3CYBxYRzaIAmUNDU4Yv42xnfQ&hl=en">Word on the Street: Debunking the Myth of ‘Pure’ Standard English</a> (New York: Basic Books, 2001), p. 231.<br />
<br />
[74] John McWhorter, “<a href="http://www.city-journal.org/html/11_1_whats_holding_blacks.html">What’s Holding Blacks Back?</a>” City Journal (Winter 2001).<br />
<br />
[75] Daniel Goleman, “<i>Black Scientists Study the ‘Pose’ of the Inner City,</i>” The New York Times (April 21, 2002), p. C7.<br />
<br />
[76] John McWhorter, “<a href="http://www.city-journal.org/html/11_1_whats_holding_blacks.html">What’s Holding Blacks Back?</a>” City Journal (Winter 2001).<br />
<br />
[77] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[78] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[79] Shelby Steele, <i>The Content of Our Character</i> (New York: Saint Martin’s Press, 1990), p. 14.<br />
<br />
[80] Ibid., p. 31.<br />
<br />
[81] Shelby Steele, “<a href="http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110008318">White Guilt and the Western Past</a>,” The Wall Street Journal (May 2, 2006).<br />
<br />
[82] Orlando Patterson, “<a href="http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0CE4D9163DF933A15753C1A967958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all">Race, Gender, and Liberal Fallacies</a>,” The New York Times (October 20, 1991).<br />
<br />
[83] Hugh Davis Graham, <i>The Civil Rights Era: Origins and Development of National Policy</i> (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990), p. 33.<br />
<br />
[84] <a href="http://www.eeoc.gov/abouteeoc/35th/thelaw/eo-10925.html">Executive Order 10925: Establishing the President’s Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity</a> (March 6, 1961).<br />
<br />
[85] Thomas Sowell, <i>Civil Rights: Rhetoric or Reality</i> (New York: Quill, 1984), p. 39.<br />
<br />
[86] Herman Belz, <i>Equality Transformed</i> (New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1991), p. 39.<br />
<br />
[87] Hugh Davis Graham, <i>The Civil Rights Era: Origins and Development of National Policy</i>, pp. 111-113.<br />
<br />
[88] Dinesh D’Souza, <i>The End of Racism</i>, p. 224.<br />
<br />
[89] Thernstrom, <i>America in Black and White</i>, pp. 172-173.<br />
<br />
[90] Dinesh D’Souza, <i>The End of Racism</i>, p. 218.<br />
<br />
[91] Ibid., p. 218.<br />
<br />
[92] Ibid., pp. 218-219.<br />
<br />
[93] Thernstrom, <i>America in Black and White</i>, p. 173.<br />
<br />
[94] Clifford Alexander, “<i>What Affirmative Action Really Means</i>,” The New York Times (December 16, 1991).<br />
<br />
[95] Jimmie Briggs, “<i>Hope of Our Past</i>,” Emerge (March 1994), p. 23.<br />
<br />
[96] Dinesh D’Souza, <i>Illiberal Education</i> (New York: The Free Press, 1991), p. 41. Dinesh D’Souza, The End of Racism, p. 303.<br />
<br />
[97] Carl Cohen, “<i>Race, Lies, and ‘Hopwood</i>,’” Commentary (June 1996), p. 41.<br />
<br />
[98] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[99] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[100] William G. Bowen and Derek Bok, <i>The Shape of the River</i> (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998), p. 26.<br />
<br />
[101] Robert Lerner, Ph.D. and Althea K. Nagai, Ph.D., “<a href="http://www.ceousa.org/content/view/442/100/">Racial and Ethnic Preferences in Undergraduate Admissions at Six North Carolina Public Universities</a>,” Center for Equal Opportunity (June 1998).<br />
<br />
[102] Stephan Thernstrom, “<i>The Scandal of the Law Schools</i>,” Commentary (December 1997), p. 31.<br />
<br />
[103] Robert Zelnick, <i>Backfire</i>, p. 197.<br />
<br />
[104] Richard Bernstein, “<i>Law School Calls Bias Ruling a Victory</i>,” The New York Times (August 21, 1994), p. 26.<br />
<br />
[105] Robert Lerner and Althea Nagai, “<a href="http://www.ceousa.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_view&gid=201">Racial and Ethnic Preferences at the Three Virginia Public Law Schools</a>,” Center for Equal Opportunity (April 25, 2002).<br />
<br />
[106] Michael Levin, <i>Feminism and Freedom</i> (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books, 1987), p. 119. Charles Murray, “<i>The Coming of Custodial Democracy</i>,” Commentary (September 1988), p. 24. Ethan Bonner, “<i>Colleges Look for Answer to Racial Gaps in Testing</i>,” The New York Times (November 8, 1997), p. A12.<br />
<br />
[107] Robert Lerner and Althea Nagai, “<a href="http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:LT15c_gYGU8J:www.ceousa.org/index.php%3Foption%3Dcom_docman%26task%3Ddoc_view%26gid%3D162%26Itemid%3D54+%22Racial+and+Ethnic+Preferences+and+Consequences+at+the+University+of+Maryland+School+of+Medicine%22&hl=en&ct=clnk">Racial and Ethnic Preferences and Consequences at the University of Maryland School of Medicine</a>,” Center for Equal Opportunity (April 3, 2001).<br />
<br />
[108] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[109] Robert Lerner and Althea Nagai, “<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20030806073429/http:/www.ceousa.org/pdfs/multimed.pdf">Preferences in Medical Education</a>,” Center for Equal Opportunity (June 14, 2001).<br />
<br />
[110] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[111] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[112] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[113] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[114] Robert Lerner and Althea Nagai, “<a href="http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:LT15c_gYGU8J:www.ceousa.org/index.php%3Foption%3Dcom_docman%26task%3Ddoc_view%26gid%3D162%26Itemid%3D54+%22Preferences+in+Medical+Education%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=6&gl=us">Preferences and Consequences at the University of Maryland School of Medicine</a>,” Center for Equal Opportunity (April 3, 2001).<br />
<br />
[115] Althea Nagai, “<a href="http://www.ceousa.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_view&gid=235">Racial and Ethnic Admission Preferences at the University of Michigan Medical School</a>,” Center for Equal Opportunity (October 17, 2006).<br />
<br />
[116] John H. Bunzel, “<i>Affirmative Action Admissions: How It ‘Works’ at Berkeley</i>,” The Public Interest (Fall 1988), pp. 124-125.<br />
<br />
[117] Sally Pipes, “<i>Quashing Quotas</i>,” Investor’s Business Daily (March 1, 1995).<br />
<br />
[118] Dinesh D’Souza, <i>Illiberal Education</i>, p. 39.<br />
<br />
[119] Thernstrom, <i>America in Black and White</i>, p. 193.<br />
<br />
[120] Ibid., p. 382.<br />
<br />
[121] Dinesh D’Souza, <i>Illiberal Education</i>, p. 39.<br />
<br />
[122] Thernstrom, <i>America in Black and White</i>, pp. 406-407.<br />
<br />
[123] Ibid., p. 410.<br />
<br />
[124] Thomas Sowell, “<a href="http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?id=1635">Affirmative Action and College Graduation Rates</a>,” Capitalism Magazine (June 4, 2002).<br />
<br />
[125] Thomas Sowell, “<i>Mascot Politics</i>,” Jewish World Review (May 27, 2008).<br />
<br />
[126] Thernstrom, <i>America in Black and White</i>, p. 411.<br />
<br />
[127] Arch Puddington, “<i>What to Do about Affirmative Action</i>,” Commentary (June 1995), p. 23. Thomas Sowell, Civil Rights: Rhetoric or Realty?, pp. 49-50. Thernstrom, America in Black and White, pp. 187-188, 234.<br />
<br />
[128] Thernstrom, <i>America in Black and White</i>, p. 81.<br />
<br />
[129] Ibid., pp. 81-82.<br />
<br />
[130] Gerald David Jaynes and Robin M. Williams, Jr., eds., A<i> Common Destiny: Blacks and American Society</i> (Washington DC: National Research Council, National Academy Press, 1989), p. 295.<br />
<br />
[131] Thernstrom, <i>America in Black and White</i>, p. 83.<br />
<br />
[132] Ibid., pp. 82-83.<br />
<br />
[133] Ibid., p. 82.<br />
<br />
[134] Thomas Sowell, <i>The Economics and Politics of Race</i> (New York: Quill, 1983), pp. 190-191.<br />
<br />
[135] Tony Snow, “<i>Blacks Should Not Abandon King’s Dream</i>,” Conservative Chronicle (September 7, 1994), p. 28. Walter E. Williams, “<i>White People Are Divine</i>,” More Liberty Means Less Government (Stanford: Hoover Institution Press, 1999), p. 6.<br />
<br />
[136] Robert Bork, <i>Slouching Towards Gomorrah</i> (New York: HarperCollins, 1996), p. 238.<br />
<br />
[137] Larry Dublin, “<i>Class Divisions</i>,” The Journal News (February 2, 1999), p. 4A.<br />
<br />
[138] Dinesh D’Souza, <i>Illiberal Education</i>, p. 265.<br />
<br />
[139] Andrew Hacker, <i>Two Nations</i>, p. 143.<br />
<br />
[140] Thomas Sowell, <i>The Economics and Politics of Race</i>, p. 140.<br />
<br />
[141] John H. Bunzel and Jeffrey Au, “<i>Diversity or Discrimination: Asian Americans in College</i>,” The Public Interest (Spring 1987), p. 55.<br />
<br />
[142] National Center for Education Statistics, <i>Digest of Educational Statistics</i>, 1995, p. 138. Cited by Thernstrom, America in Black and White, p. 383.<br />
<br />
[143] Thernstrom, <i>America in Black and White</i>, pp. 382-383.<br />
<br />
[144] Pam Belluck, “<i>Reason Is Sought for Lag by Blacks in School Effort</i>,” The New York Times (July 4, 1999), p. 15.<br />
<br />
[145] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[146] Walter E. Williams, “<a href="http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4732">The Poverty in Black Education Is Not Due to Racial Discrimination or Lack of Money in D.C.</a>, Capitalism Magazine (July 5, 2006).<br />
<br />
[147] <i>National Center for Education Statistics, Disparities in Public School District Spending</i>, 1989-1990, NCES 95-300. (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1995), p. 15.<br />
<br />
[148] Stephen Powers and Stanley Rothman, <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=hJtF5HtSbwoC&pg=PA53&lpg=PA53&dq=%223.9+years%22+and+math+and+%223.4+years%22+and+science+and+%225.4+years%22+and+science+and+%223.3+years%22&source=web&ots=UpgZBKL7cP&sig=Ut_u8zY46UdqmJavqJftoks-U-o&hl=en">The Least Dangerous Branch? Consequences of Judicial Activism</a> (Praeger Publishers, 2002), p. 53.<br />
<br />
[149] Walter E. Williams, “<a href="http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4732">The Poverty in Black Education Is Not Due to Racial Discrimination or Lack of Money in D.C.</a>,” Capitalism Magazine (July 5, 2006).<br />
<br />
[150] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[151] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[152] Kent Kaiser, “<a href="http://www.mfc.org/pfn/97-10/nea.html">NEA Resolutions Show Liberal Agenda</a>,” Pro-Family News (October 1997).<br />
<br />
[153] F. A. Hayek, <i>The Constitution of Liberty</i>, section 24.3.<br />
<br />
[154] “<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A42592-2003Feb21&notFound=true">What’s So Liberal about Keeping Children in Dreadful Schools?</a>” The Washington Post (February 23, 2003).<br />
<br />
[155] Charles Murray, <i>Losing Ground: American Social Policy</i>, 1950-1960 (New York: Basic Books, 1984), p. 57. Cited in Thomas Sowell, The Vision of the Anointed (New York: Basic Books, 1995), p. 12.<br />
<br />
[156] Ibid., p. 64 (Cited in Thomas Sowell, <i>The Vision of the Anointed</i>, p. 12.)<br />
<br />
[157] Marjorie Hunter, “<i>Johnson Signs Bill to Fight Poverty; Pledges New Era</i>,” The New York Times (August 21, 1964), p. 1. Cited in Thomas Sowell, The Vision of the Anointed, p. 10.<br />
<br />
[158] Thomas Sowell, <i>The Vision of the Anointed</i>, p. 11.<br />
<br />
[159] Ibid., p. 13.<br />
<br />
[160] Christine Kim and Robert Rector, “<a href="http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/wm1183.cfm">Welfare Reform Turns Ten: Evidence Shows Reduced Dependence, Poverty</a>,” The Heritage Foundation (August 1, 2006).<br />
<br />
[161] Robert Rector, “<a href="http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/Test031501b.cfm">The Effects of Welfare Reform</a>,” The Heritage Foundation (March 15, 2001).<br />
<br />
[162] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[163] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[164] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[165] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[166] Issues: <i>Welfare</i>, p. 302.<br />
<br />
[167] Thernstrom, <i>America in Black and White</i>, p. 240.<br />
<br />
[168] Matthew Robinson, “<i>Can the U.S. Afford Illegitimacy?</i>” Investor’s Business Daily (October 16, 1995). <br />
<br />
[169] William F. Buckley, Jr., “<i>Care for the Illegitimate, or Reduce Illegitimacy?</i>’ New York Post (February 12, 1997), p. 27.<br />
<br />
[170] William F. Buckley, Jr., “<i>The Myth of Mass Illegitimacy</i>,” New York Post (August 12, 1996), p. 21. Carl Horowitz, “The Human Cost of Illegitimacy,” Investor’s Business Daily (March 8, 1995).<br />
<br />
[171] Thomas Sowell, <i>Civil Rights: Rhetoric or Reality?</i>, p. 48.<br />
<br />
[172] Associated Press, “<i>Single Women and Poverty Strongly Linked</i>,” The New York Times (February 20, 1994), p. 35. “<i>The Roots of Inequality</i>,” Investor’s Business Daily (April 8, 1996), p. 2.<br />
<br />
[173] Thernstrom, <i>America in Black and White</i>, p. 197, Table 8.<br />
<br />
[174] “<i>The Roots of Inequality</i>,” Investor’s Business Daily (April 8, 1996), p. 2.<br />
<br />
[175] Thernstrom, <i>America in Black and White</i>, p. 237.<br />
<br />
[176] Robert Rector, “<a href="http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/Test031501b.cfm">The Effects of Welfare Reform</a>,” The Heritage Foundation (March 15, 2001).<br />
<br />
[177] George Gilder, <i>Wealth and Poverty</i> (San Francisco: ICS Press, 1993), p. 146. George Gilder, “The Roots of Black Poverty,” The Wall Street Journal (October 30, 1995).<br />
<br />
[178] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[179] U.S. Census Bureau, <i>Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2006</i> (August 2007).<br />
<br />
[180] Thomas Sowell, “<i>Squeamish Words and Dying Babies</i>,” Barbarians Inside the Gates (Stanford: Hoover Institution Press, 1999), p. 183.<br />
<br />
[181] Thernstrom, <i>America in Black and White</i>, p. 197. Dinesh D’Souza, The End of Racism, pp. 300-302.<br />
<br />
[182] George Gilder, <i>Wealth and Poverty</i>, P. 81.<br />
<br />
[183] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[184] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[185] Hugh B. Price, “<i>Hard-Fought Battle for Civil Rights Is Hardly Over</i>,” New York Daily News (August 29, 1994), p. 23.<br />
<br />
[186] Bob Herbert, “<i>Don’t Flunk the Future</i>,” The New York Times (August 13, 1998).<br />
<br />
[187] Charles Sykes, <i>A Nation of Victims</i> (New York: Saint Martin’s Press, 1992), p. 69.<br />
<br />
[188] Robert Reinhold, “<i>An Edgy Los Angeles Awaits a Jury’s Verdict</i>,” The New York Times (April 11, 1993), Section 1, p. 14.<br />
<br />
[189] Robert Rector, “<a href="http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/Test031501b.cfm">The Effects of Welfare Reform</a>,” The Heritage Foundation (March 15, 2001).<br />
<br />
[190] Elaine Kamarck, “<i>Fatherless Families: A Violent Link</i>,” Los Angeles Times (May 7, 1992), p. B7.<br />
<br />
[191] Mona Charen, “<i>Liberal Tinkering Has Put Our Civilization at Risk</i>,” Conservative Chronicle (August 24, 1994), p. 21.<br />
<br />
[192] Robert Rector, “<a href="http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/Test031501b.cfm">The Effects of Welfare Reform</a>,” The Heritage Foundation (March 15, 2001).<br />
<br />
[193] Douglas Smith and G. Roger Jajoura, "Social Structure and Criminal Victimization," Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, February 1988, pp.27-52. Cited in Robert Rector, “The Effects of Welfare Reform,” The Heritage Foundation (March 15, 2001).<br />
<br />
[194] M. Anne Hill and June O'Neill, <i>Underclass Behaviors in the United States: Measurement and Analysis of Determinants</i> (New York: Baruch College, March 1990). Cited in Robert Rector, “<a href="http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/Test031501b.cfm">The Effects of Welfare Reform</a>,” The Heritage Foundation (March 15, 2001).<br />
<br />
[195] Walter E. Williams, “<i>Struggle for Civil Rights Is Over</i>,” Conservative Chronicle (April 27, 1994), p. 26.<br />
<br />
[196] Shelby Steele, <i>The Content of Our Character</i>, p. 24.<br />
<br />
[197] Jesse Lee Peterson, “<i>Longing for Fathers</i>,” Issues and Views (Spring 1996), p. 8.<br />
<br />
[198] Thomas Sowell, <i>Civil Rights: Rhetoric or Reality?</i>, p. 75.<br />
<br />
[199] Dinesh D’Souza, <i>The End of Racism</i>, pp. 67-68.<br />
<br />
[200] Thomas Sowell, <i>Civil Rights: Rhetoric or Reality?</i>, p. 75.<br />
<br />
[201] Herbert G. Gutman, <i>The Black Family in Slavery and Freedom</i> (New York: Vintage Books, 1976), p. xvii.<br />
<br />
[202] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[203] Ibid., p. 462.<br />
<br />
[204] Ibid., p. xix.<br />
<br />
[205] Ibid., p. xvii.<br />
<br />
[206] Jonathan Alter, “<i>The Long Shadow of Slavery</i>,” Newsweek (December 8, 1997), p. 63.<br />
<br />
[207] Thomas Sowell, <i>Civil Rights: Rhetoric or Reality?</i>, p. 75.<br />
<br />
[208] Thomas Sowell, <i>The Economics and Politics of Race</i>, p. 125.<br />
<br />
[209] Herbert G. Gutman, <i>The Black Family in Slavery and Freedom</i>, p. 444.<br />
<br />
[210] Ibid., p. xix.<br />
<br />
[211] Walter E. Williams, “<a href="http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=38882">Government: Not the Answer for Blacks</a>,” WorldNetDaily (November 15, 2006).<br />
<br />
[212] Tamar Lewin, “<i>Black Children Living With One Parent Put at 55%</i>,” The New York Times (July 15, 1990), p. 17. Bill McAllister, “<i>To Be Young, Male, and Black</i>,” Washington Post (December 28, 1989), p. A1. Jared Taylor, <i>Paved with Good Intentions</i>, p. 297.<br />
<br />
[213] Mortimer Zuckerman, “<i>Mentioning the Unmentionable</i>,” U.S. News & World Report (June 4, 1990), p. 82.<br />
<br />
[214] Robert Woodson, “<i>We Need to Examine Some Side Effects of the Civil Rights Movement</i>,” Issues & Views (Fall 1991), p. 4.<br />
<br />
[215] Thernstrom, <i>America in Black and White</i>, p. 238.<br />
<br />
[216] Thomas Sowell, <i>The Vision of the Anointed</i>, p. 17.<br />
<br />
[217] Ibid., pp. 15-16.<br />
<br />
[218] Ibid., p. 17.<br />
<br />
[219] Ibid., p. 18.<br />
<br />
[220] Ibid., p. 16.<br />
<br />
[221] Ibid., p. 18.<br />
<br />
[222] Ibid., p. 21<br />
<br />
[223] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[224] Ibid., p. 22.<br />
<br />
[225] Ben Best, “<a href="http://www.benbest.com/lifeext/murder.html">Death by Murder</a>.”<br />
<br />
[226] Thomas Sowell, <i>The Vision of the Anointed</i>, p. 24.<br />
<br />
[227] Ibid., p. 27.<br />
<br />
[228] <i>Crime in the United States: 2006</i> (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice), Table 43.<br />
<br />
[229] Bureau of Justice Statistics, “<a href="http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/pim07.htm">Prison Inmates at Midyear 2007</a>,” page 7, Table 9.<br />
<br />
[230] Scott McConnell, “<i>Exit the Hillary Cult</i>,” New York Post (March 11, 1994), p. 17.<br />
<br />
[231] Felicia R. Lee, “<i>Facing Down His Color As a Path to Privilege</i>,” The New York Times (May 5, 1999).<br />
<br />
[232] Ralph Wiley, <i>Why Black People Tend to Shout</i> (New York: Birch Lane Press, 1991), p. 81.<br />
<br />
[233] Heather MacDonald, “<a href="http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=294274911882475">High Incarceration Rate of Blacks Is Function of Crime, Not Race</a>,” Investor’s Business Daily (April 28, 2008).<br />
<br />
[234] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[235] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[236] Susan Brink, “<a href="http://inverted-world.com/index.php/News/News/exploring_the_life_expectancy_gap/">Exploring the Life Expectancy Gap</a>,” The Inverted World (March 26, 2007).<br />
<br />
[237] Susan Brink, “<a href="http://mlyon01.wordpress.com/2007/09/24/black-mens-shorter-life-span-may-be-attributable-in-part-to-the-stresses-of-their-position-in-society/">Black Men’s Shorter Life Span May Be Attributable to the Stresses of Their Position in Society</a>,” Los Angeles Times (September 24, 2007).<br />
<br />
[238] Thernstrom, <i>America in Black and White</i>, p. 263.<br />
<br />
[239] Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics, “<i>Percent distribution of murders and nonnegligent manslaughters known to police, by race of victim, United States, 1964-2006</i>” [<a href="http://www.albany.edu/sourcebook/pdf/t31232006.pdf">Table 3.123.2006 pdf file format (26k)</a>]<br />
<br />
[240] Bureau of Justice Statistics, “<a href="http://www.ojp.gov/bjs/homicide/ageracesex.htm">Age, Gender, and Race Trends</a>.”<br />
<br />
[241] Bureau of Justice Statistics, “<a href="http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm">Homicide Trends in the U.S.: Trends by Race</a>.” Dan Eggen, “<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/09/AR2007080901964.html">Study: Almost Half of Murder Victims Black</a>,” The Washington Post (August 10, 2007).<br />
<br />
[242] Bureau of Justice Statistics, <i>National Crime Victimization Survey: 2003</i>, Table 42.<br />
<br />
[243] Patrick J. Buchanan, “<a href="http://www.wnd.com/index.php/index.php?pageId=43138">The Color of Crime</a>,” World Net Daily (August 21, 2007).<br />
<br />
[244] Janice Shaw Crouse, “<a href="http://www.townhall.com/columnists/JaniceShawCrouse/2007/10/15/anybody_can_get_it">Anybody Can Get It?</a>” TownHall.com (October 15, 2007).<br />
<br />
[245] Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, <a href="http://www.townhall.com/columnists/JaniceShawCrouse/2007/10/15/anybody_can_get_it">HIV/AIDS Policy Fact Sheet</a> (July 2007).<br />
<br />
[246] Jesse Lee Peterson, “<a href="http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51657">AIDS: Black Leadership’s Grand Hustle</a>,” WorldNetDaily (August 24, 2006).<br />
<br />
[247] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[248] Ibid.<br />
<br />
[249] Deborah Kong, “<a href="http://aad.english.ucsb.edu/docs/ap070902.html">NAACP Opposes California Initiative to Bar Racial Classifying</a>” AAD Project (July 9, 2002).<br />
<br />
[250] NAACP, “<a href="http://www.naacp.org/about/leadership/directors/chaircorner/2005-07-10/">Transcript of Julian Bond’s Speech During 96th Annual Convention</a>.”<br />
<br />
[251] Barry Bearak, “<i>Questions of Race Run Deep for Foe of Preferences</i>,” The New York Times (July 27, 1997).<br />
<br />
[252] Jeff Jacoby, “<a href="http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/1996/12/31/another_year_of_hate_speech_from_the_left/">Another Year of Hate Speech from the Left</a>,” Boston Globe (December 31, 1996).<br />
<br />
[253] John Perazzo, “<a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=C6BC14C3-2A7F-41AE-9FB8-DE6AADF4FD5F">How the Left Trashes Black Conservatives</a>,” FrontPageMag.com (July 10, 2002).<br />
<br />
[254] “<a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/1998/08/21/1998-08-21_s_f__mayor_rips_justice_thom.html">S.F. Mayor Rips Justice Thomas</a>,” New York Daily News (August 21, 1998).<br />
<br />
[255] “<a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/1998/08/21/MNR5BA10.DTL">Clarence Thomas a Shill, Mayor Tells Black Group</a>,” San Francisco Chronicle (August 21, 1998).<br />
<br />
[256] Larry Elder, “<a href="http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/elder082798.html">The Brown Bomber Strikes Justice Thomas</a>,” Jewish World Review (August 27, 1998).<br />
<br />
[257] “<a href="http://sanenation.blogspot.com/2006/10/liberal-racism-alive-and-well.html">Liberal Racism: Alive and Well</a>,” SaneNation.blogspot.com (October 25, 2006).<br />
<br />
[258] Bob Parks, “<a href="http://mensnewsdaily.com/2006/08/03/mel-icious-intent/">Mel-icious Intent</a>,” Men’s News Daily (August 3, 2006).<br />
<br />
[259] Letha See, <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=SvGAbm4kVh0C&pg=PA73&lpg=PA73&dq=%22june+jordan%22+and+%E2%80%9Cvirulent+Oreo+phenomenon%22&source=web&ots=l-q9sGEGkz&sig=5HgivIq67tre2hSSOcczLq4MuTU&hl=en">Human Behavior in the Social Environment from an African American Perspective</a> (New York: Routledge, 1999), p. 73.<br />
<br />
[260] Karen Arenson, “<a href="http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9407EED61139F937A35757C0A960958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=print">W. Haywood Burns, 55, Dies</a>,” The New York Times (April 4, 1996).<br />
<br />
[261] John Perazzo, “<a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=C6BC14C3-2A7F-41AE-9FB8-DE6AADF4FD5F">How the Left Trashes Black Conservatives</a>,” FrontPageMag.com (July 10, 2002).<br />
<br />
[262] Media Research Center, “<a href="http://www.mediaresearch.org/cyberalerts/1999/cyb19991210.asp">Clarence Thomas Accepted Award on Behalf of Woman Who Wished Him Dead</a>,” (December 10, 1999).<br />
<br />
[263] Stephen Smith, “<a href="http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0377/is_/ai_18579238">On Justice Clarence Thomas</a>,” Public Interest (Summer 1996).<br />
<br />
[264] Eugene Volokh, “<a href="http://opinionjournal.com/federation/feature/?id=110010657">Doubting Thomas</a>,” The Wall Street Journal (September 27, 2007).<br />
<br />
[265] Deroy Murdock, “<a href="http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_/ai_18963103">When Hate Speech Isn’t Hate Speech</a>,” Insight on the News (December 23, 1996).<br />
<br />
[266] Jeff Jacoby, “<a href="http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/1996/12/31/another_year_of_hate_speech_from_the_left/">Another Year of Hate Speech from the Left</a>,” Boston Globe (December 31, 1996).<br />
<br />
[267] Larry Elder, “<a href="http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/elder010401.asp">Sowell and Williams: Grace under Fire</a>,” Jewish World Review (January 4, 2001).<br />
<br />
[268] Yaacov Shavit, <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=IF3nT14IbOIC&pg=PA273&lpg=PA273&dq=%E2%80%9Cfrustrated+slaves+crawling+back+to+the+plantation%22&source=web&ots=XI2kVl3vRa&sig=nFNR-0UP6zX-2x2RZcdbeV8e4vk&hl=en">History in Black: African Americans in Search of an Ancient Past</a> (New York: Routledge, 2001).<br />
<br />
[269] Shelby Steele, “<a href="http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/3506941.html">The Loneliness of the ‘Black Conservative</a>,’” Hoover Institution (1999).<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [<a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=1258">Discover the Networks</a>]</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327922598170048610" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JSpbgoKp8LA/SfCVX96zuGI/AAAAAAAAEIs/qqvoPLfHrLA/s400/400_BlackLine.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 7px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 620px;" />Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-30418186017929318042013-02-13T16:29:00.000+02:002013-02-28T23:51:30.883+02:00Slavoj Zizek: PC Multiculturalism: the Cultural Logic of Multinational Capitalism vs. Authentic Multiculturalism: 'The one measure of true love is: you can insult the other'<div align="justify"><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Slavoj Zizek: PC Multiculturalism: the Cultural Logic of Multinational Capitalism vs. Authentic Multiculturalism: 'The one measure of true love is: you can insult the other'</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">You cannot do the game of erotic seduction in politically correct terms: Another thing that bothers me about this multiculturalism is when people ask me: 'How can you be sure that you are not a racist?' My answer is that there is only one way. If I can exchange insults, brutal jokes, dirty jokes, with a member of a different race and we both know it's not meant in a racist way. If, on the other hand, we play this politically correct game - 'Oh, I respect you, how interesting your customs are' - this is inverted racism, and it is disgusting.</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Andrea Muhrrteyn compilation of Slavoj Zizek on Multiculturalism | 13 February 2013|</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GkuPbtFiapQ/URuin3-t3dI/AAAAAAAAhM0/Emv2bqfWv7c/s1600/SlavojZizek_MultinationalMulticulturalism_830x970.PNG"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-wLfPQi-MWXU/URuiYtWRL8I/AAAAAAAAhMo/NOuxlqFMFjs/s1600/SlavojZizek_MultinationalMulticulturalism_400x467.PNG" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 467px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 400px;" /></a><blockquote><span style="font-size: 95%;">For me there is one measure of true love: you can insult the other. Like in that horrible German comedy film from 1943 where Marika Röck treats her fiancé very brutally. This fiancé is a rich, important person, so her father asks her why are you treating him like that. And she gives the right answer. She says: 'But I love him, and since I love him, I can do with him whatever I want.' That's the truth of it. If there is true love, you can say horrible things and anything goes.<br />
<br />
When multiculturalists tell you to respect the others, I always have this uncanny association that this is dangerously close to how we treat our children: the idea that we should respect them, even when we know that what they believe is not true. We should not destroy their illusions. No, I think that others deserve better - not to be treated like children. <br />
<br />
Isn't it sad and tragic that the only relatively strong - not fringe - political movement that still directly addresses the working class is made up of right-wing populists? They are the only ones. Jean-Marie Le Pen in France, for example. I was shocked when I saw him three years ago at a congress of the Front National. He brought a black Frenchman, an Algerian and a Jew on the podium, embraced them and said: 'They are no less French than I am. Only the international cosmopolitan companies who neglect French patriotic interests are my enemy.' So the price is that only right-wingers still talk about economic exploitation.<br />
<br />
On today's market, we find a whole series of products deprived of their malignant property: coffee without caffeine, cream without fat, beer without alcohol. And the list goes on: what about virtual sex as sex without sex? The Colin Powell doctrine of warfare with no casualties (on our side, of course) as warfare without warfare? The contemporary redefinition of politics as the art of expert administration as politics without politics? This leads us to today's tolerant liberal multiculturalism as an experience of the Other deprived of its Otherness – the decaffeinated Other.<br />
<br />
<div align="center">**********</div><br />
Multiculturalism: How, then, does the universe of Capital relate to the form of Nation State in our era of global capitalism? Perhaps, this relationship is best designated as ‘auto-colonization’: with the direct multinational functioning of Capital, we are no longer dealing with the standard opposition between metropolis and colonized countries; a global company as it were cuts its umbilical cord with its mother-nation and treats its country of origins as simply another territory to be colonized. This is what disturbs so much the patriotically oriented right-wing populists, from Le Pen to Buchanan: the fact that the new multinationals have towards the French or American local population exactly the same attitude as towards the population of Mexico, Brazil or Taiwan. Is there not a kind of poetic justice in this self-referential turn? Today’s global capitalism is thus again a kind of ‘negation of negation’, after national capitalism and its internationalist/colonialist phase. At the beginning (ideally, of course), there is capitalism within the confines of a Nation-State, with the accompanying international trade (exchange between sovereign Nation-States); what follows is the relationship of colonization in which the colonizing country subordinates and exploits (economically, politically, culturally) the colonized country; the final moment of this process is the paradox of colonization in which there are only colonies, no colonizing countries—the colonizing power is no longer a Nation-State but directly the global company. In the long term, we shall all not only wear Banana Republic shirts but also live in banana republics.<br />
<br />
And, of course, the ideal form of ideology of this global capitalism is multiculturalism, the attitude which, from a kind of empty global position, treats each local culture the way the colonizer treats colonized people—as ‘natives’ whose mores are to be carefully studied and ‘respected’. That is to say, the relationship between traditional imperialist colonialism and global capitalist self-colonization is exactly the same as the relationship between Western cultural imperialism and multiculturalism: in the same way that global capitalism involves the paradox of colonization without the colonizing Nation-State metropole, multiculturalism involves patronizing Eurocentrist distance and/or respect for local cultures without roots in one’s own particular culture. In other words, multiculturalism is a disavowed, inverted, self-referential form of racism, a ‘racism with a distance’—it ‘respects’ the Other’s identity, conceiving the Other as a self-enclosed ‘authentic’ community towards which he, the multiculturalist, maintains a distance rendered possible by his privileged universal position. Multiculturalism is a racism which empties its own position of all positive content (the multiculturalist is not a direct racist, he doesn’t oppose to the Other the particular values of his own culture), but nonetheless retains this position as; the privileged empty point of universality from which one is able to appreciate (and depreciate) properly other particular cultures—the multiculturalist respect for the Other’s specificity is the very form of asserting one’s; own superiority. </span></blockquote><a name='more'></a><div align="center"><a href="http://fleur-de-lis.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-__b6nnsrEpQ/UQqve4pxolI/AAAAAAAAg-U/74EyJkDE6MA/s1600/IdleNoMore-IndigenousRights_598x126.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 119px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 598px;" /></a></div><br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Multiculturalism, or, the Cultural Logic of Multinational Capitalism</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Slavoj Zizek | European Graduate School</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<table align="right" border="0" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" style="width: 375px;"><tbody>
<tr><td width="375"><div align="center"><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="305" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/iPmE51Oo-9A" width="375"></iframe><br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 80%;">Slavoj Zizek Environment, Identity and Multiculturalism (<a href="http://youtu.be/iPmE51Oo-9A">01:15:07</a>)</span></strong></div></td></tr>
</tbody></table><blockquote>It is as if we are witnessing today the ultimate confirmation of Freud's thesis, from Civilization and its Discontents, on how, after every assertion of Eros, Thanatos reasserts itself with a vengeance. At the very moment when, according to the predominant liberal ideology, we are finally leaving behind the "immature" political passions (the regime of the "political": class struggle and other "out-dated" divisive antagonisms) for the post-ideological "mature" pragmatic universe of rational administration and negotiated consensus, for the universe, free of utopian impulses, in which the dispassionate administration of social affairs goes hand in hand with the aestheticized hedonism (the pluralism of "ways of life"), — at this very moment, the foreclosed political is celebrating a triumphant comeback in its most archaic form of pure, undistilled racist hatred of the Other which renders the rational tolerant attitude utterly impotent. In this precise sense, the contemporary "postmodern" racism is the symptom of the multiculturalist late capitalism, bringing to the light the inherent contradiction of the liberal-democratic ideological project. Liberal "tolerance" condones the folklorist Other deprived of its substance (like the multitude of "ethnic cuisines" in a contemporary megalopolis) — any "real" Other is instantly denounced for its "fundamentalism", since the kernel of Otherness resides in the regulation of its jouissance, i.e. the "real Other" is by definition "patriarchal", "violent", never the Other of ethereal wisdom and charming customs. One is tempted to reactualize here the old Marcusean notion of "repressive tolerance", reconceiving it as the tolerance of the Other in its aseptized, benign form, which forecloses the dimension of the Real of the Other's jouissance.<br />
<br />
[..] What relationship exists between the world of capital and the national state in this era of global capitalism? Maybe this relationship could be defined better as “auto-colonisation”: in the direct activity of multinational capital we no longer have anything to do with the opposing standards between metropolises and colonised countries, the global company in some way severs the umbilical cord with its nation of origin and treats its own country as a mere sphere of action, which it needs to colonise. This is where the motive for the bad feeling of nations orientated towards the populist left is, from le Pen to Buchanan: the fact is that the new multinationals behave with the French or American citizens in exactly the same way as they behave with Mexicans, Brazilians or the Taiwanese. However, doesn’t some kind of poetic justice exist in this self-referential shift? <br />
<br />
Today’s global capitalism is again a species of “the negation of negation”, after the period of national capitalism and its international/colonial phase. At the beginning (obviously in an ideal sense) a capitalism circumscribed by the national confines of the country are registered with an international market (the exchange between sovereign nations); after this phase follows the relationship of colonisation, in which the colonising country subordinates and (economically, politically and culturally) exploits the colonised country; however, the final act of this process is the paradox of colonisation, where the real colonies and colonising countries no longer exist – the power of colonising is no longer in the hands of the national states, but directly in the hands of the global businesses. <br />
<br />
In the long run, we’ll not only be wearing Banana Republic T-shirts, but we’ll also be living in the Banana Republic. Naturally, multiculturalism is the ideal form of global capitalism’s ideology, it is an attitude which from an empty global position any local culture is discussed, in the same way that a coloniser treats a colonised people as the “indigenous” whose nature must be studied attentively and with “respect”. In other words, the relationship between traditional imperialist colonialism and capitalist global auto-colonisation is the same as the relationship between Western cultural imperialism and multiculturalism: and just as global capitalism includes the paradox of colonisation without the colonised countries, so multiculturalism offers a protection of Euro-centric distance and/or the respect for local cultures without having any roots in its own particular culture. <br />
<br />
Multiculturalism is evidently an inverted and un-confessed form of “distant” racism: “respecting” the identity of the other, conceiving the other as an “authentic” closed community against which he, the multiculturalist, maintains a distance made possible by his privileged universal position. In other words, multiculturalism is a form of racism which empties the position of all positive content (the multiculturalist is not an open racist, he doesn’t oppose the other’s particular values of his own culture), but nevertheless preserves this position as an empty and privileged essence of universality, from which the other specific cultures can be adequately appreciated: multiculturalism’s respect for the specificity of the other is the most efficient means of reaffirming his own superiority. <br />
<br />
Does what brings us to our conclusion that the neutrality of multiculturalism is a lie really derive from the fact that its position silently privileges Euro-centric contents? This is a right way of thinking, but it comes from the wrong reason. The background and roots of a particular culture, which sustains the universal position of multiculturalism, is not the “truth” of this position, concealed behind the mask of universality (“multiculturalism is in reality euro-centric…”), but on the contrary is the simple emblem of certain roots and a phantasmagorical cover, hiding the fact that the subject is already completely “without roots” and that its true position is in the emptiness of universality. <br />
<br />
Today’s “diversities” (the homeless, people living in ghettos, the unemployed…) are symptoms of the universal late capitalist system, which admonishes us with increasing frequency on the immanent reasoning of late capitalism: the real utopia of capitalism consists of the possibility which with adequate measures (“the affirmative act” for the liberal progressives; the return to thinking about ourselves and family values for the conservatives) these “exceptions” will be eliminated in the long run, at least in principle. A utopia analogous to the concept “of the rainbow coalition”; in a utopian future will all the progressives’ longings (the fight for gay and lesbian rights; fight for the rights of ethnic and religious minorities; ecological battles; feminist struggles; etc.) be reunited by the communal “chain of equivalence”? Yet again, the essence fails for structural reasons; simply, due to the empirical complexity of their position, all the particular “progressive” battles will never be reunited, but will always demonstrate “wrong” chains of equivalence (for example, the continuous fights for ethnic Afro-American identity and the patriarchal homophonic ideologies). The manifestation of “wrong” persuasions is based on the sole principle structuring today’s “progressive” policy of re-establishing “chains of equivalency”: the only sphere of particular mass struggles, with their incessant movements and concentrations, maintains the “repression” of key roles of the economic battle – the policy of the left of the “chain of equivalency” between the various mass struggles is closely linked to the silent omission of an analysis of capitalism, both as a system of global economy and the acceptance of capitalist economic relations as an unquestionable framework.<br />
<br />
[..]<br />
<br />
<b>Multiculturalism</b><br />
<br />
How, then, does the universe of Capital relate to the form of NationState in our era of global capitalism? Perhaps, this relationship is best designated as ‘auto-colonization’: with the direct multinational functioning of Capital, we are no longer dealing with the standard opposition between metropolis and colonized countries; a global company as it were cuts its umbilical cord with its mother-nation and treats its country of origins as simply another territory to be colonized. This is what disturbs so much the patriotically oriented right-wing populists, from Le Pen to Buchanan: the fact that the new multinationals have towards the French or American local population exactly the same attitude as towards the population of Mexico, Brazil or Taiwan. Is there not a kind of poetic justice in this self-referential turn? Today’s global capitalism is thus again a kind of ‘negation of negation’, after national capitalism and its internationalist/colonialist phase. At the beginning (ideally, of course), there is capitalism within the confines of a Nation-State, with the accompanying international trade (exchange between sovereign Nation-States); what follows is the relationship of colonization in which the colonizing country subordinates and exploits (economically, politically, culturally) the colonized country; the final moment of this process is the paradox of colonization in which there are only colonies, no colonizing countries—the colonizing power is no longer a Nation-State but directly the global company. In the long term, we shall all not only wear Banana Republic shirts but also live in banana republics.<br />
<br />
And, of course, the ideal form of ideology of this global capitalism is multiculturalism, the attitude which, from a kind of empty global position, treats each local culture the way the colonizer treats colonized people—as ‘natives’ whose mores are to be carefully studied and ‘respected’. That is to say, the relationship between traditional imperialist colonialism and global capitalist self-colonization is exactly the same as the relationship between Western cultural imperialism and multiculturalism: in the same way that global capitalism involves the paradox of colonization without the colonizing Nation-State metropole, multiculturalism involves patronizing Eurocentrist distance and/or respect for local cultures without roots in one’s own particular culture. In other words, multiculturalism is a disavowed, inverted, self-referential form of racism, a ‘racism with a distance’—it ‘respects’ the Other’s identity, conceiving the Other as a self-enclosed ‘authentic’ community towards which he, the multiculturalist, maintains a distance rendered possible by his privileged universal position. <br />
<br />
Multiculturalism is a racism which empties its own position of all positive content (the multiculturalist is not a direct racist, he doesn’t oppose to the Other the particular values of his own culture), but nonetheless retains this position as the privileged empty point of universality from which one is able to appreciate (and depreciate) properly other particular cultures—the multiculturalist respect for the Other’s specificity is the very form of asserting one’s own superiority.</blockquote><br />
<div align="center"><a href="http://fleur-de-lis.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-__b6nnsrEpQ/UQqve4pxolI/AAAAAAAAg-U/74EyJkDE6MA/s1600/IdleNoMore-IndigenousRights_598x126.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 119px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 598px;" /></a></div><br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">'The one measure of true love is: you can insult the other': The Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Zizek talks about subjectivity, multiculturalism, sex and terrorism.</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Sabine Reul and Thomas Deichmann | Wired | 15 November 2001</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<blockquote>The Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Žižek has gained something of a cult following for his many writings - including The Ticklish Subject, a playful critique of the intellectual assault upon human subjectivity (1).<br />
<br />
At the prestigious Frankfurt Book Fair in October 2001, he talked to Sabine Reul and Thomas Deichmann about subjectivity, multiculturalism, sex and unfreedom after 11 September. <br />
<br />
<b><i>Has 11 September thrown new light on your diagnosis of what is happening to the world?</i></b><br />
<br />
<b>Slavoj Žižek</b>: One of the endlessly repeated phrases we heard in recent weeks is that nothing will be the same after 11 September. I wonder if there really is such a substantial change. Certainly, there is change at the level of perception or publicity, but I don't think we can yet speak of some fundamental break. Existing attitudes and fears were confirmed, and what the media were telling us about terrorism has now really happened.<br />
<br />
In my work, I place strong emphasis on what is usually referred to as the virtualisation or digitalisation of our environment. We know that 60 percent of the people on this Earth have not even made a phone call in their life. But still, 30 percent of us live in a digitalised universe that is artificially constructed, manipulated and no longer some natural or traditional one. At all levels of our life we seem to live more and more with the thing deprived of its substance. You get beer without alcohol, meat without fat, coffee without caffeine...and even virtual sex without sex.<br />
<br />
Virtual reality to me is the climax of this process: you now get reality without reality...or a totally regulated reality. But there is another side to this. Throughout the entire twentieth century, I see a counter-tendency, for which my good philosopher friend Alain Badiou invented a nice name: 'La passion du réel', the passion of the real. That is to say, precisely because the universe in which we live is somehow a universe of dead conventions and artificiality, the only authentic real experience must be some extremely violent, shattering experience. And this we experience as a sense that now we are back in real life. <br />
<br />
<i><b>Do you think that is what we are seeing now?</b></i><br />
<br />
<b>Slavoj Žižek</b>: I think this may be what defined the twentieth century, which really began with the First World War. We all remember the war reports by Ernst Jünger, in which he praises this eye-to-eye combat experience as the authentic one. Or at the level of sex, the archetypal film of the twentieth century would be Nagisa Oshima's Ai No Corrida (In The Realm Of The Senses), where the idea again is that you become truly radical, and go to the end in a sexual encounter, when you practically torture each other to death. There must be extreme violence for that encounter to be authentic.<br />
<br />
Another emblematic figure in this sense to me is the so-called 'cutter'- a widespread pathological phenomenon in the USA. There are two million of them, mostly women, but also men, who cut themselves with razors. Why? It has nothing to do with masochism or suicide. It's simply that they don't feel real as persons and the idea is: it's only through this pain and when you feel warm blood that you feel reconnected again. So I think that this tension is the background against which one should appreciate the effect of the act. <br />
<br />
<i><b>Does that relate to your observations about the demise of subjectivity in The Ticklish Subject? You say the problem is what you call 'foreclosure'- that the real or the articulation of the subject is foreclosed by the way society has evolved in recent years</b></i>.<br />
<br />
<b>Slavoj Žižek</b>: The starting point of my book on the subject is that almost all philosophical orientations today, even if they strongly oppose each other, agree on some kind of basic anti-subjectivist stance. For example, Jürgen Habermas and Jacques Derrida would both agree that the Cartesian subject had to be deconstructed, or, in the case of Habermas, embedded in a larger inter-subjective dialectics. Cognitivists, Hegelians - everybody is in agreement here.<br />
<br />
I am tempted to say that we must return to the subject - though not a purely rational Cartesian one. My idea is that the subject is inherently political, in the sense that 'subject', to me, denotes a piece of freedom - where you are no longer rooted in some firm substance, you are in an open situation. Today we can no longer simply apply old rules. We are engaged in paradoxes, which offer no immediate way out. In this sense, subjectivity is political. <br />
<br />
<i><b>But this kind of political subjectivity seems to have disappeared. In your books you speak of a post-political world</b></i>.<br />
<br />
<b>Slavoj Žižek</b>: When I say we live in a post-political world, I refer to a wrong ideological impression. We don't really live in such a world, but the existing universe presents itself as post-political in the sense that there is some kind of a basic social pact that elementary social decisions are no longer discussed as political decisions. They are turned into simple decisions of gesture and of administration. And the remaining conflicts are mostly conflicts about different cultures. We have the present form of global capitalism plus some kind of tolerant democracy as the ultimate form of that idea. And, paradoxically, only very few are ready to question this world. <br />
<br />
<i><b>So, what's wrong with that?</b></i><br />
<br />
<b>Slavoj Žižek</b>: This post-political world still seems to retain the tension between what we usually refer to as tolerant liberalism versus multiculturalism. But for me - though I never liked Friedrich Nietzsche - if there is a definition that really fits, it is Nietzsche's old opposition between active and passive nihilism. Active nihilism, in the sense of wanting nothing itself, is this active self-destruction which would be precisely the passion of the real - the idea that, in order to live fully and authentically, you must engage in self-destruction. On the other hand, there is passive nihilism, what Nietzsche called 'The last man' - just living a stupid, self-satisfied life without great passions.<br />
<br />
The problem with a post-political universe is that we have these two sides which are engaged in kind of mortal dialectics. My idea is that, to break out of this vicious cycle, subjectivity must be reinvented. <br />
<br />
<i><b>You also say that the elites in our Western world are losing their nerve. They want to throw out all old concepts like humanism or subjectivity. Against that, you say it is important to look at what there is in the old that may be worth retaining</b></i>.<br />
<br />
<b>Slavoj Žižek</b>: Of course, I am not against the new. I am, indeed, almost tempted to repeat Virginia Woolf. I think it was in 1914 when she said it was as though eternal human nature had changed. To be a man no longer means the same thing. One should not, for example, underestimate the inter-subjective social impact of cyberspace. What we are witnessing today is a radical redefinition of what it means to be a human being.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Almost all philosophical orientations today agree on some kind of basic anti-subjectivist stance.</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
Take strange phenomena, like what we see on the internet. There are so-called 'cam' websites where people expose to an anonymous public their innermost secrets down to the most vulgar level. You have websites today - even I, with all my decadent tastes, was shocked to learn this - where people put a video-camera in their toilets, so you can observe them defecating. This a totally new constellation. It is not private, but also it is also not public. It is not the old exhibitionist gesture.<br />
<br />
Be that as it may, something radical is happening. Now, a number of new terms are proposed to us to describe that. The one most commonly used is paradigm shift, denoting that we live in an epoch of shifting paradigm. So New Age people tell us that we no longer have a Cartesian, mechanistic individualism, but a new universal mind. In sociology, the theorists of second modernity say similar things. And psychoanalytical theorists tell us that we no longer have the Oedipus complex, but live in an era of universalised perversion.<br />
<br />
My point is not that we should stick to the old. But these answers are wrong and do not really register the break that is taking place. If we measure what is happening now by the standard of the old, we can grasp the abyss of the new that is emerging.<br />
<br />
Here I would refer to Blaise Pascal. Pascal's problem was also confrontation with modernity and modern science. His difficulty was that he wanted to remain an old, orthodox Christian in this new, modern age. It is interesting that his results were much more radical and interesting for us today than the results of superficial English liberal philosophers, who simply accepted modernity.<br />
<br />
You see the same thing in cinema history, if we look at the impact of sound. Okay, 'what's the problem?', you might say. By adding the sound to the image we simply get a more realistic rendering of reality. But that is not at all true. Interestingly enough, the movie directors who were most sensitive to what the introduction of sound really meant were generally conservatives, those who looked at it with scepticism, like Charlie Chaplin (up to a point), and Fritz Lang. Fritz Lang's Das Testament des Dr Mabuse, in a wonderful way, rendered this spectral ghost-like dimension of the voice, realising that voice never simply belongs to the body. This is just another example of how a conservative, as if he were afraid of the new medium, has a much better grasp of its uncanny radical potentials.<br />
<br />
The same applies today. Some people simply say: 'What's the problem? Let's throw ourselves into the digital world, into the internet, or whatever….' They really miss what is going on here. <br />
<br />
<i><b>So why do people want to declare a new epoch every five minutes?</b></i><br />
<br />
<b>Slavoj Žižek</b>: It is precisely a desperate attempt to avoid the trauma of the new. It is a deeply conservative gesture. The true conservatives today are the people of new paradigms. They try desperately to avoid confronting what is really changing.<br />
<br />
Let me return to my example. In Charlie Chaplin's film <i><b>The Great Dictator</b></i>, he satirises Hitler as Hinkel. The voice is perceived as something obscene. There is a wonderful scene where Hinkel gives a big speech and speaks totally meaningless, obscene words. Only from time to time you recognise some everyday vulgar German word like 'Wienerschnitzel' or 'Kartoffelstrudel'. And this was an ingenious insight; how voice is like a kind of a spectral ghost. All this became apparent to those conservatives who were sensitive for the break of the new.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">The most dangerous thing today is just to flow with things </span></span></strong><br />
<br />
In fact, all big breaks were done in such a way. Nietzsche was in this sense a conservative, and, indeed, I am ready to claim that Marx was a conservative in this sense, too. Marx always emphasised that we can learn more from intelligent conservatives than from simple liberals. Today, more than ever, we should stick to this attitude. When you are surprised and shocked, you don't simply accept it. You should not say: 'Okay, fine, let's play digital games.' We should not forget the ability to be properly surprised. I think, the most dangerous thing today is just to flow with things. <br />
<br />
<i><b>Then let's return to some of the things that have been surprising us. In a recent article, you made the point that the terrorists mirror our civilisation. They are not out there, but mirror our own Western world. Can you elaborate on that some more?</b></i><br />
<br />
<b>Slavoj Žižek</b>: This, of course, is my answer to this popular thesis by Samuel P Huntington and others that there is a so-called clash of civilisations. I don't buy this thesis, for a number of reasons.<br />
<br />
Today's racism is precisely this racism of cultural difference. It no longer says: 'I am more than you.' It says: 'I want my culture, you can have yours.' Today, every right-winger says just that. These people can be very postmodern. They acknowledge that there is no natural tradition, that every culture is artificially constructed. In France, for example, you have a neo-fascist right that refers to the deconstructionists, saying: 'Yes, the lesson of deconstructionism against universalism is that there are only particular identities. So, if blacks can have their culture, why should we not have ours?'<br />
<br />
We should also consider the first reaction of the American 'moral majority', specifically Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, to the 11 September attacks. Pat Robertson is a bit eccentric, but Jerry Falwell is a mainstream figure, who endorsed Reagan and is part of the mainstream, not an eccentric freak. Now, their reaction was the same as the Arabs', though he did retract a couple of days later. Falwell said the World Trade Centre bombings were a sign that God no longer protects the USA, because the USA had chosen a path of evil, homosexuality and promiscuity.<br />
<br />
According to the FBI, there are now at least two million so-called radical right-wingers in the USA. Some are quite violent, killing abortion doctors, not to mention the Oklahoma City bombing. To me, this shows that the same anti-liberal, violent attitude also grows in our own civilisation. I see that as proof that this terrorism is an aspect of our time. We cannot link it to a particular civilisation.<br />
<br />
Regarding Islam, we should look at history. In fact, I think it is very interesting in this regard to look at ex-Yugoslavia. Why was Sarajevo and Bosnia the place of violent conflict? Because it was ethnically the most mixed republic of ex-Yugoslavia. Why? Because it was Muslim-dominated, and historically they were definitely the most tolerant. We Slovenes, on the other hand, and the Croats, both Catholics, threw them out several hundred years ago.<br />
<br />
This proves that there is nothing inherently intolerant about Islam. We must rather ask why this terrorist aspect of Islam arises now. The tension between tolerance and fundamentalist violence is within a civilisation.<br />
<br />
Take another example: on CNN we saw President Bush present a letter of a seven-year-old girl whose father is a pilot and now around Afghanistan. In the letter she said that she loves her father, but if her country needs his death, she is ready to give her father for her country. President Bush described this as American patriotism. Now, do a simple mental experiment - imagine the same event with an Afghan girl saying that. We would immediately say: 'What cynicism, what fundamentalism, what manipulation of small children.' So there is already something in our perception. But what shocks us in others we ourselves also do in a way. <br />
<br />
<i><b>So multiculturalism and fundamentalism could be two sides of the same coin?</b></i><br />
<br />
<b>Slavoj Žižek</b>: There is nothing to be said against tolerance. But when you buy this multiculturalist tolerance, you buy many other things with it. Isn't it symptomatic that multiculturalism exploded at the very historic moment when the last traces of working-class politics disappeared from political space? For many former leftists, this multiculturalism is a kind of ersatz working-class politics. We don't even know whether the working class still exists, so let's talk about exploitation of others.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">This notion of tolerance effectively masks its opposite: intolerance</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
There may be nothing wrong with that as such. But there is a danger that issues of economic exploitation are converted into problems of cultural tolerance. And then you have only to make one step further, that of Julia Kristeva in her essay 'Etrangers à nous mêmes', and say we cannot tolerate others because we cannot tolerate otherness in ourselves. Here we have a pure pseudo-psychoanalytic cultural reductionism.<br />
<br />
Isn't it sad and tragic that the only relatively strong - not fringe - political movement that still directly addresses the working class is made up of right-wing populists? They are the only ones. Jean-Marie Le Pen in France, for example. I was shocked when I saw him three years ago at a congress of the Front National. He brought a black Frenchman, an Algerian and a Jew on the podium, embraced them and said: 'They are no less French than I am. Only the international cosmopolitan companies who neglect French patriotic interests are my enemy.' So the price is that only right-wingers still talk about economic exploitation.<br />
<br />
The second thing I find wrong with this multiculturalist tolerance is that it is often hypocritical in the sense that the other whom they tolerate is already a reduced other. The other is okay in so far as this other is only a question of food, of culture, of dances. What about clitoridectomy? What about my friends who say: 'We must respect Hindus.' Okay, but what about one of the old Hindu customs which, as we know, is that when a husband dies, the wife is burned. Now, do we respect that? Problems arise here.<br />
<br />
An even more important problem is that this notion of tolerance effectively masks its opposite: intolerance. It is a recurring theme in all my books that, from this liberal perspective, the basic perception of another human being is always as something that may in some way hurt you. <br />
<br />
<i><b>Are you referring to what we call victim culture?</b></i><br />
<br />
<b>Slavoj Žižek</b>: The discourse of victimisation is almost the predominant discourse today. You can be a victim of the environment, of smoking, of sexual harassment. I find this reduction of the subject to a victim sad. In what sense? There is an extremely narcissistic notion of personality here. And, indeed, an intolerant one, insofar as what it means is that we can no longer tolerate violent encounters with others - and these encounters are always violent.<br />
<br />
Let me briefly address sexual harassment for a moment. Of course I am opposed to it, but let's be frank. Say I am passionately attached, in love, or whatever, to another human being and I declare my love, my passion for him or her. There is always something shocking, violent in it. This may sound like a joke, but it isn't - you cannot do the game of erotic seduction in politically correct terms. There is a moment of violence, when you say: 'I love you, I want you.' In no way can you bypass this violent aspect. So I even think that the fear of sexual harassment in a way includes this aspect, a fear of a too violent, too open encounter with another human being.<br />
<br />
Another thing that bothers me about this multiculturalism is when people ask me: 'How can you be sure that you are not a racist?' My answer is that there is only one way. If I can exchange insults, brutal jokes, dirty jokes, with a member of a different race and we both know it's not meant in a racist way. If, on the other hand, we play this politically correct game - 'Oh, I respect you, how interesting your customs are' - this is inverted racism, and it is disgusting.<br />
<br />
In the Yugoslav army where we were all of mixed nationalities, how did I become friends with Albanians? When we started to exchange obscenities, sexual innuendo, jokes. This is why this politically correct respect is just, as Freud put it, 'zielgehemmt'. You still have the aggression towards the other.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">You cannot do the game of erotic seduction in politically correct terms</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
For me there is one measure of true love: you can insult the other. Like in that horrible German comedy film from 1943 where Marika Röck treats her fiancé very brutally. This fiancé is a rich, important person, so her father asks her why are you treating him like that. And she gives the right answer. She says: 'But I love him, and since I love him, I can do with him whatever I want.' That's the truth of it. If there is true love, you can say horrible things and anything goes.<br />
<br />
When multiculturalists tell you to respect the others, I always have this uncanny association that this is dangerously close to how we treat our children: the idea that we should respect them, even when we know that what they believe is not true. We should not destroy their illusions. No, I think that others deserve better - not to be treated like children. <br />
<br />
<i><b>In your book on the subject you talk of a 'true universalism' as an opposite of this false sense of global harmony. What do you mean by that?</b></i><br />
<br />
<b>Slavoj Žižek</b>: Here I need to ask myself a simple Habermasian question: how can we ground universality in our experience? Naturally, I don't accept this postmodern game that each of us inhabits his or her particular universe. I believe there is universality. But I don't believe in some a priori universality of fundamental rules or universal notions. The only true universality we have access to is political universality. Which is not solidarity in some abstract idealist sense, but solidarity in struggle.<br />
<br />
If we are engaged in the same struggle, if we discover that - and this for me is the authentic moment of solidarity - being feminists and ecologists, or feminists and workers, we all of a sudden have this insight: 'My God, but our struggle is ultimately the same!' This political universality would be the only authentic universality. And this, of course, is what is missing today, because politics today is increasingly a politics of merely negotiating compromises between different positions. <br />
<br />
<i><b>The post-political subverts the freedom that has been talked about so much in recent weeks. Is that what you are saying?</b></i><br />
<br />
<b>Slavoj Žižek</b>: I do claim that what is sold to us today as freedom is something from which this more radical dimension of freedom and democracy has been removed - in other words, the belief that basic decisions about social development are discussed or brought about involving as many as possible, a majority. In this sense, we do not have an actual experience of freedom today. Our freedoms are increasingly reduced to the freedom to choose your lifestyle. You can even choose your ethnic identity up to a point.<br />
<br />
But this new world of freedom described by people like Ulrich Beck, who say everything is a matter of reflective negotiation, of choice, can include new unfreedom. My favourite example is this, and here we have ideology at its purest: we know that it is very difficult today in more and more professional domains to get a long-term job. Academics or journalists, for example, now often live on a two- or three-year contract, that you then have to renegotiate. Of course, most of us experience this as something traumatising, shocking, where you can never be sure. But then, along comes the postmodern ideologist: 'Oh, but this is just a new freedom, you can reinvent yourself every two years!'<br />
<br />
The problem for me is how unfreedom is hidden, concealed in precisely what is presented to us as new freedoms. I think that the explosion of these new freedoms, which fall under the domain of what Michel Foucault called 'care of the self', involves greater social unfreedom.<br />
<br />
Twenty or 30 years ago there was still discussion as to whether the future would be fascist, socialist, communist or capitalist. Today, nobody even discusses this. These fundamental social choices are simply no longer perceived as a matter to decide. A certain domain of radical social questions has simply been depoliticised.<br />
<br />
I find it very sad that, precisely in an era in which tremendous changes are taking place and, indeed entire social coordinates are transformed, we don't experience this as something about which we decided freely. <br />
<br />
<i><b>So, let's return to the aftermath of 11 September. We now experience a strange kind of war that we are told will not end for a long time. What do you think of this turn of events?</b></i><br />
<br />
<b>Slavoj Žižek</b>: I don't quite agree with those who claim that this World Trade Centre explosion was the start of the first war of the twenty-first century. I think it was a war of the twentieth century, in the sense that it was still a singular, spectacular event. The new wars would be precisely as you mentioned - it will not even be clear whether it is a war or not. Somehow life will go on and we will learn that we are at war, as we are now.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">The explosion of these new freedoms involves greater social unfreedom</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
What worries me is how many Americans perceived these bombings as something that made them into innocents: as if to say, until now, we had problems, Vietnam, and so on. Now we are victims, and this somehow justifies us in fully identifying with American patriotism.<br />
<br />
That's a risky gesture. The big choice for Americans is whether they retreat into this patriotism - or, as my friend Ariel Dorfman wrote recently: 'America has the chance to become a member of the community of nations. America always behaves as though it were special. It should use this attack as an opportunity to admit that it is not special, but simply and truly part of this world.' That's the big choice.<br />
<br />
There is something so disturbingly tragic in this idea of the wealthiest country in the world bombing one of the poorest countries. It reminds me of the well-known joke about the idiot who loses a key in the dark and looks for it beneath the light. When asked why, he says: 'I know I lost it over there, but it's easier to look for it here.'<br />
<br />
But at the same time I must confess that the left also deeply disappointed me. Falling back into this safe pacifist attitude - violence never stops violence, give peace a chance - is abstract and doesn't work here. First, because this is not a universal rule. I always ask my leftist friends who repeat that mantra: What would you have said in 1941 with Hitler. Would you also say: 'We shouldn't resist, because violence never helps?' It is simply a fact that at some point you have to fight. You have to return violence with violence. The problem is not that for me, but that this war can never be a solution.<br />
<br />
It is also false and misleading to perceive these bombings as some kind of third world working-class response to American imperialism. In that case, the American fundamentalists we already discussed, are also a working-class response, which they clearly are not. We face a challenge to rethink our coordinates and I hope that this will be a good result of this tragic event. That we will not just use it to do more of the same but to think about what is really changing in our world. <br />
<br />
<i><b>Dr Slavoj Žižek is professor of philosophy at University Ljubljana, Slovenia. He is currently a member of the Directors' Board at Kulturwissenschaftliches Institut in Essen, Germany.</b></i><br />
<br />
<i><b>Sabine Reul is sub-editor and Thomas Deichmann is chief editor of Novo, spiked's partner magazine in Germany. See the Novo website, where the full interview is published in German.</b></i></blockquote><br />
<div align="center"><a href="http://fleur-de-lis.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-__b6nnsrEpQ/UQqve4pxolI/AAAAAAAAg-U/74EyJkDE6MA/s1600/IdleNoMore-IndigenousRights_598x126.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 119px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 598px;" /></a></div><br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Multiculturalism: The Reality of an Illusion</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;">Slavoj Žižek. "Multiculturalism, the Reality of an Illusion." in: Lacan.com. 2009. (English).</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<blockquote>In a critical reading of my plenary talk at the Law and Critique Conference in 2007, Sara Ahmed challenges my claim that it is an “empirical fact” that liberal multiculturalism is hegemonic. [1] Her first step is to emphasize the distinction between the semblance of hegemony (ideological illusion) and actual hegemony:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Hegemony is not really reducible to facts as it involves semblance, fantasy and illusion, being a question of how things appear and the gap between appearance and how bodies are distributed. To read hegemony we have to distrust how things appear. Indeed, what is striking about Zizek’s retort is how much his reading of ‘political correctness’ and ‘liberal multiculturalism’ involved a certain literalism, as if the prohibition of speech acts that are not based on respecting the other’s difference are ‘really’ what is prohibited, or as if the prohibition is simply real by virtue of being articulated within public culture. So the speech act, ‘we must support the other’s difference’ is read as hegemonic, is taken literally as a sign not only that it is compulsory to support the other’s difference, but we are not allowed to refuse this support. The speech act is read as doing what it says. <br />
<br />
In order to re-consider the effects of such injunctions and prohibitions, I have introduced a new class of what I call non-performatives: speech acts that do not do what they say, that do not bring into effect that which they name. Could the speech work to create an illusion that we do support the other’s difference, which might work by not bringing such support into existence?</blockquote><br />
My point is double here. First, I agree with the category of “non-performative,” but with a twist: it is a performative, even a very efficient one, but a different one than it claims to be. There are other theoretical notions we can use to describe this duality: “pragmatic paradox,” the gap between the “subject of the enunciated” and the “subject of the enunciation,” ”double bind”; there are nonetheless differences between these notions. <br />
<br />
“Double bind” implies an unbearable subjective tension (the proverbial mother who explicitly enjoins her son to go away and start an autonomous life, but whose message between the lines is a desperate call to stay with her; the father who tells his son to act autonomously, so that if the son effectively does it, her thereby asserts his subordination to his father, since he followed his injunction), while the “non-performative” works smoothly, enabling you as it were to have a cake and eat it, i.e., to assert your superiority over the Other in/through the very gesture of guaranteeing his equality and your respect for his difference.<br />
<br />
When I claim that multiculturalism is hegemonic, I only claim that it is hegemonic as ideology, not that it described the reality of predominant social relations – which is why I criticize it so ferociously. So when Ahmed writes that “multiculturalism is a fantasy which conceals forms of racism, violence and inequality,” I only can add that this goes for every hegemonic ideology. I do not confuse ideological fantasy/illusion and fact – they are confused in reality: the reality of what Ahmed calls “civil racism” can only function through (in the guise of) the illusion of anti-racist multiculturalism. And, furthermore, an illusion is never simply an illusion: it is not enough to make the old Marxist point about the gap between the ideological appearance of the universal legal form and the particular interests that effectively sustain it – as is so common amongst politically-correct critics on the Left. The counter-argument that the form is never a ‘mere’ form, but involves a dynamic of its own which leaves traces in the materiality of social life, made by Claude Lefort and Jacques Rancière, is fully valid. After all the ‘formal freedom’ of the bourgeois sets in motion the process of altogether ‘material’ political demands and practices, from trade unions to feminism. Rancière rightly emphasizes the radical ambiguity of the Marxist notion of the gap between formal democracy with its discourse of the rights of man and political freedom and the economic reality of exploitation and domination. This gap between the ‘appearance’ of equality-freedom and the social reality of economic and cultural differences can either be interpreted in the standard symptomatic way, that is the form of universal rights, equality, freedom and democracy is just a necessary, but illusory expression of its concrete social content, the universe of exploitation and class domination. Or it can be interpreted in the much more subversive sense of a tension in which the ‘appearance’ of egaliberté, is precisely not a ‘mere appearance,’ but has a power of its own. This power allows it to set in motion the process of the re-articulation of actual socio-economic relations by way of their progressive ‘politicization’: why shouldn’t women also vote? Why shouldn’t conditions at the work place also be of public political concern? and so on. If the bourgeois freedom is merely formal and doesn’t disturb the true relations of power, why, then, didn’t the Stalinist regime allow it? Why was it so afraid of it? In the opposition between form and content, the form possesses an autonomy of its own – one can almost say: a content of its own. – Back to Ahmed, how, then, does multiculturalism as fantasy function?<br />
<br />
<blockquote>In such a fantasy, racism is ‘officially prohibited’. This is true. We are ‘supposed’ to be for racial equality, tolerance and diversity, and we are not ‘allowed’ to express hatred towards others, or to incite racist hatred. I would argue that this prohibition against racism is imaginary, and that it conceals everyday forms of racism, and involves a certain desire for racism. Take Big Brother and the Jade Goody story. You could argue that Big Brother’s exposure of racism functions as evidence that political correctness is hegemonic: you are not allowed to be racist towards others. But that would be a misreading. What was at stake was the desire to locate racism in the body of Jade Goody, who comes to stand for the ignorance of the white working classes, as a way of showing that ‘we’ (channel 4 and its well-meaning liberal viewers) are not racist like that. When anti-racism becomes an ego ideal you know you are in trouble.</blockquote><br />
The prohibition of racist speech should not then be taken literally: rather it is a way of imagining ‘us’ as beyond racism, as being good multicultural subjects who are not that. By saying racism is over there –‘look, there it is! in the located body of the racist’ – other forms of racism remain unnamed, what we could call civil racism. We might even say that the desire for racism is an articulation of a wider unnamed racism that accumulates force by not being named, or by operating under the sign of civility.<br />
<br />
The best example one can imagine of this are the presidential elections in France a couple of years ago when Jean-Marie le Pen made it into the second round: reacting to this racist-chauvinist threat, the entire “democratic France” joined their ranks behind Jacques Chirac who was reelected with an overwhelming majority of 80%. No wonder everyone felt good after this display of French anti-racism, no wonder people “loved to hate” le Pen: by way of clearly locating racism in him and his party, the general “civil racism” is rendered invisible. In a homologous way, there was, in Slovenia, around a year ago, a big problem with a Roma (Gipsy) family which camped close to a small town. When a man was killed in the camp, the people in the town started to protest against the Roma, demanding that they be moved from the camp (which they occupied illegally) to another location, organizing vigilante groups, etc. <br />
<br />
As expected, all liberals condemned them as racists, locating racism into this isolated small village, while none of the liberals, living comfortably in the big cities, had any everyday contact with the Roma (except for meeting their representatives in front of the TV cameras when they supported them). When the TV interviewed the “racists” from the town, they were clearly seen to be a group of people frightened by the constant fighting and shooting in the Roma camp, by the constant theft of animals from their farms, and by other forms of small harassments from the Roma. It is all too easy to say (as the liberals did) that the Roma way of life is (also) a consequence of the centuries of their exclusion and mistreatment, that the people in the nearby town should also open themselves more to the Roma, etc. – nobody clearly answered the local “racists” what they should concretely do to solve the very real problems the Roma camp evidently was for them.<br />
<br />
One of the most irritating liberal-tolerant strategies is to oppose Islam as a great religion of spiritual peace and compassion to its fundamentalist-terrorist abuse – whenever Bush or Netanyahu or Sharon announced a new phase in the War on Terror, they never forgot to include this mantra. (One is almost tempted to counter it by claiming that Islam is, as all religions, in itself a rather stupid inconsistent edifice, and that what makes it truly great are its possible political uses.) This is liberal-tolerant racism at its purest: this kind of “respect” for the other is the very form of appearance of its opposite, of patronizing disrespect. The very term “tolerance” is here indicative: one “tolerates” something one doesn’t approve of, but cannot abolish, either because one is not strong enough to do it or because one is benevolent enough to allow the Other to stick to its illusion – in this way, a secular liberal “tolerates” religion, a permissive parent “tolerates” his children’s excesses, etc.<br />
<br />
Where I disagree with Ahmed is in her supposition that the underlying injunction of liberal tolerance is monocultural – “Be like us, become British!” I claim that, on the opposite, its injunction is cultural apartheid: others should not come too close to us, we should protect our “way of life.” The demand “Become like us!” is a superego demand, a demand which counts on the other’s inability to really become like us, so that we can then gleefully “deplore” their failure. (Recall how, in the apartheid South Africa, the official regime’s ideology was multiculturalist: apartheid is needed so that all the diverse black tribes will not get drowned into our civilization…) The truly unbearable fact for a multiculturalist liberal is an Other who effectively becomes like us, while retaining its specific features.<br />
<br />
Furthermore, Ahmed passes between two forms of racism which should be distinguished. First, there is the “reflexive racism”: we use our non-racism to distinguish ourselves from the racist other and thus to castigate them in a racist way. More precisely, one should distinguish, in a kind of spectral analysis, three different modes of today’s racism. First, there is the old fashioned unabashed rejection of the (despotic, barbarian, orthodox, Muslim, corrupt, oriental…) Other on behalf of the authentic (Western, civilized, democratic, Christian…) values. Then there is the “reflexive” Politically Correct racism: the multiculturalist perception of Muslims or Balkans as the terrain of ethnic horrors and intolerance, of primitive irrational war passions, to be opposed to the post-Nation-State liberal-democratic process of solving conflicts through rational negotiations, compromises and mutual respect. Racism is here as it were elevated to the second power: it is attributed to the Other, while we occupy the convenient position of a neutral benevolent observer, righteously dismayed at the horrors going on down there. Finally, there is the reversed racism: it celebrates the exotic authenticity of the Balkan Other, as in the notion of Serbs who, in contrast to the inhibited, anemic Western Europeans, still exhibit a prodigious lust for life – this last form of racism plays a crucial role in the success of Emir Kusturica’s films in the West. – Second, racists themselves become a “threatened minority” whose free speech must be protected, i.e., they<br />
<blockquote>use the prohibition as evidence that racism is a minority position which has to be defended against the multicultural hegemony. Racism can then be articulated as a minority position, a refusal of orthodoxy. In this perverse logic, racism can then be embraced as a form of free speech. We have articulated a new discourse of freedom: as the freedom to be offensive, in which racism becomes an offence that restores our freedom: the story goes, we have worried too much about offending the other, we must get beyond this restriction, which sustains the fantasy that ‘that’ was the worry in the first place. Note here that the other, especially the Muslim subject who is represented as easily offended, becomes the one who causes injury, insofar as it is the Muslim other’s ‘offendability’ that is read as restricting our free speech. The offendable subject ‘gets in the way’ of our freedom. So rather than saying racism is prohibited by the liberal multicultural consensus, under the banner of respect for difference, I would argue that racism is what is protected under the banner of free speech through the appearance of being prohibited.</blockquote><br />
The thing to do here is to supplement Ahmed’s presentation with different, unexpected, examples which render visible unexpected consequences and links of her theoretical propositions. Notice the paradox of Chomsky here: he wrote a preface to a book by Jean Faurisson, a holocaust-denier, defending the right for the book to be published. Chomsky made it clear that he is personally disgusted by Faurisson’s reasoning; his problem is that, once we start to prohibit certain opinions, who will be next in line? The question is thus: how to counteract the fake liberal prohibition of racism? In the Chomsky mode, or by replacing it with a “true” prohibition?<br />
<br />
Another unexpected example: according to Jean-Claude Milner, a unified Europe can only constitute itself on the condition of the progressive erasure of all divisive historical traditions and legitimizations: consequently, the unified Europe is based on the erasure of history, of historical memory. Recent phenomena like holocaust revisionism, the moral equation of all victims of the WWII (Germans suffered under the Allied bombardments no less than Russians and Englishmen; the fate of the Nazi collaborators liquidated by the Russians after the war is comparable to the victims of the Nazi genocide, etc.), are the logical outcome of this tendency: all specified limits are potentially erased on behalf of abstract suffering and victimization. And – this is what Milner is aiming at all along – this Europe, in its very advocacy of the unlimited openness and multicultural tolerance, again needs the figure of the “Jew” as a structural obstacle to this drive to unlimited unification; however, today’s anti-Semitism is no longer the old ethnic anti-Semitism; its focus is displaced from Jews as an ethnic group to the State of Israel: “in the program of the Europe of the 21st century, the State of Israel occupies exactly the position that the name ‘Jew’ occupied in the Europe before the cut of 39-45.” In this way, today’s anti-Semitism can present itself as anti-anti-Semitism, full of solidarity with the victims of the holocaust; the reproach is just that, in our era of the gradual dissolution of all limits, of the fluidification of all traditions, the Jews wanted to built their own clearly delimited Nation-State – here are the very last lines of Milner’s book: [2]<br />
<blockquote>If modernity is defined by the belief into an unlimited realization of dreams, our future is fully outlined. It leads through the absolute theoretical and practical anti-Judaism. To follow Lacan beyond what he explicitly stated, the foundations of a new religion are thus posited: anti-Judaism will be the natural religion of the humanity-to-come.</blockquote><br />
Is Milner, a passionate pro-Zionist, not relying here on the same logic as Ahmed? Are, in his view, Jews not caught in the same paradoxical predicament as, say, the British Muslims: they were offered all the civil rights, the chance to integrate into our society, but, ungrateful as they are, they persisted in their separate way of life? Plus, like Muslims, they are perceived as over-offendable, seeing everywhere “anti-Semitism”… Milner’s point is thus that the official anti-anti-Semitism, prohibiting it (recall the case of David Irving), is the form of appearance of secret anti-Semitism. – Back to Ahmed’s line of argumentation: the hegemony of multiculturalism is thus not a direct hegemony, but a reflexive one:<br />
<blockquote>the hegemonic position is that liberal multiculturalism is the hegemony. This is why the current monoculture political agenda functions as a kind of retrospective defense against multiculturalism. The explicit argument of New Labor is that multiculturalism went ‘too far’: we gave the other ‘too much’ respect, we celebrated difference ‘too much’, such that multiculturalism is read as the cause of segregation, riots and even terrorism.”</blockquote><br />
I totally agree with the general principle that “hegemonies are often presented as minority positions, as defenses against what are perceived to be hegemonic positions” – Today’s celebration of “minorities” and “marginals” IS the predominant majority position. I would only add a series of other examples, like the neocons who complain about the terror of liberal Political Correctness, presenting themselves as protectors of an endangered minority. Or take those critics of patriarchy who attack it as if it is still a hegemonic position, ignoring what Marx and Engels wrote more than 150 years ago, in the first chapter of <i>The Communist Manifesto</i>: “The bourgeoisie, wherever it has got the upper hand, has put an end to all feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations.” – is still ignored by those Leftist cultural theorists who focus their critique on patriarchal ideology and practice. Is it not the time to start to wonder about the fact that the critique of patriarchal “phallogocentrism” etc. was elevated into a main target at the very historical moment – ours – when patriarchy definitely lost its hegemonic role, when it is progressively swept away by market individualism of Rights? What becomes of patriarchal family values when a child can sue his parents for neglect and abuse, i.e., when family and parenthood itself are de iure reduced to a temporary and dissolvable contract between independent individuals? (And, incidentally, Freud was no less aware of this: for him, the decline of the Oedipal mode of socialization was the historical condition of the rise of psychoanalysis.) [3] In other words, the critical statement that patriarchal ideology continues to be today’s hegemonic ideology IS today’s hegemonic ideology – its function is to enable us to evade the deadlock of the hedonist permissiveness which is effectively hegemonic.<br />
<br />
On February 7 2008, the Archbishop of Canterbury told BBC Radio 4’s World at One that the adoption of certain aspects of Sharia law in the UK “seems unavoidable”: the UK has to “face up to the fact” that some of its citizens do not relate to the British legal system, so that adopting parts of Islamic Sharia law would help maintain social cohesion. He stressed that “nobody in their right mind would want to see in this country the kind of inhumanity that’s sometimes been associated with the practice of the law in some Islamic states; the extreme punishments, the attitudes to women as well”; however, an approach to law which simply said “there’s one law for everybody and that’s all there is to be said, and anything else that commands your loyalty or allegiance is completely irrelevant in the processes of the courts – I think that’s a bit of a danger”. Muslims should not have to choose between “the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty”. The issue of whether Catholic adoption agencies should be forced to accept gay parents under equality laws already showed the potential for legal confusion: “The principle that there is only one law for everybody is an important pillar of our social identity as a Western democracy. But I think it is a misunderstanding to suppose this means people don’t have other affiliations, other loyalties which shape and dictate how they behave in society and that the law needs to take some account of that.” People may legally devise their own way to settle a dispute in front of an agreed third party as long as both sides agree to the process. Muslim Sharia courts and the Jewish Beth Din come into this category: the country’s main Beth Din at Finchley in north London oversees a wide range of cases including divorce settlements, contractual rows between traders and tenancy disputes; in a similar way, Muslims should be allowed to choose to have marital disputes or financial matters dealt with in a Sharia court. [4]<br />
<br />
However, with all my sympathies for Rowan Williams, I think the devil hides in the details of his proposal, where the old dilemma of group versus individual rights explodes with a vengeance. Williams is careful enough to emphasize two limitations of his proposal: (1) individual Muslims should retain a choice: they should not be forced to obey Sharia, but just allowed to choose it; (2) Sharia should be implemented only in certain areas, applying norms which are not in conflict with the general law (marital disputes, not amputations of hands for theft…). But if we fully follow these two principles, then nothing radical really happens: if some group of people want to regulate their affairs in a way which adds new additional rules without infringing upon the existing legal order, so what? Things get problematic the moment we move a step further and concede to one’s particular ethnic-religious community a more substantial role of the unsurpassable roots of one’s existence.<br />
<br />
This is what makes the issue of universal compulsory education so hot: when liberals insist that children should be given the right to remain part of their particular community, but on condition that they are given a choice, for, say, the Amish children to have an effectively free choice of which way of life to choose, their parents’ or the “English,” they would have to be properly informed on all the options, educated in them – however, the only way to do this would be to extract them from their embeddedness in the Amish community, i.e., to effectively render them “English.” This also clearly demonstrates the limitations of the standard liberal attitude towards the Muslim women wearing a veil: they can do it if it is their free choice and not an option imposed on them by their husbands or family. However, the moment women wear a veil as the result of their free individual choice, the meaning of wearing a veil changes completely: it is no longer a sign of their direct substantial belonging to the Muslim community, but an expression of their idiosyncratic individuality, of their spiritual quest and protest against the vulgarity of today’s sexual commerce, or a political gesture of protesting the West. A choice is always a meta-choice, a choice of the modality of the choice itself: one thing is to wear a veil because of one’s immediate immersion into a substantial tradition; another thing is to refuse to wear a veil; yet another thing is to wear a veil not out of substantial belonging, but as an act of ethico-political choice. This is why, in our secular societies of choice, people who maintain a substantial religious belonging are in a subordinate position: even if they are allowed to maintain their belief, this belief is “tolerated” as their idiosyncratic personal choice/opinion; the moment they present it publicly as what it is for them (a matter of substantial belonging), they are accused of “fundamentalism.” What this means is that the “subject of free choice” (in the Western “tolerant” multicultural sense) can only emerge as the result of an extremely violent process of being torn out of one’s particular life-world, of being cut off from one’s roots.<br />
<br />
Western secular law not only promotes different content of the laws subjects are compelled to obey than religious legal edifices, it also relies on a different formal mode of how subjects relate to legal regulations. This is what misses the simple reduction of the gap that separates the liberal universalism from particular substantial ethnic identities to a gap between two particularities (“liberal universalism is an illusion, a mask concealing its own particularity which it imposes onto others as universal”): the universalism of a Western liberal society does not reside in the fact that its values (human rights, etc.) are universal in the sense of holding for ALL cultures, but in a much more radical sense: in it, individuals relate to themselves as “universal,” they participate in the universal dimension directly, by-passing their particular social position. The problem with particular laws for particular ethnic/religious groups is that not all people experience themselves as belonging to a particular ethnic/religious community – so apart from people belonging to groups, there should be “universal” individuals who just belong to the state law. Apart from apples, pears, and grapes, there should be a place for fruits as such. – The catch is here that of the freedom of choice given to you if you make the right choice: others should be tolerated if they accept our society –<br />
<blockquote>this involves a reading of the other as abusing our multicultural love: as if to say, we gave our love to you, and you abused our love by living apart from us, so now you must become British. There is a threat implied here: become us, become like us (and support democracy and give up the burqa, so we can see your face and communicate with you like the ordinary people we are) or go away. /…/ Migrants enter the national consciousness as ungrateful. Ironically then racism becomes attributed to the failure of migrants to receive our love. The monocultural hegemony involves the fantasy that multiculturalism is the hegemony. The best description of today’s hegemony is ‘liberal monoculturalism’ in which common values are read as under threat by the support for the other’s difference, as a form of support that supports the fantasy of the nation as being respectful at the same time as it allows the withdrawal of this so-called respect. The speech act that declares liberal multiculturalism as hegemonic is thus the hegemonic position.</blockquote><br />
If we formulate the problem in these terms, the alternative amounts to: either “true” multiculturalism, or we should drop the universal claim as such. Both solutions are wrong, for the simple reason that they are not different at all, but ultimately coincide: “true” multiculturalism would have been the utopia of a neutral universal legal frame enabling each particular culture to assert its identity. The thing to do is to change the entire field, introducing a totally different Universal, that of an antagonistic struggle which does not take place between particular communities, but splits from within each community, so that the “trans-cultural” link between communities is that of a shared struggle.<br />
<br />
Notes<br />
<br />
[1] Sara Ahmed, “‘Liberal Multiculturalism is the Hegemony – Its an Empirical Fact’ – A response to Slavoj Zizek” (unpublished manuscript).<br />
Furthermore, the liberal-multiculturalist’s opposition to direct racism is not a mere illusion whose truth is the protection of racism: there is a class-coded dimension in it of which Ahmed is aware, directed against (white) working class fundamentalism/racism/antifeminism.<br />
<br />
[2] Jean-Claude Milner, Les penchants criminels de l’Europe démocratique, Paris: Éditions Verdier 2003, p. 126.<br />
<br />
[3] One of the feminist strategies (especially in France and Italy) is to admit that the paternal authority is disintegrating, and that late capitalism is approaching a globalized perverse society of “pathological narcissists” caught into the superego call to enjoy; but to claim that, to counter this lack, a new figure of authority is emerging “from below,” unnoticed by the media – the symbolic authority of the mother which has nothing to do with the traditional patriarchal figure of Mother – a new mother is here which doesn’t fit the existing ideological coordinates. The problem with this solution is that it as a rule amounts to descriptions of and generalizations of actual cases of (single and other) mothers who have to take care of children – in short, it reads as (sometimes almost Catholic-sentimental) description of heroic and compassionate single who keep children or the family together when the father is absent. Such an approach doesn’t really confront the key question, that of the Name-of-the-Father. That is to say, the Name-of-the-Father plays a key role in structuring the symbolic space, sustaining prohibitions which constitute and stabilize desires – what happens with this role with the maternal authority? Also, for Lacan, the Name-of-the-Father only functions when recognized – referred to – by the mother, i.e., for him, the Name-of-the-Father is a structuring principle for the entire field of sexual difference – one can well imagine a lesbian family/couple raising children where, although there is no father, the Name-of-the-Father is fully operative. So what happens with sexual difference, as well as with the symbolic function of the father, with the rise of the maternal authority?<br />
<br />
[4] It is interesting to note that the Evo Morales government in Bolivia is pursuing a similar goal: it set itself the task of exploring the possibilities of combining the legal order of a modern state with old native practices to resolve conflictual situations.</blockquote><br />
<div align="center"><a href="http://fleur-de-lis.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-__b6nnsrEpQ/UQqve4pxolI/AAAAAAAAg-U/74EyJkDE6MA/s1600/IdleNoMore-IndigenousRights_598x126.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 119px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 598px;" /></a></div><br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Liberal multiculturalism masks an old barbarism with a human face</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Across Europe, the politics of the far right is infecting us all with the need for a 'reasonable' anti-immigration policy</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Slavoj Zizek | The Guardian | Sunday 3 October 2010 22.00 BST</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<blockquote>The recent expulsion of Roma, or Gypsies, from France drew protests from all around Europe – from the liberal media but also from top politicians, and not only from those on the left. But the expulsions went ahead, and they are just the tip of a much larger iceberg of European politics.<br />
<br />
A month ago, a book by Thilo Sarrazin, a bank executive who was considered politically close to the Social Democrats, caused an uproar in Germany. Its thesis is that German nationhood is threatened because too many immigrants are allowed to maintain their cultural identity. Although the book, titled Germany Does Away with Itself, was overwhelmingly condemned, its tremendous impact suggests that it touched a nerve.<br />
<br />
Incidents like these have to be seen against the background of a long-term rearrangement of the political space in western and eastern Europe. Until recently, most European countries were dominated by two main parties that addressed the majority of the electorate: a right-of-centre party (Christian Democrat, liberal-conservative, people's) and a left-of-centre party (socialist, social-democratic), with smaller parties (ecologists, communists) addressing a narrower electorate.<br />
<br />
Recent electoral results in the west as well as in the east signal the gradual emergence of a different polarity. There is now one predominant centrist party that stands for global capitalism, usually with a liberal cultural agenda (for example, tolerance towards abortion, gay rights, religious and ethnic minorities). Opposing this party is an increasingly strong anti-immigrant populist party which, on its fringes, is accompanied by overtly racist neofascist groups. The best example of this is Poland where, after the disappearance of the ex-communists, the main parties are the "anti-ideological" centrist liberal party of the prime minister Donald Tusk and the conservative Christian Law and Justice party of the Kaczynski brothers. Similar tendencies are discernible in the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and Hungary. How did we get here?<br />
<br />
After decades of hope held out by the welfare state, when financial cuts were sold as temporary, and sustained by a promise that things would soon return to normal, we are entering a new epoch in which crisis – or, rather, a kind of economic state of emergency, with its attendant need for all sorts of austerity measures (cutting benefits, diminishing health and education services, making jobs more temporary) is permanent. Crisis is becoming a way of life.<br />
<br />
After the disintegration of the communist regimes in 1990, we entered a new era in which the predominant form of the exercise of state power became a depoliticised expert administration and the co-ordination of interests. The only way to introduce passion into this kind of politics, the only way to actively mobilise people, is through fear: the fear of immigrants, the fear of crime, the fear of godless sexual depravity, the fear of the excessive state (with its burden of high taxation and control), the fear of ecological catastrophe, as well as the fear of harassment (political correctness is the exemplary liberal form of the politics of fear).<br />
<br />
Such a politics always relies on the manipulation of a paranoid multitude – the frightening rallying of frightened men and women. This is why the big event of the first decade of the new millennium was when anti-immigration politics went mainstream and finally cut the umbilical cord that had connected it to far right fringe parties. From France to Germany, from Austria to Holland, in the new spirit of pride in one's cultural and historical identity, the main parties now find it acceptable to stress that immigrants are guests who have to accommodate themselves to the cultural values that define the host society – "it is our country, love it or leave it" is the message.<br />
<br />
Progressive liberals are, of course, horrified by such populist racism. However, a closer look reveals how their multicultural tolerance and respect of differences share with those who oppose immigration the need to keep others at a proper distance. "The others are OK, I respect them," the liberals say, "but they must not intrude too much on my own space. The moment they do, they harass me – I fully support affirmative action, but I am in no way ready to listen to loud rap music." What is increasingly emerging as the central human right in late-capitalist societies is the right not to be harassed, which is the right to be kept at a safe distance from others. A terrorist whose deadly plans should be prevented belongs in Guantánamo, the empty zone exempted from the rule of law; a fundamentalist ideologist should be silenced because he spreads hatred. Such people are toxic subjects who disturb my peace.<br />
<br />
On today's market, we find a whole series of products deprived of their malignant property: coffee without caffeine, cream without fat, beer without alcohol. And the list goes on: what about virtual sex as sex without sex? The Colin Powell doctrine of warfare with no casualties (on our side, of course) as warfare without warfare? The contemporary redefinition of politics as the art of expert administration as politics without politics? This leads us to today's tolerant liberal multiculturalism as an experience of the Other deprived of its Otherness – the decaffeinated Other.<br />
<br />
The mechanism of such neutralisation was best formulated back in 1938 by Robert Brasillach, the French fascist intellectual, who saw himself as a "moderate" antisemite and invented the formula of reasonable antisemitism. "We grant ourselves permission to applaud Charlie Chaplin, a half Jew, at the movies; to admire Proust, a half Jew; to applaud Yehudi Menuhin, a Jew; … We don't want to kill anyone, we don't want to organise any pogrom. But we also think that the best way to hinder the always unpredictable actions of instinctual antisemitism is to organise a reasonable antisemitism."<br />
<br />
Is this same attitude not at work in the way our governments are dealing with the "immigrant threat"? After righteously rejecting direct populist racism as "unreasonable" and unacceptable for our democratic standards, they endorse "reasonably" racist protective measures or, as today's Brasillachs, some of them even Social Democrats, tell us: "We grant ourselves permission to applaud African and east European sportsmen, Asian doctors, Indian software programmers. We don't want to kill anyone, we don't want to organise any pogrom. But we also think that the best way to hinder the always unpredictable violent anti-immigrant defensive measures is to organise a reasonable anti-immigrant protection."<br />
<br />
This vision of the detoxification of one's neighbour suggests a clear passage from direct barbarism to barbarism with a human face. It reveals the regression from the Christian love of one's neighbour back to the pagan privileging of our tribe versus the barbarian Other. Even if it is cloaked as a defence of Christian values, it is itself the greatest threat to Christian legacy.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/oct/03/immigration-policy-roma-rightwing-europe">Guardian</a> :: <a href="http://www.egs.edu/faculty/slavoj-zizek/articles/multiculturalism-or-the-cultural-logic-of-multinational-capitalism/">EGS.edu</a> :: <a href="http://www.egs.edu/faculty/slavoj-zizek/articles/multiculturalism-the-reality-of-an-illusion/">EGS</a> :: <a href="http://www.lacan.com/essays/?page_id=454">Lacan</a> :: <a href="http://www.spiked-online.com/articles/00000002D2C4.htm">Spiked</a> :: <a href="http://www.infoamerica.org/teoria_articulos/zizek01.htm">Info America</a> :: <a href="http://www.soc.aau.dk/fileadmin/user_upload/kbm/VoF/Kurser/2011/Multiculturalism/slavoj_zizek-multiculturalism-or-the-cultural-logic-of-multinational-capitalism.pdf">SOC</a>]</span></strong></b></i></b></i></blockquote></div><br />
<br />
<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327922598170048610" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JSpbgoKp8LA/SfCVX96zuGI/AAAAAAAAEIs/qqvoPLfHrLA/s400/400_BlackLine.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 7px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 620px;" />Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-28052082229169726502013-02-12T13:05:00.000+02:002013-02-12T13:27:02.663+02:00Special Ops book confirms Manning/Wikileaks related Complaint to FBI, that Petraeus Fired to stop his support for Sustainable Security, exposing Nobel's “War is Peace” Fraud<div align="justify"><br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Special Ops book confirms Manning/Wikileaks/Breivik related Complaint to FBI, that Petraeus was Fired to stop his support for Sustainable Security, exposing Nobel's “War is Peace” Fraud</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Brandon Webb, a former Navy SEAL, and Jack Murphy, a former Green Beret, are authors of a new book <i>'Benghazi: The Definitive Report'</i>, where they allege Petraeus was taken down in a 'palace coup' by high-level intelligence officers who did not like the way he was running the CIA. On 19 November 2012, a submission to Washington DC FBI Director, James McJunkin, submitted evidence that FBI's Petraeus-Broadwell investigation was used as a convenient excuse to fire Petraeus, to prevent Petraeus from implementing a Sustainable Security Peace Plan, submitted to the CIA, as part of court documents, involving Wikileaks and Pfc Manning; on 15 October 2012.</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Andrea Muhrrteyn | Michael Zennie | Brandon Webb | Jack Murphy | 12 February 2013</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-pcG7CKQnTjg/URoX3RCu07I/AAAAAAAAhHA/yViCblpA34E/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_Benghazi_885x460.PNG"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ADgv_uuuihM/URoXm6FDBcI/AAAAAAAAhG0/dOrDKoi3baE/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_Benghazi_600x312.PNG" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 312px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Daily Mail Exclusive: David Petraeus was brought down after betrayal by vengeful CIA agents and his own bodyguards who made sure his affair was exposed, claims new book<br />
</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Brandon Webb, a former Navy SEAL, and Jack Murphy, a former Green Beret, reveal the new claims in their book 'Benghazi: The Definitive Report' | Petraeus was humiliated after a 'palace coup' by high-level intelligence officers who did not like the way he was running the CIA, authors say | The book also claims that Petraeus and Ambassador Chris Stevens were caught off guard by Benghazi consulate attack because they weren't briefed about on-going U.S. military operations in Libya | Webb and Murphy say Benghazi attack was a retaliation for secret raids authorized by Obama security adviser John Brennan<br />
</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Michael Zennie | 05:06 GMT, 10 February 2013 | Daily Mail.UK</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<br />
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-nl0Kvo5gQkk/URoYNu0SVNI/AAAAAAAAhHM/LQPJ1U1RMcg/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_Benghazi_320x468.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-nl0Kvo5gQkk/URoYNu0SVNI/AAAAAAAAhHM/LQPJ1U1RMcg/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_Benghazi_320x468.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 468px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 320px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote>David Petraeus was betrayed by his own bodyguards and vengeful high-ranking enemies in the CIA, who made sure his affair with his biographer was exposed to the public, a new book claims.<br />
<br />
MailOnline can reveal a new angle on the story that rocked Washington last fall. It comes from two retired special operations commandos - a Navy SEAL and a Green Beret - who say they discovered a plot against the former CIA director while doing research about the attacks on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.<br />
<br />
Senior CIA officers targeted Petraeus because they didn't like the way he was running the agency - focusing more on paramilitary operations than intelligence analysis. They used their political clout and their connections to force an FBI investigation of his affair with Paul Broadwell and make it public, according to '<i><b><a href="http://astore.amazon.com/ecofem-20/detail/B00AHCRRJS" target="_blank">Benghazi: The Definitive Report.</a></b></i>'<br />
<br />
'It was high-level career officers on the CIA who got the ball rolling on the investigation. It was basically a palace coupe to get Petraeus out of there,' Jack Murphy, one of the authors, told MailOnline.<br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Q5x7NX3RGYo/URoZTfAUcRI/AAAAAAAAhH8/R16-tOfWH-w/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_PetBodyguards_644x473.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-X0OvgSyIdKY/URoZLFODUEI/AAAAAAAAhHw/phljCSPETBw/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_PetBodyguards_600x441.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 441px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
Murphy and co-author Brandon Webb also revealed that the September 11 Benghazi terrorist attack that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, was retaliation by Islamist militants who had been targeted by covert U.S. military operations.<br />
<br />
The book claims that neither Stevens nor even Petraeus knew about the raids by American special operations troops, which had 'kicked a hornet's nest' among the heavily-armed fighters after the overthrow of Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi.<br />
<br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-InN9ouYk-Ns/URoZru7CqRI/AAAAAAAAhIU/L1tOWCNY7LY/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_UKDipVehicle_643x529.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BU5C4weIJkA/URoZkF0Q2YI/AAAAAAAAhII/Ss5S51NmW-U/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_UKDipVehicle_600x494.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 494px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
John Brennan, President Barack Obama's Deputy National Security Adviser, had been authorizing 'unilateral operations in North Africa outside of the traditional command structure,' according to the e-book. Brennan is Obama's pick to replace Petraeus as head of the CIA.<br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-dBK9T0_ELmM/URoaD3b3wbI/AAAAAAAAhIs/lGWH2wGidho/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_Brennan_643x459.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-QP_0wTokESQ/URoZ-anQsoI/AAAAAAAAhIg/l9X2DUbbDHA/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_Brennan_600x428.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 428px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
'<i><b><a href="http://astore.amazon.com/ecofem-20/detail/B00AHCRRJS" target="_blank">Benghazi: The Definitive Report</a></b></i>,' published by William Morrow and Company, is due out in e-book on Tuesday. The authors, Webb and Murphy, are editors of <a href="http://sofrep.com/">SOFREP.com</a>, a site devoted to news and stories written by current and former special operations commandos.<br />
<br />
Perhaps the most startling accusation in the book is that Petraeus' affair with his biographer Paula Broadwell was leaked by the members of his personal protection detail.<br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9ek2tk8ICvA/URoakGVysiI/AAAAAAAAhJE/_eZVEglLp8M/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_PetHollyBroadwell_643x438.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-yAmHjuxdQW4/URoaViNTPuI/AAAAAAAAhI4/DxwhNgpmG2U/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_PetHollyBroadwell_600x409.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 409px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
The authors say that senior intelligence officers working on the 7th floor of Central Intelligence headquarters in Langley, Virginia, used their political clout to ensure that the FBI investigated the former Army general's personal life.<br />
<br />
They then told Petraeus that they would publicly humiliate him if he didn't admit the affair and resign.<br />
<br />
'It was well known to Petraeus’s Personal Security Detachment (bodyguards) that he and Broadwell were having an affair. He wasn’t the only high-ranking Agency head or general engaged in extramarital relations, but when the 7th floor wanted Petraeus out, they cashed in their chips,' Webb and Murphy write.<br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ekAz6Qrzbkg/URoa4yvBLzI/AAAAAAAAhJc/4ljMq8KIvZs/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_PetraeusBroadwell_643x516.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-pHGUtbi92mo/URoawYCeRHI/AAAAAAAAhJQ/-ONUP41GlQ4/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_PetraeusBroadwell_600x481.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 481px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
The book continues: 'The reality of the situation is that high-ranking CIA officers had already discovered the affair by consulting with Petraeus’s PSD and then found a way to initiate an FBI investigation in order to create a string of evidence and an investigative trail that led to the information they already had—in other words, an official investigation that could be used to force Petraeus to resign.'<br />
<br />
Webb and Murphy said the CIA bureaucracy wanted Petraeus out of the CIA. Senior officials were furious over the way he had been running the agency since he was appointed in September 2011.<br />
<br />
He was turning the agency's focus from intelligence gathering and analysis to paramilitary operations, including drone strikes.<br />
<br />
Additionally, he ran the CIA like a four-star general, instead of treating it like a political institution, the authors say. His management style made countless powerful enemies within the CIA.<br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-0lx4ZNkJ8HU/URobHSPO7mI/AAAAAAAAhJ0/YKNXQ7VC7lw/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_PetHollyBroadwelli_645x513.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-82EBVfB5H7o/URobApA0YtI/AAAAAAAAhJo/NH656oKl6uE/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_PetHollyBroadwelli_600x477.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 477px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
On November 9, three days after Obama's reelection, Petraeus shocked the nation by resigning as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency and admitting that he had been sleeping with Broadwell - whom he had met while she was researching her biography of him, '<i><b>All In: The Education of General David Petraeus</b></i>.'<br />
<br />
Before he was publicly castigated, Petraeus was the most high-profile and highly-respected commander in the military. His counter-insurgency strategy was credited with turning the tide in the Iraq War and securing the country so U.S. troops could withdraw. He also commanded a surge of American forces in Afghanistan.<br />
<br />
Petraeus, 60, earned a Ph.D. from Princeton University and was hailed as a 'warrior scholar.' Before his resignation, he was mentioned as a possible vice presidential nominee for Republican candidate Mitt Romney.<br />
<br />
Petraeus' public image is in shambles after the affair went public.<br />
<br />
'It’s almost like they wanted him not just to resign but that they wanted him kicked out of the political game for at least a number of years,' Murphy told MailOnline.<br />
<br />
Media reports indicate that the FBI began investigating Petraeus' affair with Broadwell after Tampa socialite Jill Kelley, a friend of Petraeus and his wife Holly, reported that she had received threatening emails from the mistress warning her to stay away from Petraeus.<br />
<br />
The authors say that Kelley's report may have started in the FBI investigation - but CIA officers pressured the Justice Department to keep the inquiry open.<br />
<br />
Webb said his sources in the FBI told him federal agents wanted to close down their investigation when they learned that nothing illegal had happened, but they were told to keep digging. The FBI investigators, Webb says, never wanted to out Petraeus' affair.<br />
<br />
Murphy said he learned of the 'palace coup' from current and former members of the CIA.<br />
<br />
The authors claim that Petraeus was already on his way out when the scandal broke. They learned weeks before that he was interviewing for teaching jobs at Princeton University.<br />
<br />
Petraeus was furious, they say, because he was kept in the dark about the raids being conducted without his knowledge by the Pentagon's Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) across Libya and North Africa.<br />
<br />
Webb and Murphy claim that the September 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. consulate and a CIA outpost in Benghazi proved to Petraeus that he was an outsider in the Obama administration and that he would remain marginalized as long as he was at the CIA.<br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-UOgkTqOxCyo/URob3CJYPEI/AAAAAAAAhKM/axls4vOGgmU/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_Benghazi_642x447.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-KdHtqzqEMiM/URobsBeaLlI/AAAAAAAAhKA/4MEzlWlQNrs/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_Benghazi_600x418.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 418px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
The central premise of '<i><b><a href="http://astore.amazon.com/ecofem-20/detail/B00AHCRRJS" target="_blank">Benghazi: The Definitive Report</a></b></i>' is that the attacks were precipitated by secret raids JSOC had performed in Libya. An attack on the Islamist group Ansar al-Sharia days before September 11 may have been the final straw.<br />
<br />
Heavily-armed militants with Ansar al-Sharia attacked the consulate on September 11 as retaliation, the book claims. Ambassador Chris Stevens and Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith died of smoke inhalation when insurgents set fire to the consulate.<br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-4lz4L4z5h7w/URocOwhmNUI/AAAAAAAAhKk/v2PC8Hiunig/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_Stevens-Smith_650x474.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-vzZjRoELt8I/URocHr-U66I/AAAAAAAAhKY/gryN6NJWeQ4/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_Stevens-Smith_600x438.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 438px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
After the raid, the militants launched a second attack against a CIA annex across town. It was there that CIA security contractors Ty Woods and Glen Doherty - both former U.S. Navy SEALs - were killed when their position took a direct hit from an enemy mortar.<br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-QKQjFfx2PsA/URocc87kh0I/AAAAAAAAhK8/OqWEkYXAEQ8/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_GlenDoherty_651x468.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-z-eAl5JETyw/URocV9V-J5I/AAAAAAAAhKw/Dj8Q9I4toQ8/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_GlenDoherty_600x431.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 431px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
Webb and Murphy said they wrote the book to reveal 'the truth' behind the attack. They say news accounts of the incident have often been inaccurate because journalists have not had inside access to the people who were on the ground at the time.<br />
<br />
The authors have been frustrated, they say, by politicians who have attempted to twist the facts of the case to suit their own ends. Conservatives sought to use the attack as an election issue and place the blame on Obama.<br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2SssvzrV3Fc/URoY7SpBksI/AAAAAAAAhHk/P2TMdVNzbKk/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_BrandonWebb_644x466.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-b7nV-7L5XBc/URoYyLwvqeI/AAAAAAAAhHY/2jtZk6cXf9A/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_BrandonWebb_600x434.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 434px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
Democrats and the Obama administration have worked to deflect responsibility and downplay the warning signs that were present before the consulate was raided.<br />
<br />
Webb and Murphy claim that the 'inside' story of the attack - as told by their connections in the CIA and special operations units of the military - show that Brennan never warned the CIA or Stevens about ongoing U.S. military operations in the country.</blockquote><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-podRJyedUaQ/URocydQZzDI/AAAAAAAAhLI/p3tfsIxIXVY/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_SofrepSrci_320x538.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-podRJyedUaQ/URocydQZzDI/AAAAAAAAhLI/p3tfsIxIXVY/s1600/130212_SOFREP_PetraeusFired_SofrepSrci_320x538.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 538px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 320px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote>Had the State Department and the intelligence community known about what was happening, they would have stepped up security in Benghazi and could have prevented the tragedy.<br />
<br />
Webb counts Doherty, 42, as one of his best friends and he is furious that the real story of what happened has not yet surfaced.<br />
<br />
He said Doherty and a team of CIA security officers chartered a flight from Tripoli to Benghazi when the consulate came under attack - despite initial resistance from the CIA - to rush to the aid of the Americans who were in danger.<br />
<br />
Both authors are well-positioned to access classified insider information about the attack. They run SOFREP.com, a news site written and edited by current and former members of the special operations community.<br />
<br />
Webb served as an Navy SEAL for ten years and deployed overseas five times. He left the Navy in 2006. Murphy served eight years in the U.S. Army, including as an Army Ranger and a Special Forces Green Beret. He deployed overseas three times before retiring in 2010. He is currently studying political science at Columbia University. <br />
<br />
Calls to the White House were not returned on Saturday. The CIA could not be reached on Saturday.<br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;"><span style="color: #660000;">IN THEIR OWN WORDS: AUTHORS SAY BOOK IS THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE ACCOUNT OF THE BENGHAZI ATTACK </span></span></strong><br />
<br />
'<b><i><a href="http://astore.amazon.com/ecofem-20/detail/B00AHCRRJS" target="_blank">Benghazi: The Definitive Report</a></i></b>' is a short read at just 83 pages. However, it is packed with little-known details and exclusive information and background about the consulate attack. Here are a few key excerpts from the book:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>(Deputy National Security Advisor) John Brennan also ran a highly compartmentalized program out of the White House in regard to weapons transfers, and Stevens would not have been trusted with that type of information. Stevens likely helped consolidate as many weapons as possible after the war to safeguard them, at which point Brennan exported them overseas to start another conflict.<br />
<br />
During the rebellion against Gaddafi and in the aftermath of his death, Libya and North Africa became a staging ground for a dizzying array of operations by SpecOps, paramilitary forces, and international private military contractors working for everyone from European nations to multibillion-dollar oil corporations.<br />
<br />
What we do know is that the British Special Air Service (SAS) landed in Libya at some point—probably the secretive intelligence gathering component of the SAS called 'The Increment,' which works alongside MI-6.<br />
<br />
Elite counter-terrorist operators from America’s Delta Force were deployed to Libya as 'analysts,' which allowed President Obama to declare that America did not have any boots on the ground but was simply providing air support for the rebels. The reality was that Delta Force had a small contingent instructing the rebels in the finer points of weapons and tactics.<br />
<br />
Behind closed doors, President Obama had given his counterterrorism adviser, John Brennan, carte blanche to run operations in North Africa and the Middle East, provided he didn’t do anything that ended up becoming an exposé in The New York Times and embarrassing the administration. In 2012, a secret war across North Africa was well underway.<br />
<br />
With JSOC (Joint Special Operations Command), Brennan waged his own unilateral operations in North Africa outside of the traditional command structure. These Direct Action (DA) operations, unlike the traditional ISR missions mentioned above, were 'off the books' in the sense that they were not coordinated through the Pentagon or other governmental agencies, including the CIA. With Obama more than likely providing a rubber stamp, the chain of command went from Brennan to McRaven, who would then mobilize the men of ISA (Intelligence Support Activity), SEAL Team Six, or Delta Force to conduct these missions.<br />
<br />
With a small element launching from an airfield in a European nation, JSOC operations targeted Al Qaeda personalities within Libyan militia organizations. In the weeks before the Benghazi tragedy, they most likely hit a known associate of Al-Suri in order to get him to “up periscope” and increase his visibility, which would then make it possible for JSOC to run a targeted operation to kill or capture him.<br />
<br />
The aftermath of one of these secret raids into Libya would have grave consequences for all of them, including former Navy SEALs Ty Woods and Glen Doherty. SOFREP believes the Benghazi attack on 9/11/12 was blowback from the late-summer JSOC operations that were threatening the Al Qaeda-aligned militant groups (including Ansar Al-Sharia) in Libya and North Africa, now a leading base of operations for Islamic extremism.</blockquote></blockquote><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-y2aQBd9TY6Y/UK6gyr5eikI/AAAAAAAAfpU/mXEtgUQJzwE/s1600/12-11-21_CNNIReport_PetraeusFired_07_600x493.PNG"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-984U-kxq1PY/URoevs1RrQI/AAAAAAAAhME/q4HntT5wfcQ/s1600/12-11-21_CNNIReport_PetraeusFired_07_600x493.PNG" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 434px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Excerpts: Petraeus Fired to stop his support for Sustainable Security, exposing Nobel's “War is Peace” Fraud</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">HabeusMentem | Posted November 21, 2012 | CNN-IReport</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<br />
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-34He6LpsOLY/URodkq7Xq2I/AAAAAAAAhLg/CtH4Bh-oCbo/s1600/12-11-21_CNNIReport_PetraeusFired_01_600x493.PNG"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-DsYY4J-5ekQ/URode_7dOZI/AAAAAAAAhLU/1yqpsWrBUKU/s1600/12-11-21_CNNIReport_PetraeusFired_01_375x308.PNG" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 308px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 375px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote>(Washington DC): A submission made to Washington DC FBI Director, James McJunkin on 19 November, asks the FBI whether the FBI's Petraeus-Broadwell investigation was used as a convenient excuse to fire Petraeus, to prevent Petraeus from implementing a Sustainable Security Peace Plan, submitted to the CIA, as part of court documents, involving Wikileaks and Pfc Manning; on 15 October 2012.<br />
<br />
[..] Pfc Manning, his Peacenik and ‘Anti-War’ and ‘Peace’ supporters were challenged to sign the Maria Bochkareva Leaver Peacenik Oath, if they were Willing to Pay the One Child Per Family Price for Peace; and submit it to General David Petraeus at the Central Intelligence Agency.<br />
<br />
The Oath states: I hereby declare that I am a sincere peacenik, who is willing to pay the one child or less, per family, price of peace, by addressing the root causes of conflict, and helping to move the humans on Planet Earth onto a procreation trend towards peace. I furthermore hereby declare that I understand that if I violate this Leaver Peacenik One Child Oath, I thereby authorize the Central Intelligence Agency to remove me and my children from the Leaver genepool, by assassination.<br />
<br />
Signing the Oath additionally requests that if Pfc Manning signs the oath, the CIA Director is to make an official request to the relevant authority, for all charges against Pfc. Manning to be withdrawn.<br />
<br />
Finally, signing the oath requests the Central Intelligence Agency’s Kent Center to establish a fund for contributions in honour of Pfc Manning, to establish a ‘Maria Bochkareva Leaver Peacenik Honor Medal’, to be awarded on the 23rd of April, of every year, for the individual who has done the most to educate their community, or nation on the role of overpopulation and overconsumption as factors pushing society to conflict and war.<br />
<br />
[..] The Complaint to FBI McJunkin also includes significant evidence documenting the principles of National Environmental Security & Peace Strategy: Addressing Scarcity as an underlying Cause of Violent Conflict.<br />
<br />
[..] The submission to FBI McJunkin concludes: "So, Director McJunkin, what do you think? Was FBI’s Petraeus-Broadwell investigation used as a convenient excuse to fire Petraeus to Protect the ‘War is Peace Whores’ Human Factory Farming War Economy, from the threat of CIA-Petraeus’ implementation of Ecocentric ‘Maria Bochkareva’ Sustainable Security Proactive Peace Plan raised in USCAAF: CCR v. USA, and USSC: Alien on Pale Blue Dot vs. RCFP, et al?" [<a href="http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-884801">Read Further</a>]</blockquote><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-6-PUBqW2uso/UK6gMY9eKzI/AAAAAAAAfoY/r4eM7IIwWUQ/s1600/12-11-21_CNNIReport_PetraeusFired_02_600x490.PNG"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-BQZ9tIETxVc/URofTD9ncVI/AAAAAAAAhMQ/WCAVNhE3kvc/s1600/12-11-21_CNNIReport_PetraeusFired_02_600x490.PNG" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 490px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Petraeus Fired to stop his support for Sustainable Security Peace exposing Nobel's War is Peace Whores</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Nobel Peace Prizes Awarded for Reducing Scarcity: 0 | Nobel Peace Prizes Awarded for Reducing Overpopulation: 0 | Nobel Peace Prizes Awarded for Reducing Overconsumption: 0 | 900 Vietnam[1], 40 Iraq and Afghanistan[2] Veterans returned their ‘bullshit’ medals to U.S. Congress and NATO. | Nobel Peace Laureates returned their War is Peace Whore Medals: 0 </span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Andrea Muhrrteyn | 18 November 2012 | SQSwans</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<br />
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-7vHBOXh1d7Q/UKlLdue84hI/AAAAAAAAfmI/YrQ-j4MlWWc/s1600/Petraues-Broadwell_350x511.PNG"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Ng48AvYsZx0/URoeQQL_eSI/AAAAAAAAhL4/gZ8Gyko_lD0/s1600/Petraues-Broadwell_350x511.PNG" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 511px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 350px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote>Correspondence to Director McJunkin: Subject: FBI-DC: Dir McJunkin: RE: FBI's Petraeus Broadwell Investigation [(<a href="http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/121116_fbi-petraeus?mode=window&viewMode=singlePage">PDF</a>)]<br />
<br />
'All In' Bet: FBI’s Petraeus-Broadwell investigation was used as convenient excuse to fire Petraeus to Protect the ‘War is Peace Whores’ Human Factory Farming War Economy, from the threat of CIA-Petraeus’ implementation of Ecocentric ‘Maria Bochkareva’ Sustainable Security Proactive Peace Plan raised in USCAAF: CCR v. USA, and USSC: Alien on Pale Blue Dot vs. RCFP, et al? <br />
<br />
1. USCAAF & USSC Case Overview: Proactive Peace adoption of Scarcity as a Cause of Violent Conflict ‘Maria Bochkareva Oath’ Sustainable Security Plan<br />
<br />
2. General Petraeus and CIA’s Proactive Peace adoption of Scarcity as a Cause of Violent Conflict and ‘Maria Bochkareva Oath’ Sustainable Security Plan Threatened to expose the Norwegian Nobel Peace Prize - and its recipients, which include President Obama – as ‘War is Peace Whores’.<br />
<br />
3. Chronology: 15 Oct: CIA Leaver Peacenik Challenge of Manning’s Ecocentric Motives – 15 Nov: Nobel Laureates salute Manning as War is Peace Whore.<br />
<br />
4. National Environmental Security & Peace Strategy: Addressing Scarcity as an underlying Cause of Violent Conflict [<a href="http://norway-v-breivik.blogspot.com/2012/11/petraeus-fired-to-stop-his-support-for.html">Read Further</a>]</blockquote><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [<a href="http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-884801">CNN IReport</a> :: <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2276139/David-Petraeus-CIA-directors-bodyguards-exposed-affair-Paula-Broadwell-claims-Benghazi-The-Definitive-Report.html#axzz2Kfp9xL1C">Daily Mail.UK</a> :: <a href="http://norway-v-breivik.blogspot.com/2012/11/petraeus-fired-to-stop-his-support-for.html">NO v Breivik</a> :: <a href="http://norway-v-breivik.blogspot.com/2012/11/cnn-petraeus-fired-to-stop-his-support.html">NO v Breivik</a> :: <a href="http://sofrep.com/">SOFREP</a> :: <a href="http://astore.amazon.com/ecofem-20/detail/B00AHCRRJS">Amazon</a>]</span></strong></div><br />
<br />
<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327922598170048610" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JSpbgoKp8LA/SfCVX96zuGI/AAAAAAAAEIs/qqvoPLfHrLA/s400/400_BlackLine.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 7px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 620px;" />Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-87456551060255691232013-02-07T23:00:00.003+02:002013-02-08T09:48:20.285+02:00Anti-Corruption LAPD & US Navy Reservist Christopher Dorner goes on a Breivik-style suicide Manhunt of Corrupt LAPD Officers<div align="justify"><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Anti-Corruption LAPD & US Navy Reservist Christopher Dorner goes on a Breivik-style suicide Manhunt of Corrupt LAPD Officers</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Do you know why we are unsuccessful in asymmetrical and guerrilla warfare in CENTCOM theatre of operations? I’ll tell you. It’s not the inefficiency of our combatant commanders, planning, readiness or training of troops. Much like the Vietnam war, ACM, AAF, foreign fighters, Jihadist, and JAM have nothing to lose. They embrace death as it is a way of life. I simply don’t fear it. I am the walking exigent circumstance you created.<br />
<br />
Mr. Bill Cosby, you are a reasonable and talented man who has spoken the truth of the cultural anomalies within the black communities that need to change now. The black communities’ resentment toward you is because they don’t like hearing the truth or having their clear and evident dirty laundry aired to the nation. The problem is, the country is not blind nor dumb. They believe we are animals. Do not mute your unvarnished truthful speech or moral compass. Blacks must strive for more in life than bling, hoes, and cars. The current culture is an epidemic that leaves them with no discernible future. They’re suffocating and don’t even know it. .. We can not address this nation’s intolerant issues until we address our own communities morality issues first. </span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Andrea Murrhteyn & Christopher Dorner | SQSwans & Fox-LA | 07 February 2013</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-75H0IHg2iEc/URQVI_dns1I/AAAAAAAAhDs/NO6URdbLaLw/s1600/LA_ChrisDorner_Navy-LAPD_615x840.PNG"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-mDvFZOiiktY/URQU9vWWteI/AAAAAAAAhDg/liDoiNJjAls/s1600/LA_ChrisDorner_Navy-LAPD_375x513.PNG" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 513px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 375px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote>Southern California Police have announced a manhunt for former LAPD cop and US Navy reservist Christopher Jordan Dorner after two bodies were found that he is alleged to have killed in a parking lot in California, and Dorner publicized a 'suicide' manifesto wherein he announced his reasons for the killings, and future killings he intends to do (unless the LAPD clear his name) and why he is targeting corrupt LAPD Officers, whom he refers to as 'high value targets'.<br />
<br />
Dorner's lengthy 20-page manifesto, clarifies how he has exhausted all remedies from the California Justice system.<br />
<br />
Numerous news accounts name Dorner's victims as Monica Quan, 28, and Keith Lawrence, 27, her fiance and a USC public safety officer. Monica Quan is the daughter of retired LAPD Capt. Randy Quan, who became a lawyer after he retired, and is the man responsible for representing Dorner in his police tribunal hearings, that destroyed his police career.<br />
<br />
Other high value targets are alleged corrupt and Caucasian, African American, Mexican, Asian and lesbian racist and sexist police officers: <br />
<br />
<strong>"Those Caucasian officers who join South Bureau divisions (77th,SW,SE, an Harbor) with the sole intent to victimize minorities who are uneducated, and unaware of criminal law, civil law, and civil rights. You prefer the South bureau because a use of force/deadly force is likely and the individual you use UOF on will likely not report it. You are a high value target."<br />
<br />
"Those Black officers in supervisory ranks and pay grades who stay in south bureau (even though you live in the valley or OC) for the sole intent of getting retribution toward subordinate caucasians officers for the pain and hostile work environment their elders inflicted on you as probationers (P-1′s) and novice P-2′s. You are a high value target. You perpetuated the cycle of racism in the department as well. You breed a new generation of bigoted caucasian officer when you belittle them and treat them unfairly."<br />
<br />
"Those Hispanic officers who victimize their own ethnicity because they are new immigrants to this country and are unaware of their civil rights. You call them wetbacks to their face and demean them in front of fellow officers of different ethnicities so that you will receive some sort of acceptance from your colleagues. I’m not impressed. Most likely, your parents or grandparents were immigrants at one time, but you have forgotten that. You are a high value target." <br />
<br />
"Those lesbian officers in supervising positions who go to work, day in day out, with the sole intent of attempting to prove your misandrist authority (not feminism) to degrade male officers. You are a high value target."<br />
<br />
"Those Asian officers who stand by and observe everything I previously mentioned other officers participate in on a daily basis but you say nothing, stand for nothing and protect nothing. Why? Because of your usual saying, ” I……don’t like conflict”. You are a high value target as well."<br />
<br />
"Those of you who “go along to get along” have no backbone and destroy the foundation of courage. You are the enablers of those who are guilty of misconduct. You are just as guilty as those who break the code of ethics and oath you swore."<br />
<br />
"No one is saying you can’t be prejudiced or a bigot. We are all human and hold prejudices. If you state that you don’t have prejudices, your lying! But, when you act on it and victimize innocent citizens and fellow innocen officers, than that is a concern."</strong><br />
<br />
Other possible Dorner victims, include a Riverside County shooting that left one officer dead and two wounded. Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck called on Dorner to turn himself in: "This has gone far enough. Nobody else needs to die." He said Dorner "has multiple weapons at his disposal including assault rifles,'' and has police and military training. Beck said Los Angeles police have launched more than 40 protective details to provide security for law enforcement personnel and others who they believe Dorner targeted, based on Dorner's Manifesto.<br />
<br />
Dorners facebook page - <a href="http://www.facebook.com/chris.dorner.7">Chris.Dorner.7</a> - opened on January 21, appears to have been setup with a specific intention related to his Manifesto actions, considering that the second last photo (#215) on his facebook page is a compass 'North'; which his manifesto frequently refers to. The last photo #216 is simply a black square, implying possibly a 'black hole'. Also his favourite quote: "I never saw a wild thing feel sorry for itself. A small bird will drop frozen dead from a bough without ever feeling sorry for itself", by D.H. Lawrence; is also stated in his manifesto.</blockquote><br />
<a name='more'></a><div align="center"><a href="http://norway-v-breivik.blogspot.com/search/label/*%20Indigenous%20Rights"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-PPoqYBini2A/URQPk326FLI/AAAAAAAAhC8/UaglEq5829I/s1600/IdleNoMore-IndigenousRights_598x126.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 119px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 556px;" /></a></div><br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Uncensored Manifesto from Retired LAPD Officer Christopher Dorner</span></span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<br />
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Jme8lF8eed8/URQWE12IUhI/AAAAAAAAhD4/IoYZq3p3jgA/s1600/LA_ChrisDorner.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Jme8lF8eed8/URQWE12IUhI/AAAAAAAAhD4/IoYZq3p3jgA/s1600/LA_ChrisDorner.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 271px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 271px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote>From: Christopher Jordan Dorner /7648<br />
<br />
To: America<br />
<br />
Subj: Last resort<br />
<br />
Regarding CF# 07-004281<br />
<br />
I know most of you who personally know me are in disbelief to hear from media reports that I am suspected of committing such horrendous murders and have taken drastic and shocking actions in the last couple of days. You are saying to yourself that this is completely out of character of the man you knew who always wore a smile wherever he was seen. I know I will be villified by the LAPD and the media.<br />
<br />
Unfortunately, this is a necessary evil that I do not enjoy but must partake and complete for substantial change to occur within the LAPD and reclaim my name. The department has not changed since the Rampart and Rodney King days. It has gotten worse. The consent decree should never have been lifted. The only thing that has evolved from the consent decree is those officers involved in the Rampart scandal and Rodney King incidents have since promoted to supervisor, commanders, and command staff, and executive positions.<br />
<br />
The question is, what would you do to clear your name?<br />
<br />
Name; A word or set of words by which a person, animal, place, or thing is known, addressed, or referred to.<br />
<br />
Name Synonyms; reputation, title, appellation, denomination, repute.<br />
<br />
A name is more than just a noun, verb, or adjective. It’s your life, your legacy, your journey, sacrifices, and everything you’ve worked hard for every day of your life as and adolescent, young adult and adult. Don’t let anybody tarnish it when you know you’ve live up to your own set of ethics and personal ethos.<br />
<br />
In 8/07 I reported an officer (Ofcr. Teresa Evans/now a Sergeant), for kicking a suspect (excessive force) during a Use of Force while I was assigned as a patrol officer at LAPD’s Harbor Division. While cuffing the suspect, (Christopher Gettler), Evans kicked the suspect twice in the chest and once in the face. The kick to the face left a visible injury on the left cheek below the eye. Unfortunately after reporting it to supervisors and investigated by PSB (internal affairs investigator Det. Villanueva/Gallegos), nothing was done. I had broken their supposed “Blue Line”.<br />
<br />
Unfortunately, It’s not JUST US, it’s JUSTICE!!! In fact, 10 months later on 6/25/08, after already successfully completing probation, acquiring a basic Post Certificate, and Intermediate Post Certificate, I was relieved of duty by the LAPD while assigned to patrol at Southwest division. It is clear as day that the department retaliated toward me for reporting Evans for kicking Mr. Christopher Gettler. The department stated that I had lied and made up the report that Evans had kicked the suspect.<br />
<br />
I later went to a Board of Rights (department hearing for decision of continued employment) from 10/08 to 1/09. During this BOR hearing a video was played for the BOR panel where Christopher Gettler stated that he was indeed kicked by Officer Evans (video sent to multiple news agencies). In addition to Christopher Gettler stating he was kicked, his father Richard Gettler, also stated that his son had stated he was kicked by an officer when he was arrested after being released from custody. This was all presented for the department at the BOR hearing. They still found me guilty and terminated me.<br />
<br />
What they didn’t mention was that the BOR panel made up of Capt. Phil Tingirides, Capt. Justin Eisenberg, and City Attorney Martella had a signigicant problem from the time the board was assembled. Capt. Phil Tingirides was a personal friend of Teresa Evans from when he was her supervisor at Harbor station. That is a clear conflict of interest and I made my argument for his removal early and was denied. The advocate for the LAPD BOR was Sgt. Anderson. Anderson also had a conflict of interest as she was Evans friend and former partner from Harbor division where they both worked patrol together. I made my argument for her removal when I discovered her relation to Evans and it was denied.<br />
<br />
During the BOR, the department attempted to label me unsuccessfully as a bully. They stated that I had bullied a recruit, Abraham Schefres, in the academy when in reality and unfounded disposition from the official 1.28 formal complaint investigation found that I was the one who stood up for Abraham Schefres when other recruits sang nazi hitler youth songs about burning Jewish ghettos in WWII Germany where his father was a survivor of a concentration camp. How fucking dare you attempt to label me with such a nasty vile word. I ask that all earnest journalist investigating this story ask Ofcr. Abraham Schefres about the incident when Ofcr. Burdios began singing a nazi youth song about burning jewish ghettos.</blockquote><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-CIOcs-OL5HM/URQW0t-LK2I/AAAAAAAAhEQ/nzVU3crWVik/s1600/LA_ChrisDorner-navy2.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-bC9aJPdBWEU/URQWnsE7jRI/AAAAAAAAhEE/FdMqjG2UQ2I/s1600/LA_ChrisDorner-navy2_380x600.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 600px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 380px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote>The internal affairs investigation in the academy involving Schefres was spurned by a complaint that I had initiated toward two fellow recruit/offifcers. While on a assigned patrol footbeat in Hollywood Division, Officers Hermilio Buridios IV and Marlon Magana (both current LAPD officers) decided that they would voice their personal feelings about the black community. While traveling back to the station in a 12 passenger van I heard Magana refer to another individual as a nigger. I wasn’t sure if I heard correctly as there were many conversations in the van that was compiled of at least 8 officers and he was sitting in the very rear and me in the very front.<br />
<br />
Even with the multiple conversations and ambient noise I heard Officer Magana call an indivdual a nigger again. Now that I had confirmed it, I told Magana not to use that word again. I explained that it was a well known offensive word that should not be used by anyone. He replied, “I’ll say it when I want”. Officer Burdios, a friend of his, also stated that he would say nigger when he wanted. At that point I jumped over my front passenger seat and two other officers where I placed my hands around Burdios’ neck and squeezed. I stated to Burdios, “Don’t fucking say that”. At that point there was pushing and shoving and we were separated by several other officers. What I should have done, was put a Winchester Ranger SXT 9mm 147 grain bullet in his skull and Officer Magana’s skull.<br />
<br />
The Situation would have been resolved effective, immediately. The sad thing about this incident was that when Detective Ty from internal affairs investigated this incident only (1) officer (unknown) in the van other than myself had statements constistent with what actually happened. The other six officers (John Carey, Gary Parker, Jacob Waks, Abraham Schefres and names I have forgotten) all stated they heard nothing and saw nothing. Shame on every one of you. Shame on Detective Ty (same ethnicity as Burdios) for creating a separate 1.28 formal complaint against me (Schefres complaint) in retaliation for initiating the complaint against Burdios and Magana. Don’t retaliate against honest officers for breaking your so called blue line.<br />
<br />
I hope your son Ryan Ty, who I knew, is a better officer than you, Detective Ty.The saddest part of this ordeal was that Officer Burdios and Magana were only given 22 day suspensions and are still LAPD officers to this day. That day, the LAPD stated that it is acceptable for fellow officers to call black officers niggers to their face and you will receive a slap on the wrist. Even sadder is that during that 22 day suspension Buridios and Magana received is that the LAPPL (Los Angeles Police Protective League) paid the officers their salaries while they were suspended. When I took a two day suspension for an accidental discharge, I took my suspension and never applied for a league salary. Its called integrity.<br />
<br />
Journalist, I want you to investigate every location I resided in growing up. Find any incidents where I was ever accused of being a bully. You won’t, because it doesn’t exist. It’s not in my DNA. Never was. I was the only black kid in each of my elementary school classes from first grade to seventh grade in junior high and any instances where I was disciplined for fighting was in response to fellow students provoking common childhood schoolyard fights, or calling me a nigger or other derogatory racial names. I grew up in neighborhoods where blacks make up less than 1%. <br />
<br />
My first recollection of racism was in the first grade at Norwalk Christian elementary school in Norwalk, CA. A fellow student, Jim Armstrong if I can recall, called me a nigger on the playground. My response was swift and non-lethal. I struck him fast and hard with a punch an kick. He cried and reported it to a teacher. The teacher reported it to the principal. The principal swatted Jim for using a derogatory word toward me. He then for some unknown reason swatted me for striking Jim in response to him calling me a nigger. He stated as good Christians we are to turn the other cheek as Jesus did. Problem is, I’m not a fucking Christian and that old book, made of fiction and limited non-fiction, called the bible, never once stated Jesus was called a nigger. How dare you swat me for standing up for my rights for demanding that I be treated as a equal human being. That day I made a life decision that i will not tolerate racial derogatory terms spoken to me. Unfortunately I was swatted multiple times for the same exact reason up until junior high. Terminating me for telling the truth of a caucasian officer kicking a mentally ill man is disgusting. Don’t ever call me a fucking bully. I want all journalist to utilize every source you have that specializes in collections for your reports. With the discovery and evidence available you will see the truth. Unfortunately, I will not be alive to see my name cleared. That’s what this is about, my name. A man is nothing without his name. Below is a list of locations where I resided from childhood to adulthood.<br />
</blockquote><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-tP73uK5DzRc/URQXkjolesI/AAAAAAAAhEc/8FmtkNjcGxE/s1600/LA-Dorner-Navy_416x316.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-tP73uK5DzRc/URQXkjolesI/AAAAAAAAhEc/8FmtkNjcGxE/s1600/LA-Dorner-Navy_416x316.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 316px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 416px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote>Cerritos, CA.<br />
Pico Rivera, CA.<br />
La Palma, CA.<br />
Thousand Oaks, CA.<br />
Cedar City, UT.<br />
Pensacola, FL.<br />
Enid, OK.<br />
Yorba Linda, CA.<br />
Las Vegas, NV.<br />
<br />
During the BOR an officer named, Sgt. Hernandez, from Los Angeles Port Police testified on behalf of the LAPD. Hernandez stated for the BOR that he arrived at the location of the UOF shortly before I cuffed the suspect. He also stated that he assisted in cuffing the suspect and that’s old the BOR he told me to fix my tie. All of those statements were LIES!!! Hernandez, you arrived at the UOF location up to 30 seconds after I had cuffed Mr. Gettler. <br />
<br />
All you did was help me lift the suspect to his feet as it was difficult for me to do by myself because of his heavy weight. You did not tell me to fix my tie as the BOR members and everyone else in the room know you lied because the photographic evidence from the UOF scene where Gettler’s injuries were photographed clearly shows me wearing a class B uniform on that day. A class B uniform is a short sleeved uniform blouse. A short sleeved uniform blouse for the LAPD does not have a tie included. This is not Super Troopers uniform, you jackass. Why did you feel the need to embellish and lie about your involvement in the UOF? Are you ashamed that you could not get hired on by any other department other than port police? Do you have delusions of grandeur? What you did was perjury, exactly what Evans did when she stated she did not kick Christopher Gettler.<br />
<br />
What they failed to mention in the BOR was Teresa Evans own use of force history during her career on the LAPD. She has admitted that she has a lengthy use of force record and has been flagged several times by risk management. She has a very well known nickname, Chupacabra, which she was very proud to flaunt around the division. She found it very funny and entertaining to draw blood from suspects and arrestees. At one point she even intentionally ripped the flesh off the arm of a woman we had arrested for battery (sprayed her neighbor with a garden water hose). Knowing the woman had thin elastic skin, she performed and Indian burn to the woman’s arm after cuffing her. That woman was in her mid-70′s, a mother and grandmother, and was angry at her tenants who failed to pay rent on time. Something I can completely understand and I am sure many have wanted to do toward tenants who do not pay their rent. Teresa Evans was also demoted from a senior lead officer rank/position for performance issues. During my two months of working patrol with Teresa Evans, I found her as a woman who was very angry that she had been pulled from patrol for a short time because of a domestic violence report made by Long Beach Police Department because of an incident involving her active LAPD officer boyfriend, Dominick Fuentes, and herself. Dominick Fuentes is the same officer investigated for witness tampering. She also was visibly angry on a daily basis that she was going to have to file for bankruptcy because her ex-husband, a former LAPD officer and not Dominick Fuentes, who had left the department, state, and was nowhere to be found had left her with a tax bill and debt that she was unable to pay because of a lack of financial means. Evans, you are a POS and you lied right to the BOR panel when Randy Quan asked you if you kicked Christopher Gettler. You destroyed my life and name because of your actions. Time is up. The time is now to confess to Chief Beck.<br />
<br />
I ask that all journalist investigating this story submit request for FOIA with the LAPD to gain access to the BOR transcripts which occurred from 10/08 to 2/09. There, you will see that a video was played for the BOR members of Mr. Christopher Gettler who suffers from Schizophrenia and Dementia stating that he was kicked by a female officer. That video evidence supports my claim that Evans kicked him twice in the upper body and once in the face. I would like all journalist to also request copies of all reports that I had written while employed by LAPD. Whether in the academy, or during my 3 years as a police officer. There are DR#’s attached to each report (investigative report) that I have ever written so they all exist. A FOIA request will most likely be needed to access these at Parker center or at the Personnel/Records. Judge my writin/grammar skills for yourself. The department attempted to paint me as an officer who could not write reports. Even though Sgt. Joel Sydanmaa a training officer who trained me stated for the BOR panel that there was nothing wrong with my report writing and that I was better than all rookie/probationer officers he has ever trained. Officer David Drew stated the same but refused to testify as he did not want to “get involved” with the BOR’s. Contact Sgt. Donald Deming ,(now a Captain at Lompoc PD), Sgt. Thaddeus Faulk, and Sgt. Ed Clark. All will state that my report writing was impeccable. I will tell you this, I always type my reports because I have messy handwriting/penmanship. I never had a single kickback/redlined report at Southwest division and Sgt. Faulk and Sgt. Clark can testify to that. I never received an UNSATISFACTORY on any day or week. The same can be said within the U.S. Naval Reserves. All commanders will state that my report writing was always clear, concise, and impeccable. Even search my AAR (after action reports),chits, Memorandum’s, IIR’s (Intelligence Information Reports) which were written in the Navy. All were pristine.<br />
<br />
I had worked patrol at LAPD’s Harbor Division from 2/06 until 7/06 when I was involuntarily recalled back to active duty (US Navy) for a 12 month mobilization/deployment to Centcom in support of OIF/OEF. I returned back to LAPD’s Harbor division on 7/07 and immediately returned to patrol. I worked at Harbor division until 11/07 where I then transferred to Southwest Division. I worked At Southwest division until 6/25/08 when I was relieved of duty.<br />
<br />
I have exhausted all available means at obtaining my name back. I have attempted all legal court efforts within appeals at the Superior Courts and California Appellate courts. This is my last resort. The LAPD has suppressed the truth and it has now lead to deadly consequences. The LAPD’s actions have cost me my law enforcement career that began on 2/7/05 and ended on 1/2/09. They cost me my Naval career which started on 4/02 and ends on 2/13. I had a TS/SCI clearance(Top Secret Sensitive Compartmentalized Information clearance) up until shortly after my termination with LAPD. This is the highest clearance a service member can attain other than a Yankee White TS/SCI which is only granted for those working with and around the President/Vice President of the United States. I lost my position as a Commanding Officer of a Naval Security Forces reserve unit at NAS Fallon because of the LAPD. I’ve lost a relationship with my mother and sister because of the LAPD. I’ve lost a relationship with close friends because of the LAPD. In essence, I’ve lost everything because the LAPD took my name and new I was INNOCENT!!! Capt Phil Tingirides, Justin Eisenberg, Martella, Randy Quan, and Sgt. Anderson all new I was innocent but decided to terminate me so they could continue Ofcr. Teresa Evans career. I know about the meeting between all of you where Evans attorney, Rico, confessed that she kicked Christopher Gettler (excessive force). Your day has come.<br />
<br />
I’m not an aspiring rapper, I’m not a gang member, I’m not a dope dealer, I don’t have multiple babies momma’s. I am an American by choice, I am a son, I am a brother, I am a military service member, I am a man who has lost complete faith in the system, when the system betrayed, slandered, and libeled me. I lived a good life and though not a religious man I always stuck to my own personal code of ethics, ethos and always stuck to my shoreline and true North. I didn’t need the US Navy to instill Honor, Courage, and Commitment in me but I thank them for re-enforcing it. It’s in my DNA.<br />
<br />
Luckily I don’t have to live everyday like most of you. Concerned if the misconduct you were apart of is going to be discovered. Looking over your shoulder, scurrying at every phone call from internal affairs or from the Captains office wondering if that is the day PSB comes after you for the suspects you struck when they were cuffed months/years ago or that $500 you pocketed from the narcotics dealer, or when the other guys on your watch beat a transient nearly to death and you never reported the UOF to the supervisor. No, I don’t have that concern, I stood up for what was right but unfortunately have dealt with the reprocussions of doing the right thing and now losing my name and everything I ever stood for. You fuckers knew Evans was guilty of kicking (excessive force) Gettler and you did nothing but get rid of what you saw as the problem, the whistleblower. Gettler himself stated on video tape (provided for the BOR and in transcripts) he was kicked and even his father stated that his son said he was kicked by Evans when he was released from custody. The video was played for the entire BOR to hear. Tingirides, Eisenberg, and Martella all heard it. You’re going to see what a whistleblower can do when you take everything from him especially his NAME!!!<br />
<br />
Look what you did to Sgt. Gavin (now lieutenant) when he exposed the truth of your lying, racism, and PSB cover-ups to frame and convict an innocent man. You can not police yourselves and the consent decree was unsuccessful. Sgt. Gavin, I met you on the range several times as a recruit and as an officer. You’re a good man and I saw it in your eyes an actions.<br />
<br />
Self Preservation is no longer important to me. I do not fear death as I died long ago on 1/2/09. I was told by my mother that sometimes bad things happen to good people. I refuse to accept that.<br />
<br />
From 2/05 to 1/09 I saw some of the most vile things humans can inflict on others as a police officer in Los Angeles. Unfortunately, it wasn’t in the streets of LA. It was in the confounds of LAPD police stations and shops (cruisers). The enemy combatants in LA are not the citizens and suspects, it’s the police officers.<br />
<br />
People who live in glass houses should not throw stones. How ironic that you utilize a fixed glass structure as your command HQ. You use as a luminous building to symbolize that you are transparent, have nothing to hide, or suppress when in essence, concealing, omitting, and obscuring is your forte.<br />
<br />
Chief Beck, this is when you need to have that come to Jesus talk with Sgt. Teresa Evans and everyone else who was involved in the conspiracy to have me terminated for doing the right thing. you also need to speak with her attorney, Rico, and his conversation with the BOR members and her confession of guilt in kicking Mr. Gettler. I’ll be waiting for a PUBLIC response at a press conference. When the truth comes out, the killing stops.<br />
<br />
Why didn’t you charge me with filing a false police report when I came forward stating that Evans kicked Mr. Christopher Gettler? You file criminal charges against every other officer who is accused and terminated for filing a false police report. You didn’t because you knew I was innocent and a criminal court would find me innocent and expose your department for suppressing the truth and retaliation, that’s why.<br />
<br />
The attacks will stop when the department states the truth about my innocence, PUBLICLY!!! I will not accept any type of currency/goods in exchange for the attacks to stop, nor do i want it. I want my name back, period. There is no negotiation. I am not the state department who states they do not negotiate with terrorist, because anybody with a Secret or TS/SCI has seen IIR’s on SIPR and knows that the US state department always negotiates by using CF countries or independent sovereign/neutral country to mediate and compromising.<br />
<br />
This department has not changed from the Daryl Gates and Mark Fuhrman days. Those officers are still employed and have all promoted to Command staff and supervisory positions. I will correct this error. Are you aware that an officer (a rookie/probationer at the time) seen on the Rodney King videotape striking Mr. King multiple times with a baton on 3/3/91 is still employed by the LAPD and is now a Captain on the police department? Captain Rolando Solano is now the commanding officer of a LAPD police station (West LA division). As a commanding officer, he is now responsible for over 200 officers. Do you trust him to enforce department policy and investigate use of force investigations on arrestees by his officers? Are you aware Evans has since promoted to Sergeant after kicking Mr. Gettler in the face. Oh, you Violated a citizens civil rights? We will promote you. Same as LAPD did with the the officers from Metro involved in the May Day melee at MacArthur Park. They promoted them to Sergeant (a supervisor role).<br />
</blockquote><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ifYVQsJdQwA/URQYiaGLYTI/AAAAAAAAhEo/ReEW7hQAmls/s1600/LA_ChrisDorner-navy3.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ifYVQsJdQwA/URQYiaGLYTI/AAAAAAAAhEo/ReEW7hQAmls/s1600/LA_ChrisDorner-navy3.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 306px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 373px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote>No one is saying you can’t be prejudiced or a bigot. We are all human and hold prejudices. If you state that you don’t have prejudices, your lying! But, when you act on it and victimize innocent citizens and fellow innocen officers, than that is a concern.<br />
<br />
For you officers who do the job in the name of JUSTICE, those of you who lost honest officers to this event, look at the name of those on the BOR and the investigating officers from PSB and Evans and ask them, how come you couldn’t tell the truth? Why did you terminate an honest officer and cover for a dishonest officer who victimized a mentally ill citizen.<br />
<br />
Sometimes humans feel a need to prove they are the dominant race of a species and they inadvertently take kindness for weakness from another individual. You chose wrong.<br />
<br />
Terminating officers because they expose a culture of lying, racism (from the academy), and excessive use of force will immediately change. PSB can not police their own and that has been proven. The blue line will forever be severed and a cultural change will be implanted. You have awoken a sleeping giant.<br />
<br />
I am here to change and make policy. The culture of LAPD versus the community and honest/good officers needs to and will change. I am here to correct and calibrate your morale compasses to true north.<br />
<br />
Those Caucasian officers who join South Bureau divisions (77th,SW,SE, an Harbor) with the sole intent to victimize minorities who are uneducated, and unaware of criminal law, civil law, and civil rights. You prefer the South bureau because a use of force/deadly force is likely and the individual you use UOF on will likely not report it. You are a high value target.<br />
<br />
Those Black officers in supervisory ranks and pay grades who stay in south bureau (even though you live in the valley or OC) for the sole intent of getting retribution toward subordinate caucasians officers for the pain and hostile work environment their elders inflicted on you as probationers (P-1′s) and novice P-2′s. You are a high value target. You perpetuated the cycle of racism in the department as well. You breed a new generation of bigoted caucasian officer when you belittle them and treat them unfairly.<br />
<br />
Those Hispanic officers who victimize their own ethnicity because they are new immigrants to this country and are unaware of their civil rights. You call them wetbacks to their face and demean them in front of fellow officers of different ethnicities so that you will receive some sort of acceptance from your colleagues. I’m not impressed. Most likely, your parents or grandparents were immigrants at one time, but you have forgotten that. You are a high value target.<br />
<br />
Those lesbian officers in supervising positions who go to work, day in day out, with the sole intent of attempting to prove your misandrist authority (not feminism) to degrade male officers. You are a high value target.<br />
<br />
Those Asian officers who stand by and observe everything I previously mentioned other officers participate in on a daily basis but you say nothing, stand for nothing and protect nothing. Why? Because of your usual saying, ” I……don’t like conflict”. You are a high value target as well.<br />
<br />
Those of you who “go along to get along” have no backbone and destroy the foundation of courage. You are the enablers of those who are guilty of misconduct. You are just as guilty as those who break the code of ethics and oath you swore.<br />
<br />
Citizens/non-combatants, do not render medical aid to downed officers/enemy combatants. They would not do the same for you. They will let you bleed out just so they can brag to other officers that they had a 187 caper the other day and can’t wait to accrue the overtime in future court subpoenas. As they always say, “that’s the paramedics job…not mine”. Let the balance of loss of life take place. Sometimes a reset needs to occur.<br />
<br />
It is endless the amount of times per week officers arrest an individual, label him a suspect-arrestee-defendant and then before arraignment or trial realize that he is innocent based on evidence. You know what they say when they realize an innocent man just had his life turned upside down?. “I guess he should have stayed at home that day he was discovered walking down the street and matching the suspects description. Oh well, he appeared to be a dirtbag anyways”. Meanwhile the falsely accused is left to pick up his life, get a new, family, friends, and sense of self worth.<br />
<br />
Don’t honor these fallen officers/dirtbags. When your family members die, they just see you as extra overtime at a crime scene and at a perimeter. Why would you value their lives when they clearly don’t value yours or your family members lives? I’ve heard many officers who state they see dead victims as ATV’s, Waverunners, RV’s and new clothes for their kids. Why would you shed a tear for them when they in return crack a smile for your loss because of the impending extra money they will receive in their next paycheck for sitting at your loved ones crime scene of 6 hours because of the overtime they will accrue. They take photos of your loved ones recently deceased bodies with their cellphones and play a game of who has the most graphic dead body of the night with officers from other divisions. This isn’t just the 20 something year old officers, this is the 50 year old officers with significant time on the job as well who participate.<br />
<br />
You allow an officer, Thaniya Sungruenyos, to attempt to hack into my credit union account and still remain on the job even when Det. Zolezzi shows the evidence that the IP address (provided by LAPFCU) that attempted to hack into my account and change my username and password leads directly to her residence. You even allow this visibly disgusting looking officer to stay on the job when she perjures (lies) in court (Clark County Family Court) to the judge’s face and denies hacking into my personal credit union online account when I attempted to get my restraint order extended. Det. Zolezzi provided the evidence and you still do nothing.<br />
<br />
How do you know when a police officer is lying??? When he begins his sentence with, “based on my experience and training”.<br />
<br />
No one grows up and wants to be a cop killer. It was against everything I’ve ever was. As a young police explorer I found my calling in life. But, As a young police officer I found that the violent suspects on the street are not the only people you have to watch. It is the officer who was hired on to the department (pre-2000) before polygraphs were standard for all new hires and an substantial vetting in a backround investigation.<br />
<br />
To those children of the officers who are eradicated, your parent was not the individual you thought they were. As you get older,you will see the evidence that your parent was a tyrant who loss their ethos and instead followed the path of moral corruptness. They conspired to hide and suppress the truth of misconduct on others behalf’s. Your parent will have a name and plaque on the fallen officers memorial in D.C. But, In all honesty, your parents name will be a reminder to other officers to maintain the oath they swore and to stay along the shoreline that has guided them from childhood to that of a local, state, or federal law enforcement officer.<br />
<br />
Bratton, Beck, Hayes, Tingirides, Eisenberg, Martella, Quan, Evans, Hernandez, Villanueva/Gallegos, and Anderson. Your lack of ethics and conspiring to wrong a just individual are over.<br />
Suppressing the truth will leave to deadly consequences for you and your family. There will be an element of surprise where you work, live, eat, and sleep. I will utilize ISR at your home, workplace, and all locations in between. I will utilize OSINT to discover your residences, spouses workplaces, and children’s schools. IMINT to coordinate and plan attacks on your fixed locations. Its amazing whats on NIPR. HUMINT will be utilized to collect personal schedules of targets. I never had the opportunity to have a family of my own, I’m terminating yours. Quan, Anderson, Evans, and BOR members Look your wives/husbands and surviving children directly in the face and tell them the truth as to why your children are dead.<br />
<br />
Never allow a LAPPL union attorney to be a retired LAPD Captain,(Quan). He doesn’t work for you, your interest, or your name. He works for the department, period. His job is to protect the department from civil lawsuits being filed and their best interest which is the almighty dollar. His loyalty is to the department, not his client. Even when he knowingly knows your innocent and the BOR also knows your innocent after Christopher Gettler stated on videotape that he was kicked and Evans attorney confessed to the BOR off the record that she kicked Gettler.<br />
<br />
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants-TJ. This quote is not directed toward the US government which I fully support 100%. This is toward the LAPD who can not monitor itself. The consent decree should not have been lifted, ever.<br />
<br />
I know your TTP’s, (techniques, tactics, and procedures). Any threat assessments you you generate will be useless. This is simple, I know your TTP’s and PPR’s. I will mitigate any of your attempts at preservation. ORM is my friend. I will mitigate all risks, threats and hazards. I assure you that Incident Command Posts will be target rich environments. KMA-367 license plate frames are great target indicators and make target selection even easier.<br />
<br />
I will conduct DA operations to destroy, exploit and seize designated targets. If unsuccessful or unable to meet objectives in these initial small scale offensive actions, I will reassess my BDA and re-attack until objectives are met. I have nothing to lose. My personal casualty means nothing. Just alike AAF’s, ACM’s, and AIF’s, you can not prevail against an enemy combatant who has no fear of death. An enemy who embraces death is a lose, lose situation for their enemy combatants.<br />
<br />
Hopefully you analyst have done your homework. You are aware that I have always been the top shot, highest score, an expert in rifle qualifications in every unit I’ve been in. I will utilize every bit of small arms training, demolition, ordnance, and survival training I’ve been given.<br />
<br />
Do you know why we are unsuccessful in asymmetrical and guerrilla warfare in CENTCOM theatre of operations? I’ll tell you. It’s not the inefficiency of our combatant commanders, planning, readiness or training of troops. Much like the Vietnam war, ACM, AAF, foreign fighters, Jihadist, and JAM have nothing to lose. They embrace death as it is a way of life. I simply don’t fear it. I am the walking exigent circumstance you created.<br />
<br />
The Violence of action will be HIGH. I am the reason TAC alert was established. I will bring unconventional and asymmetrical warfare to those in LAPD uniform whether on or off duty. ISR is my strength and your weakness. You will now live the life of the prey. Your RD’s and homes away from work will be my AO and battle space. I will utilize every tool within INT collections that I learned from NMITC in Dam Neck. You have misjudged a sleeping giant. There is no conventional threat assessment for me. JAM, New Ba’ath party, 1920 rev BGE, ACM, AAF, AQAP, AQIM and AQIZ have nothing on me. Do not deploy airships or gunships. SA-7 Manpads will be waiting. As you know I also own Barrett .50′s so your APC are defunct and futile.<br />
<br />
You better have all your officers radio/phone muster (code 1) on or off duty every hour, on the hour.<br />
Do not attempt to shadow or conduct any type of ISR on me. I have the inventory listing of all UC vehicles at Piper Tech and the home addresses of any INT analyst at JRIC and detachment locations. My POA is always POI and always true. This will be a war of attrition and a Pyrrhic and Camdean Victory for myself. You may have the resources and manpower but you are reactive and predictable in your op plans and TTP’s. I have the strength and benefits of being unpredictable, unconventional, and unforgiving. Do not waste your time with briefs and tabletops.<br />
<br />
Whatever pre-planned responses you have established for a scenario like me, shelve it. Whatever contingency plan you have, shelve it. Whatever tertiary plan you’ve created, shelve it. I am a walking exigent circumstance with no OFF or reset button. JRIC, DOJ, LASD, FBI and other local LE can’t assist and should not involve themselves in a matter that does not concern them. For all other agencies, do not involve yourself in this capture or recovery of me. Look at the big picture of the situation. They (LAPD) created the situation. I will harm no outside agency unless it is a deadly force/IDOL situation. With today’s budgeting and fiscal mess, you guys can not afford lose several officers to IOD or KIA/EOW. Plus, other officers should not have to take on the additional duties and responsibilities of dead officers. Think about their families, outside agencies, Chiefs/Directors.<br />
<br />
Outside agencies and individual officers on patrol. If you recognize my vehicle, and confirm it is my vehicle thru a dmv/want warrant check. It behoves you to respond to dispatch that your query was for information purposes only. If you proceed with a traffic stop or attempt to notify other officers of my location or for backup you will not live to see the medal of valor you were hoping to receive for your actions. Think before you attempt to intervene. You will not survive. Your family will receive that medal of valor posthumously. It will gather dust on the fireplace mantel for years. Then one day, it will go in a shoe box with other memories. Your mother will lose a son or daughter. Your significant other will be left alone, but they will find someone else to fill your void in the future and make them just as happy. Your children, if you have them, will call someone else mommy or daddy. Don’t be selfish. Your vest is only a level II or IIIA, think about it.<br />
<br />
No amount of IMINT, MASINT, and ELINT assist you in capturing me. I am off the grid. You better use your feet, tongue and every available DOD/ NON-DOD HUMINT agency, contractor to find me. I know your route to and from home, and your division. I know your significant others routine, your children’s best friends and recess. I know Your Sancha’s gym hours and routine. I assure you that the casualty rate will be high. Because of that, no one will remember your name. You will merely be a DR# and “that guy” who was KIA/EOW or long term IOD/light duty in the kit room. This is exactly why “station 500″ was created. Unfortunately, orphanages will be making a comeback in the 21st century.<br />
<br />
If you had a well regulated AWB, this would not happen. The time is now to reinstitute a ban that will save lives. Why does any sportsman need a 30 round magazine for hunting? Why does anyone need a suppressor? Why does anyone need a AR15 rifle? This is the same small arms weapons system utilized in eradicating Al Qaeda, Taliban, and every enemy combatant since the Vietnam war. Don’t give me that crap that its not a select fire or full auto rifle like the DoD uses. That’s bullshit because troops who carry the M-4/M-16 weapon system for combat ops outside the wire rarely utilize the select fire function when in contact with enemy combatants. The use of select fire probably isn’t even 1% in combat. So in essence, the AR-15 semiautomatic rifle is the same as the M-4/M-16. These do not need to be purchased as easily as walking to your local Walmart or striking the enter key on your keyboard to “add to cart”. All the firearms utilized in my activities are registered to me and were legally purchased at gun stores and private party transfers. All concealable weapons (pistols) were also legally register in my name at police stations or FFL’s. Unfortunately, are you aware that I obtained class III weapons (suppressors) without a background check thru NICS or DROS completely LEGALLY several times? I was able to use a trust account that I created on quicken will maker and a $10 notary charge at a mailbox etc. to obtain them legally. Granted, I am not a felon, nor have a DV misdemeanor conviction or active TRO against me on a NCIC file. I can buy any firearm I want, but should I be able to purchase these class III weapons (SBR’s, and suppressors) without a background check and just a $10 notary signature on a quicken will maker program? The answer is NO. I’m not even a resident of the state i purchased them in. Lock n Load just wanted money so they allow you to purchase class III weapons with just a notarized trust, military ID. Shame on you, Lock n Load. NFA and ATF need new laws and policies that do not allow loopholes such as this. In the end, I hope that you will realize that the small arms I utilize should not be accessed with the ease that I obtained them. Who in there right mind needs a fucking silencer!!! who needs a freaking SBR AR15? No one. No more Virginia Tech, Columbine HS, Wisconsin temple, Aurora theatre, Portland malls, Tucson rally, Newtown Sandy Hook. Whether by executive order or thru a bi-partisan congress an assault weapons ban needs to be re-instituted. Period!!!<br />
<br />
Mia Farrow said it best. “Gun control is no longer debatable, it’s not a conversation, its a moral mandate.”<br />
<br />
Sen. Feinstein, you are doing the right thing in leading the re-institution of a national AWB. Never again should any public official state that their prayers and thoughts are with the family. That has become cliche’ and meaningless. Its time for action. Let this be your legacy that you bestow to America. Do not be swayed by obstacles, antagaonist, and naysayers. Remember the innocent children at Austin, Kent, Stockton, Fullerton, San Diego, Iowa City, Jonesboro, Columbine, Nickel Mines, Blacksburg, Springfield, Red Lake, Chardon, Aurora, and Newtown. Make sure this never happens again!!!<br />
<br />
In my cache you will find several small arms. In the cache, Bushmaster firearms, Remington precision rifles, and AAC Suppressors (silencers). All of these small arms are manufactured by Cerberus/Freedom Group. The same company responsible for the Portland mall shooting, Webster , NY, and Sandy Hook massacre.<br />
<br />
You disrespect the office of the POTUS/Presidency and Commander in Chief. You call him Kenyan, mongroid, halfrican, muslim, and FBHO when in essence you are to address him as simply, President. The same as you did to President George W. Bush and all those in the highest ranking position of our land before him. Just as I always have. You question his birth certificate, his educational and professional accomplishments, and his judeo-christian beliefs. You make disparaging remarks about his dead parents. You never questioned the fact that his former opponent, the honorable Senator John McCain, was not born in the CONUS or that Bush had a C average in his undergrad. Electoral Candidates children (Romney) state they want to punch the president in the face during debates with no formal repercussions. No one even questioned the fact that the son just made a criminal threat toward the President. You call his wife a Wookie. Off the record, I love your new bangs, Mrs. Obama. A woman whose professional and educational accomplishments are second to none when compared to recent First wives. You call his supporters, whether black, brown, yellow, or white, leeches, FSA, welfare recipients, and ni$&er lovers. You say this openly without any discretion. Before you start with your argument that you believe I would vote for Obama because he has the same skin color as me, fuck you. I didn’t vote in this last election as my choice of candidate, John Huntsman, didn’t win the primary candidacy for his party. Mr. President, I haven’t agreed with all of your decisions but of course I haven’t agreed with all of your predecessors decisions. I think you’ve done a hell of a job with what you have been dealt and how you have managed it. I shed a tear the night you were initially elected President in 2008. I never thought that day would occur. A black man elected president in the U.S. in my lifetime. I cracked a smiled when you were re-elected in 2012 because I really didn’t think you were going to pull that one off. Romney, stop being a sore loser. You could’ve exited graciously and still contributed significantly to public service, not now. Mr. President, get back to work. Many want to see you fail as they have stated so many times previously. Unfortunately, if you fail, the U.S. fails but your opponents do not concern themselves about the big picture. Do not forget your commitment to transparency in your administration. Sometimes I believe your administration forgets that. America, you will realize today and tomorrow that this world is made up of all human beings who have the same general needs and wants in life for themselves, their kin, community, and state. That is the freedom to LIVE and LOVE. They may eat different foods, enjoy different music, have different dialects, or speak a second language, but in essence are no different from you and I. This is America. We are not a perfect sovereign country as we have our own flaws but we are the closest that will ever exist.<br />
<br />
Unfortunately, this is not the first time an authoritative figure has lied on me.<br />
<br />
Mr. Freid, assistant principal, Cypress HS. Remember when you lied to my mother and the police officer in your office about stating that you never stated to me in a private conversation that you know the theft suspect (Miranda) stole my watch. Let me refresh your memory. A physical education teachers assistant, a student, stole the list of combination codes to peoples lockers, from the P.E. teacher. That student then opened many of those lockers and stole students personal property. My watch was taken in that multi theft an I reported it to you. A week later you discovered that the theft suspect was Paul Miranda, a student. You stated to me in private that you know for a fact he stole my property. When I attempted to retrieve my property from the suspect. Campus security was called and you lied and stated that you never stated to me that you “know he stole my watch”. You sat there and lied to their faces right in front of me. You said it with such a deliberate, stern face. I never forgot that and was not surprised when 13 years later I was lied on again in the BOR by Teresa Evans. maybe you can confess to your family at the very least in the private of your own home. After that, contact my mother and apologize for lying to her in 1996.<br />
<br />
If possible, I want my brain preserved for science/research to study the effects of severe depression on an individual’s brain. Since 6/26/08 when I was relieved of duty and 1/2/09 when I was terminated I have been afflicted with severe depression. I’ve had two CT scans during my lifetime that are in my medical record at Kaiser Permanente. Both are from concussions resulting from playing football. The first one was in high school, 10/96. The second was in college and occurred in 10/99. Both were conducted at Kaiser Permanente hospitals in LA/Orange county. These two CT scans should give a good baseline for my brain activity before severe depression began in late 2008.<br />
<br />
Sure, many of you “law enforcement experts and specialist” will state, “in all my years this is the worst……..”, Stop!!! That’s not important. Ask yourselves what would cause somebody to take these drastic measures like I did. That’s what is important.<br />
<br />
To my friends listed below, I wish we could have grown old together and spent more time together. When you reminisce of our friendship and experiences, think of that and that only. Do not dwell on my recent actions the last few days. This was a necessary evil that had to be executed in order for me to obtain my NAME back. The only thing that changes policy and garners attention is death.<br />
<br />
Luis Sanchez, greatest friend, Marine officer, aviator, and an even better father and husband. I Couldn’t have had a better big brother than you. Your spoken wisdom was always retained by me, you old salty Mustang. You sternly told me that no matter what I accomplish I will always be a ni#%er in many individuals eyes. At the time, I did not comprehend your words. I do now. I never forgot the quote you state below. I love you bro.<br />
<br />
I never saw a wild thing feel sorry for itself. A small bird will drop frozen dead from a bough without ever feeling sorry for itself. –D.H. Lawrence<br />
<br />
Jason Valadao, greatest friend, Naval officer, aviator, Great Father, husband, doctor, and even better human being. I always strived to live my life parallel to your similar values and personal disciplines. Danika is lucky to have found a man like yourself, and you are fortunate to have married an irrefutable imperfect woman. Always focus on your IMMEDIATE family as they are the ones who have loved you unconditionally and always been their to support you in difficult times. I always lived my life as WWJD (what would Jason do). Danika, take care of this guy. Jason, I’m sorry I missed your wedding and you had to find another best man. I’m sorry my predicament with the department stopped me from watching you and Danika get married and arguing with you about issues that were insignificant when I was really angry at the LAPD for what they did to me. I’m deeply sorry and I love you guys.<br />
<br />
James Usera, great friend, attorney, father, husband, and the most cynical/blatant/politically incorrect friend a man can have. Best quality about you in college and now is that you never sugar coated the truth. I will miss our political discussions that always turned argumentative. Thanks for introducing me to outdoor sports like fishing, hunting, mudding, and also respect for the land and resources. Us city boys don’t get out much like you Alaskans. You even introduced me to PBR. A beer, that when you’re a poor college student is completely acceptable to get buzzed off of. I’m sorry I’ll never get to go on that moose and bear hunt with you. I love you bro.<br />
<br />
Kinta Smith, greatest friend, accountant, entrepreneur, and even better Human being. You are probably the most well balanced person I’ve ever met and the most driven for success. In college, and after graduation, I was inspired by your personal drive. Never settle. When you make your first million, promise me you won’t forget to enjoy it a bit. I know your first reaction will be to invest it somewhere else. Spend a little, just a little. I love you bro.<br />
<br />
Jason Young, great friend, entrepeneur, husband and father. You showed me the importance of fatherhood and friendship. Love you bro.<br />
<br />
Suzie Clark Cunningham, Kassandra Harrell, Melinda Yates, Cal Jackson, Ryan Smith, The Rebelledos, The Banks, Ben Bines, J. Work, Bill O’neill, Jeremy Fletcher, and Rob Harriston.<br />
<br />
You guys were all important and very special to me. Don’t be angry with me. I missed some of your weddings and unfortunately, some of your funerals. This was a necessary evil.<br />
<br />
Some say it is my fault that I was terminated. Yes, DDX, I remember you stating this to me in an angry fit. You said that I should have kept my mouth shut about another officer’s misconduct. Maybe you were right. But I’m not built like others, it’s not in my DNA and my history has always shown that. When you view the video of the suspect stating he was kicked by Evans, maybe you will see that I was a decent person after all. I told the truth. It still hurt that you abandoned me in my time of need. I hope you’re happy, that’s all I ever wanted for you.<br />
<br />
Sgt. Leonard Perez, you meant well but you should have known with your time on the job that the department would attempt to protect someone like Evans because of her time on the job, personal friendships, and ethicity. I’m not angry with you, but you should have known as an IA investigator.<br />
<br />
Sgt Maggie Faust LPPD, Ofcr John Thomas LPPD (ret), and Chief Eric Nunez LPPD, your guidance and mentoring as a young police explorer was second to none and invaluable as a young man, police officer, and naval officer. Sgt Faust, you forewarned me long ago about joining LAPD as they were “different” and operated differently from other modern law enforcement agencies. I now know it was your humbleness and respect for all who wear the badge and protect their communities that you didn’t just express what you wanted to say, that they lack values and basic ethics as law enforcement officers. Chief Nunez, your fucking awesome. Thanks for the long talks over the years when I was an explorer, college student, Naval officer, and Police officer. Your are a great leader and carry your heart on your sleeve. Your son will be a great Air Force officer with the upringing you provided. John, what can I say? Your just an awesome person and my first exposure to what law enforcement was really about was on our ride alongs. Your realistic approach and empathetic approach to treating all people as humans first is something I carried with me daily. Thank you, every one of you.<br />
<br />
Dr. Funahashi, thank you for the superb surgery you performed on my knee on 7/98 in Irvine, CA. I never had the opportunity to thank you for allowing me to live a life free of knee joint pain. Thank you.<br />
<br />
CM1 Bissett (Ret.), I learned more from you about leadership than most of my own commanders. You lived by a strict ethos of get it done, and get it done right. I wanted to attend your retirement, I really did. But because of my predicament I was unable to. Hope you and Ritchie are still together. I’ve always held you in high regard.<br />
<br />
Sgt Maj. Kenneth “Rock” Rocquemore USMC, Thank you for the intense instruction and mentorship and time spent forging me into a never quit officer. You were challenging as a DI. You made sure the vicious and intense personality I possess was discovered. On a lighter note….Don’t feel humbled you never broke me. I made it a personal goal to never give up years before. The Corp is lucky to have you at the front. Your leadership is essential and needed for all marines, especially staff NCO’s and mentorship and advisement to company grade officers. You are the epitome of a US marine and never forget that.<br />
<br />
I thank my friends for the awesome shared experiences. I thank the unnamed women I dated over my lifetime for the great and sometimes not so great sex.<br />
<br />
It’s kind of sad I won’t be around to view and enjoy The Hangover III. What an awesome trilogy. Todd Phillips, don’t make anymore Hangovers after the third, takes away the originality of its foundation. World War Z looks good and The Walking Dead season 3 (second half) looked intriguing. Damn, gonna miss shark week.<br />
<br />
Mr. Vice President, do your due diligence when formulating a concise and permanent national AWB plan. Future generations of Americans depend on your plan and advisement to the president. I’ve always been a fan of yours and consider you one of the few genuine and charismatic politicians. Damn, sounds like an oxymoron calling you an honest politician. It’s the truth.<br />
<br />
Hillary Clinton. You’ll make one hell of a president in 2016. Much like your husband, Bill, you will be one of the greatest. Look at Castro in San Antonio as a running mate or possible secretary of state. He’s (good people) and I have faith and confidence in him. Look after Bill. He was always my favorite President. Chelsea grew up to be one hell of an attractive woman. No disrespect to her husband.<br />
<br />
Gov. Chris Christie. What can I say? You’re the only person I would like to see in the White House in 2016 other than Hillary. You’re America’s no shit taking uncle. Do one thing for your wife, kids, and supporters. Start walking at night and eat a little less, not a lot less, just a little. We want to see you around for a long time. Your leadership is greatly needed.<br />
<br />
Wayne LaPierre, President of the NRA, you’re a vile and inhumane piece of shit. You never even showed 30 seconds of empathy for the children, teachers, and families of Sandy Hook. You deflected any type of blame/responsibility and directed it toward the influence of movies and the media. You are a failure of a human being. May all of your immediate and distant family die horrific deaths in front of you.<br />
<br />
Chris Matthews, Joe Scarborough, Pat Harvey, Brian Williams, Soledad Obrien, Wolf Blitzer, Meredith Viera, Tavis Smiley, and Anderson Cooper, keep up the great work and follow Cronkite’s lead. I hold many of you in the same regard as Tom Brokaw and the late Peter Jennings. Cooper, stop nagging and berating your guest, they’re your (guest). Mr. Scarborough, we met at McGuire’s pub in P-cola in 2002 when I was stationed there. It was an honor conversing with you about politics, family, and life.<br />
<br />
Willie Geist, you’re a talented and charismatic journalist. Stop with all the talk show shenanigans and get back to your core of reporting. Your future is brighter than most.<br />
<br />
Revoke the citizenship of Fareed Zakaria and deport him. I’ve never heard a positive word about America or its interest from his mouth, ever. On the same day, give Piers Morgan an indefinite resident alien and Visa card. Mr. Morgan, the problem that many American gun owners have with you and your continuous discussion of gun control is that you are not an American citizen and have an accent that is distinct and clarifies that you are a foreigner. I want you to know that I agree with you 100% on enacting stricter firearm laws but you must understand that your critics will always have in the back of their mind that you are native to a country that we won our sovereignty from while using firearms as a last resort in defense and you come from a country that has no legal private ownership of firearms. That is disheartening to American gun owners and rightfully so.<br />
<br />
The honorable President George H.W. Bush, they never give you enough credit for your successful Presidency. You were always one of my favorite Presidents (2nd favorite). I hope your health improves greatly. You are the epitome of an American and service to country.<br />
<br />
General Petraeus, you made a mistake that the majority of men make once, twice, or unfortunately many times in a lifetime. You are human. You thought with your penis. It’s okay.I personally believe you should have never resigned and told your critics to shove it. You only answer to two people regarding the affair, your wife and children, period. I hope you return to government service to your country as it is visibly in your DNA.<br />
<br />
General Colin Powell, your book “My American Journey” solidified my decision to join the military after college. I had always intended to serve, but your book and journey motivated me. You are an inspiration to all Americans and influenced me greatly.<br />
<br />
To all SEA’s (senior enlisted advisers), you are just as important if not a greater viability to large and small commands. It’s time you take a more active role in leading your enlisted and advising officers. These are not your twilight years or time to relax. You can either strengthen the tip of the spear, or make it brittle. You decide.<br />
<br />
Pat Harvey, I’ve always thought you carried yourself professionally and personally the way a strong black woman should. Your articulation and speech is second to none. You are the epitome of a journalist/anchor. You are America.<br />
<br />
Ellen Degeneres, continue your excellent contribution to entertaining America and bringing the human factor to entertainment. You changed the perception of your gay community and how we as Americans view the LGBT community. I congratulate you on your success and opening my eyes as a young adult, and my generation to the fact that you are know different from us other than who you choose to love. Oh, and you Prop 8 supporters, why the fuck do you care who your neighbor marries. Hypocritical pieces of shit.<br />
<br />
Westboro Baptist Church, may you all burn slowly in a fire, not from smoke inhalation, but from the flames and only the flames.<br />
<br />
Tebow, I really wanted to see you take charge of an offense again and the game. You are not a good QB by todays standards, but you are a great football player who knows how to lead a team and WIN. You will be “Tebowing” when you reach your next team. I have faith in you. Get out of that circus they call the Jets and away from the reality TV star, Rex Ryan, and Mark Rapist Sanchez.<br />
<br />
Christopher Walz, you impressed me in Inglorious Basterds. After viewing Django Unchained, I was sold. I have come to the conclusion that you are well on your way to becoming one of the greats if not already and show glimpses of Daniel Day Lewis and Morgan Freeman-esque type qualities of greatness. Trust me when I say that you will be one of the greatest ever.<br />
<br />
Jennifer Beals, Serena Williams, Grae Drake, Lisa Nicole-Carson, Diana Taurasi, N’bushe Wright, Brenda Villa, Kate Winslet, Ashley Graham, Erika Christensen, Gabrielle Union, Isabella Soprano, Zain Verjee, Tamron Hall, Gina Carano, America Ferrara, Giana Michaels, Nene, Natalie Portman, Queen Latifah, Michelle Rodriguez, Anjelah Johnson, Kelly Clarkson, Nora Jones, Laura Prepon, Margaret Cho, and Rutina Wesley, you are THE MOST beautiful women on this planet, period. Never settle, professionally or personally.<br />
<br />
Dave Brubeck’s “Take Five” is the greatest piece of music ever, period. Hanz Zimmer, William Bell, Eric Clapton, BB King, Bob Marley, Sam Cooke, Metallica, Rob Zombie, Nora Jones, Marvin Gaye, Jay-Z, and the King (Louis Armstrong) are musical prodigies.<br />
<br />
Jeffrey Toobin and David Gergen, you are political geniuses and modern scholars. Hopefully Toobin is nominated for the Supreme Court and implements some damn common sense and reasoning instead of partisan bickering. But in true Toobin fashion, we all know he would not accept the nomination.<br />
,<br />
John and Ken from KFI, never mute your facts and personal opinions. You are one of the few media personalities who speak the truth, even when the truth is not popular. I will miss listening to your discussions.<br />
<br />
Bill Handel, your effin awesome. For years I enjoyed your show.<br />
<br />
Anthony Bourdain, you’re a modern renaissance man who epitomizes the saying “too cool for school”.<br />
<br />
Larry David, Kevin Hart, the late Patrice Oneal, Lisa Lampanelli, Chris Rock, Jerry Seinfeld, Louis CK, Dave Chapelle, Jon Stewart, Wanda Sykes, Dennis Miller, and Jeff Ross are pure geniuses. I’m a big fan of all of your work. As a child my mom caught me watching Def Jam comedy at midnight when I should have been asleep. Instead of scolding me, the next night she let me stay up late and watch George Carlin, Eddie Murphy and Richard Pryor comedy specials with her for hours. My sides were sore for days.<br />
<br />
Larry David, I agree. 72-82 degrees is way to hot in a residence. 68 , degrees is perfect.<br />
<br />
Cyclist, I have no problem sharing the road with you. But, at least go the fucking speed limit posted or get off the road!!! That is a feasible request. Livestrong you fraudulent assholes.<br />
<br />
Cardinal Mahoney, you are in essence a predator yourself as you enabled your subordinates to molest multiple children in the church over many decades. May you die a long and slow painful death.<br />
<br />
If you continuously followed me while I was walking at dusk/night I would confront you as well. Too bad Trayvon didn’t smash your skull completely open, Zim. While Trayvon’s body erodes to bones 6 feet under, Zimmerman has put on no less than 40 pounds while out on bail. Zimmerman was arrested for battery on a Peace officer and avoided jail/prison because he completed a diversion program. Thats a history of being an asshole. Zimmerman couldn’t get hired by a LE agency because of poor credit/and a history of violence/restraining orders with women. So what does he do? Designate himself, neighborhood watch captain and make complaints to his city council about the horrible work ethic and laziness of the officers patrolling his neighborhood. Good one Zim. How classy that your father attempts to use his veterans status “disabled veteran” during your bail hearing but doesn’t state what his disability percentage is. Prior service personnel know it can be 5% disability to 100%. You and your attorneys always avoid mentioning your fathers occupation as a magistrate/judge because I’m sure he’s utilized his position to get you out of way more jams then the public has discovered and that your family is not indigent. Oh, tell your wife to stop perjuring herself in court.<br />
<br />
KCCO<br />
<br />
Anonymous, you are hated, vilified, and considered an enemy to the state. I personally view you as a culture and a necessity that brings truth to a cloaked world. Forge ahead!<br />
<br />
Charlie Sheen, you’re effin awesome.<br />
<br />
My opinion on women in combat MOS’, Designators, Rates, and AFSC’s. I wish all of you who attempt to pursue combat occupational roles the greatest success in completing, graduating, and qualifying in their respective schools/courses. Many want to see you fail. Remember, everyone of you is a pioneer. There was a time when they didn’t allow blacks to fight the good fight. This is your civil rights. Don’t quit!!!<br />
<br />
It’s time to allow gay service member’s spouses to utilize the same benefits that all heterosexual dependents are eligible for. Medical, Dental, Tricare, Deers, SGLI, BX, Commissary, Milstar, MWR, etc. Flag officers, lets be honest. You can’t really give a valid argument to as why gays shouldn’t be eligible as every month a new state enacts laws that allow same sex marriage.<br />
<br />
LGBT community and supporters, the same way you have the right to voice your opinion on acceptance of gay marriage, Chick Fil-A has a right to voice their beliefs as well. That’s what makes America so great. Freedom of expression. Don’t be assholes and boycott/degrade their business and customers who patronize the locations. They make some damn good chicken! Vandalizing (graffiti) their locations does not help any cause.<br />
<br />
Mr. Bill Cosby, you are a reasonable and talented man who has spoken the truth of the cultural anomalies within the black communities that need to change now. The black communities’ resentment toward you is because they don’t like hearing the truth or having their clear and evident dirty laundry aired to the nation. The problem is, the country is not blind nor dumb. They believe we are animals. Do not mute your unvarnished truthful speech or moral compass. Blacks must strive for more in life than bling, hoes, and cars. The current culture is an epidemic that leaves them with no discernible future. They’re suffocating and don’t even know it. MLK Jr. Would be mortified at what he worked so hard for in our acceptance as equal beings and how unfortunately we stopped progressing and began digressing. Chicago’s youth violence is a prime example of how our black communities values have declined. We can not address this nation’s intolerant issues until we address our own communities morality issues first. Accountability. We need to hold ou.”<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [<a href="http://www.myfoxla.com/story/21019027/murder-suspect-chris-dorners-online-manifesto-about-slayings">Fox-LA</a>]</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327922598170048610" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JSpbgoKp8LA/SfCVX96zuGI/AAAAAAAAEIs/qqvoPLfHrLA/s400/400_BlackLine.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 7px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 620px;" />Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-44026989690006478522013-01-31T19:54:00.000+02:002013-02-05T14:27:44.723+02:00'I feel like a stranger where I live.. Mass Immigration making reluctant racists of us all’<div align="justify"><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">British Woman Feels Like a Stranger in Her Own Neighborhood: 'I feel like a stranger where I live’</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">In the Nineties, when I arrived, this part of Acton was a traditional working-class area. Now there is no trace of any kind of community – that word so cherished by the Left. Instead it has been transformed into a giant transit camp and is home to no one. The scale of immigration over recent years has created communities throughout London that never need to – or want to – interact with outsiders.</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Jane Kelly | 7:30AM GMT 29 Jan 2013 | The Telegraph & Limits to Growth</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ogssolSwlE4/UQqujwXwzoI/AAAAAAAAg-I/e4IJQeSAftU/s1600/Telegraph_JaneKelley_LondonStranger_600x510.PNG"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-z5GEu7oBMxk/UQqubefFydI/AAAAAAAAg98/96Mi0tEJc-8/s1600/Telegraph_JaneKelley_LondonStranger_375x307.PNG" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 307px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 375px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote><b>Limits to Growth</b>: In recent weeks, cumulative <a href="http://www.limitstogrowth.org/articles/2012/12/29/britain-negative-demographic-milestones-are-noted">demographic changes have been reported in Britain</a>, along with white flight away from cities to escape the social conditions created by diverse immigration.<br />
<br />
Human beings don’t want diversity and prefer to be around others who speak their language and <a href="http://www.limitstogrowth.org/articles/2012/08/13/diversity-in-hard-times-violence-heats-up-over-immigration-in-greece/">share the same culture</a>. Most don’t like it when <a href="http://www.limitstogrowth.org/articles/2011/03/01/britain-labour-party-busted-for-immigration-flood">elitist liberal governments decide that the traditional beliefs like patriotism can be fixed</a> by importing a new, more grateful people. Polls from <a href="http://www.pewglobal.org/2007/10/04/world-publics-welcome-global-trade-but-not-immigration/">Pew</a> and <a href="http://www.limitstogrowth.org/articles/2013/01/19/britain-poll-finds-immigration-considered-biggest-problem">Ipsos</a> indicate a cross-cultural dislike of having too many foreigners residing in their countries.<br />
<br />
In the present example, Jane Kelly, an editor for the <a href="http://www.salisburyreview.co.uk/The_Salisbury_Review_Front_Page.html">Salisbury Review</a>, voices her unhappiness at feeling like a stranger in her own London neighborhood. The only surprise is that she would be brave enough to speak against the new secular religion of diversity being the highest good; in fact, <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2246288/Census-2011-UK-immigrant-population-jumps-THREE-MILLION-10-years.html">white Britons are now a minority in London</a>.<br />
<br />
Certainly <a href="http://www.limitstogrowth.org/articles/2010/07/22/terry-anderson-with-some-local-history">many Americans have told similar stories about how their pleasant California neighborhoods turned into crime-filled Mexican barrios</a>. Citizens are fleeing the <a href="http://www.limitstogrowth.org/articles/2010/12/15/inland-california-is-looking-a-lot-like-mexico/">once-Golden State</a> for places where a culturally recognizable America remains.<br />
<br />
The mega amnesty now being proposed would open the floodgates to a hugely Mexicanized America.<br />
<br />
At least the London writer doesn’t live in an area that has been <a href="http://www.limitstogrowth.org/articles/2012/11/15/britain-sharia-law-expands">declared a sharia zone by local Muslims</a> — yet.</blockquote><a name='more'></a><div align="center"><a href="http://fleur-de-lis.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-__b6nnsrEpQ/UQqve4pxolI/AAAAAAAAg-U/74EyJkDE6MA/s1600/IdleNoMore-IndigenousRights_598x126.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 119px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 598px;" /></a></div><br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">'I feel like a stranger where I live’</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Jane Kelly | 7:30AM GMT 29 Jan 2013 | The Telegraph</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<br />
<table align="right" border="0" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" style="width: 375px;"><tbody>
<tr><td width="375"><div align="center"><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="305" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/3RZyFagvXVw" width="375"></iframe><strong><span style="font-size: 80%;">One Year on From Utøya: Preliminary Ethnic & Ideological Civil War Continues to Grip Europe (<a href="http://youtu.be/3RZyFagvXVw">03:34</a>) </span></strong></div></td></tr>
</tbody></table><blockquote>"When you go swimming, it’s much healthier to keep your whole body completely covered, you know.” The Muslim lady behind the counter in my local pharmacy has recently started giving me advice like this. It’s kindly meant and I’m always glad to hear her views because she is one of the few people in west London where I live who talks to me.<br />
<br />
The streets around Acton, which has been my home since 1996, have taken on a new identity. Most of the shops are now owned by Muslims and even the fish and chip shop and Indian takeaway are Halal. It seems that almost overnight it’s changed from Acton Vale into Acton Veil.<br />
<br />
Of the 8.17 million people in London, one million are Muslim, with the majority of them young families. That is not, in reality, a great number. But because so many Muslims increasingly insist on emphasising their separateness, it feels as if they have taken over; my female neighbours flap past in full niqab, some so heavily veiled that I can’t see their eyes. I’ve made an effort to communicate by smiling deliberately at the ones I thought I was seeing out and about regularly, but this didn’t lead to conversation because they never look me in the face.<br />
<br />
I recently went to the plainly named “Curtain Shop” and asked if they would put some up for me. Inside were a lot of elderly Muslim men. I was told that they don’t do that kind of work, and was back on the pavement within a few moments. I felt sure I had suffered discrimination and was bewildered as I had been there previously when the Muslim owners had been very friendly. Things have changed. I am living in a place where I am a stranger.<br />
<br />
I was brought up in a village in Staffordshire, and although I have been in London for a quarter of a century I have kept the habit of chatting to shopkeepers and neighbours, despite it not being the done thing in metropolitan life. Nowadays, though, most of the tills in my local shops are manned by young Muslim men who mutter into their mobiles as they are serving. They have no interest in talking to me and rarely meet my gaze. I find this situation dismal. I miss banter, the hail fellow, well met chat about the weather, or what was on TV last night.<br />
<br />
More worryingly, I feel that public spaces are becoming contested. One food store has recently installed a sign banning alcohol on the premises. Fair enough. But it also says: “No alcohol allowed on the streets near this shop.” I am no fan of street drinking, and rowdy behaviour and loutish individuals are an aspect of modern British ''culture’’ I hate. But I feel uneasy that this shopkeeper wants to control the streets outside his shop. I asked him what he meant by his notice but he just smiled at me wistfully.<br />
<br />
Perhaps he and his fellow Muslims want to turn the area into another Tower Hamlets, the east London borough where ''suggestive’’ advertising is banned and last year a woman was refused a job in a pharmacy because she wasn’t veiled.<br />
<br />
On the other hand, maybe I should be grateful. At least in Acton there is just a sign in a shop. Since the start of the year there have been several reports from around London of a more aggressive approach. Television news footage last week showed incidents filmed on a mobile phone on a Saturday night, in the borough of Waltham Forest, of men shouting “This is a Muslim area” at white Britons.<br />
<br />
The video commentary stated: “From women walking the street dressed like complete naked animals with no self-respect, to drunk people carrying alcohol, we try our best to capture and forbid it all.”<br />
<br />
Another scene showed hooded youths forcing a man to drop his can of lager, telling him they were the “Muslim patrol” and that alcohol is a “forbidden evil”. The gang then approached a group of white girls enjoying a good night out, telling them to “forbid themselves from dressing like this and exposing themselves outside the mosque”.<br />
<br />
Worse, though, is film footage from last week, thought to have been taken in Commercial Street, Whitechapel, which showed members of a group who also called themselves a “Muslim patrol” harassing a man who appeared to be wearing make‑up, calling him a “bloody fag”. In the video posted on YouTube last week, the passer-by is told he is “walking through a Muslim area dressed like a fag” and ordered to get out. Last Thursday, police were reported to have arrested five “vigilantes” suspected of homophobic abuse.<br />
<br />
There are, of course, other Europeans in my area who may share my feelings but I’m not able to talk to them easily about this situation as they are mostly immigrants, too. At Christmas I spoke to an elderly white woman about the lack of parsnips in the local greengrocer, but she turned out to have no English and I was left grumbling to myself.<br />
<br />
Poles have settled in Ealing since the Second World War and are well assimilated, but since 2004 about 370,000 east Europeans have arrived in London. Almost half the populations of nearby Ealing and Hammersmith were born outside the UK. Not surprisingly, at my bus stop I rarely hear English spoken. I realise that we can’t return to the time when buses were mainly occupied by white ladies in their best hats and gloves going shopping, but I do feel nostalgic for the days when a journey on public transport didn’t leave me feeling as if I have only just arrived in a strange country myself.<br />
<br />
There are other “cultural differences” that bother me, too. Over the past year I have been involved in rescuing a dog that was kept in a freezing shed for months. The owners spoke no English. A Somali neighbour kept a dog that he told me he was training to fight, before it was stolen by other dog fighters. I have tried to re-home several cats owned by a family who refuse to neuter their animals, because of their religion.<br />
<br />
In the Nineties, when I arrived, this part of Acton was a traditional working-class area. Now there is no trace of any kind of community – that word so cherished by the Left. Instead it has been transformed into a giant transit camp and is home to no one. The scale of immigration over recent years has created communities throughout London that never need to – or want to – interact with outsiders.<br />
<br />
It wasn’t always the case: since the 1890s thousands of Jewish, Irish, Afro-Caribbean, Asian and Chinese workers, among others, have arrived in the capital, often displacing the indigenous population. Yes, there was hateful overt racism and discrimination, I’m not denying that. But, over time, I believe we settled down into a happy mix of incorporation and shared aspiration, with disparate peoples walking the same pavements but returning to very different homes – something the Americans call “sundown segregation”.<br />
<br />
But now, despite the wishful thinking of multiculturalists, wilful segregation by immigrants is increasingly echoed by the white population – the rate of white flight from our cities is soaring. According to the Office for National Statistics, 600,000 white Britons have left London in the past 10 years. The latest census data shows the breakdown in telling detail: some London boroughs have lost a quarter of their population of white, British people. The number in Redbridge, north London, for example, has fallen by 40,844 (to 96,253) in this period, while the total population has risen by more than 40,335 to 278,970. It isn’t only London boroughs. The market town of Wokingham in Berkshire has lost nearly 5 per cent of its white British population.<br />
<br />
I suspect that many white people in London and the Home Counties now move house on the basis of ethnicity, especially if they have children. Estate agents don’t advertise this self-segregation, of course. Instead there are polite codes for that kind of thing, such as the mention of “a good school”, which I believe is code for “mainly white English”. Not surprising when you learn that nearly one million pupils do not have English as a first language.<br />
<br />
I, too, have decided to leave my area, following in the footsteps of so many of my neighbours. I don’t really want to go. I worked long and hard to get to London, to find a good job and buy a home and I’d like to stay here. But I’m a stranger on these streets and all the “good” areas, with safe streets, nice housing and pleasant cafés, are beyond my reach. I see London turning into a place almost exclusively for poor immigrants and the very rich.<br />
<br />
It’s sad that I am moving not for a positive reason, but to escape something. I wonder whether I’ll tell the truth, if I’m asked. I can’t pretend that I’m worried about local schools, so perhaps I’ll say it’s for the chance of a conversation over the garden fence. But really I no longer need an excuse: mass immigration is making reluctant racists of us all.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;"><a href="http://www.salisburyreview.co.uk/Jane_Kelly/Jane_Kelly.html">Jane Kelly</a> is consulting editor of the '<a href="http://www.salisburyreview.co.uk/The_Salisbury_Review_Front_Page.html">Salisbury Review</a>’: The Quarterly Journal of Conservative Thought, where she writes acerbic, direct, and often funny blogs, reflecting her clear eyed view of our silly, sentimental, shopping obsessed, left wing society as it stumbles toward self annihilation.</span></strong><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [<a href="http://www.limitstogrowth.org/articles/2013/01/30/british-woman-feels-like-a-stranger-in-her-own-neighborhood/">Limits to Growth</a> :: <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/9831912/I-feel-like-a-stranger-where-I-live.html">UK Telegraph</a>]</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327922598170048610" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JSpbgoKp8LA/SfCVX96zuGI/AAAAAAAAEIs/qqvoPLfHrLA/s400/400_BlackLine.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 7px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 620px;" />Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-62172052781077396642013-01-30T20:45:00.000+02:002013-01-31T20:46:04.550+02:00Rise of 'white flight': British families are 'self-segregating' as more Caucasians abandon urban areas for the countryside <div align="justify"><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Rise of 'white flight': British families are 'self-segregating' as more Caucasians abandon urban areas for the countryside <br />
</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Trend has gone largely unnoticed because city centres appear diverse | Well-off whites from diverse areas are moving to outer suburbs in droves | Researchers say better schools, fresher air and background may be factors<br />
</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Emma Reynolds | 12:55 GMT, 27 January 2013 | UK Daily Mail</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-0nMXMrM9ha4/UQq5X7P5AYI/AAAAAAAAg-0/HTkgPRVbDM8/s1600/DailyMail_WhiteFlight_610x630.PNG"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-VCy5oTld8o4/UQq5LjUAWUI/AAAAAAAAg-o/sE9V89YfGII/s1600/DailyMail_WhiteFlight_375x387.PNG" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 387px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 375px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote>Britain is 'self-segregating' as white families flee urban areas for the countryside and outer suburbs.<br />
<br />
The trend is causing an 'ethnic cliff', in which the proportion of households from minority backgrounds is vastly different in areas just a few miles apart.<br />
<br />
Some outer London boroughs - including Enfield, Waltham Forest and Redbridge - have seen their white British population drop by as much as a quarter over the past decade.<br />
<br />
The same applies to urban areas around the capital such as Luton, Reading and Bedfordshire.<br />
<br />
Meanwhile, the white British population in many suburban and rural districts just next door has soared, according to research produced by Birkbeck College, University of London, in conjunction with think tank Demos.</blockquote><br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
</div><div align="center"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-N-zpNj3oMTM/UQq6CY2hQQI/AAAAAAAAg_M/QqSJ-A6P0Jk/s1600/London-EthnicChange_600x487.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-N-zpNj3oMTM/UQq6CY2hQQI/AAAAAAAAg_M/QqSJ-A6P0Jk/s1600/London-EthnicChange_600x487.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 487px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<blockquote>'Between 2001 and 2011, the proportion of white British in London's population fell from 58 to 45 per cent,' said Birkbeck professor of politics Eric Kaufmann.<br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-L-d-dY6neFQ/UQq51NL8vSI/AAAAAAAAg_A/ABEDQvF0rQs/s1600/London-Ethnic_594x422.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-L-d-dY6neFQ/UQq51NL8vSI/AAAAAAAAg_A/ABEDQvF0rQs/s1600/London-Ethnic_594x422.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 422px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 594px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
'The share of ethnic minorities reached 40 per cent of the total, a 39 per cent increase.'<br />
<br />
'This has caught many by surprise... Analysts implied that London would not become "majority minority" in most of our lifetimes, but the latest census figures suggest otherwise.'<br />
<br />
Affluent white families from diverse wards in London are shifting to less diverse wards in the outer suburbs.<br />
<br />
In the extreme example of Barking and Dagenham, the research shows, a third of the white British population departed between 2001 and 2011. Since many lack the resources to move or are council tenants, this suggests that a majority of local white British who could leave may have done so.<br />
<br />
The phenomenon has gone largely unnoticed until now because British city centres tend to have a fairly broad racial mix visible on the streets, in shops and restaurants and in many workplaces.<br />
<br />
Prof Kaufmann added: 'While white avoidance of ethnic minorities is the first thought that comes to mind, it's important to consider the alternative explanations. Most diverse wards are urban and poor. <br />
<br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-rZhr5MkauTw/UQq6Rdlq-WI/AAAAAAAAg_Y/vNaVFbW0TnA/s1600/London_MovingOut_596x392.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-rZhr5MkauTw/UQq6Rdlq-WI/AAAAAAAAg_Y/vNaVFbW0TnA/s1600/London_MovingOut_596x392.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 392px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 596px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
'Whites may be leaving for better schools, cheaper homes, fresher air, or because they are more likely to be retirees, wealthier or better educated. Only a statistical approach which controls for these factors can tell us whether ethnic preferences are key.'<br />
<br />
The share of minorities in London has increased by a percentage point a year since 1991.<br />
<br />
Minorities are moving out of their areas of concentration to better neighbourhoods, resulting in ever larger heavily-minority zones.<br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-eCfmcMxzJH8/UQq6dACmfQI/AAAAAAAAg_k/dFWfxr3NcAY/s1600/WhiteRes-London_594x437.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-eCfmcMxzJH8/UQq6dACmfQI/AAAAAAAAg_k/dFWfxr3NcAY/s1600/WhiteRes-London_594x437.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 437px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 594px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
<br />
Prof Kaufmann likened the situation to that in the US - where white Americans leave or avoid ‘majority minority’ neighbourhoods and seek out areas that are over 70 per cent white.<br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-5JLzqXzDiS8/UQq60GTrniI/AAAAAAAAg_w/bj3bH5VMBb8/s1600/LondonEthnicity_599x618.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-5JLzqXzDiS8/UQq60GTrniI/AAAAAAAAg_w/bj3bH5VMBb8/s1600/LondonEthnicity_599x618.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 618px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 599px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
He added: 'Whether Britain will follow in America's footsteps is an open question: much will depend on the residential preferences of working-class British whites and whether they are able to realise them.'<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [<a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2269058/British-families-self-segregate-whites-abandon-urban-areas-countryside.html">UK Daily Mail</a>]</span></strong></blockquote><br />
<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327922598170048610" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JSpbgoKp8LA/SfCVX96zuGI/AAAAAAAAEIs/qqvoPLfHrLA/s400/400_BlackLine.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 7px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 620px;" />Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-30810951571301981562013-01-29T00:10:00.000+02:002013-02-01T09:38:31.282+02:00Idle No More Global Action Day Finds European Indigenous Rights Groups Silent<div align="justify"><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Idle No More Global Action Day, Finds European Indigenous Rights Groups Silent</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;"></span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Andrea Muhrrteyn | SQSwans | 28 January 2013</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-1lWnIY3-Tbk/UQby_OQo_GI/AAAAAAAAg9U/bQLU5agNAww/s1600/IdleNoMore_IndigRightsRevol_635x497.PNG"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-qADIstCSGb0/UQby2PrvmII/AAAAAAAAg9I/9leCpX39-Rc/s1600/IdleNoMore_IndigRightsRevol_375x294.PNG" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 294px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 375px;" /></a><blockquote>Today was Idle No More's Indigenous Rights Global Action Day. Supporters have spoken up on behalf of Red People's - Idle No More -- Indigenous Rights, from Norway (Sami), Sweden, Rome, Germany and Poland (<a href="http://wolnemedia.net/ekologia/idle-no-more-w-polsce-i-na-swiecie/">Wolne Media: Idle No More in Poland and around the world</a>).<br />
<br />
Meanwhile -- as far as I am aware -- Breivik's 'European Indigenous Rights' supporters remain silent. <br />
<br />
The only outspoken support for <i>Idle No More's</i> Indigenous Rights Revolution Campaign who openly support Indigenous Rights for Europeans, have been this blog and the Renaissance Vanguard International; both of which support Indigenous Rights, not only for Europeans, but for All People's. <br />
<br />
Amazing. They whine endlessly about how they are always called 'racists'; but when given the opportunity to prove that they support Indigenous Rights for EVERYONE, not just whitey's; they are silent!! If you support Indigenous Rights, for only Europeans, and nobody else, thats not 'indigenous rights', that's white supremacy!</blockquote><br />
<div align="center"><a href="http://norway-v-breivik.blogspot.com/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ucMVxetdbw0/UQb1V85rcmI/AAAAAAAAg9o/v8ZoClZFlmw/s1600/IdleNoMore_IndigRightsRevol_EU_600x705.PNG" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 705px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><div align="center"><a href="http://norway-v-breivik.blogspot.com/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Ijo4lR6bpXY/UQbtFDmsGdI/AAAAAAAAg5Y/78sdW8xUzJ0/s1600/IdleNoMore-IndigenousRights_598x126.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 126px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 598px;" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Native Sovereignty and Ecological Protection in the Face of Post-Peak Oil Energy Devolution</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Jan 27, 2013 | Michael Putman, RPN Director | Renaissance Vanguard International</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-OUtC_JFvcPw/UQbvPbfPFyI/AAAAAAAAg68/h4tmq-MBbR0/s1600/Idle-RVI.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-o3nvnOe7lXI/UQbvHXM56bI/AAAAAAAAg6w/ZNS7X8WMLOs/s1600/Idle-RVI_375x281.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 281px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 375px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote>The Harper Government and the industrial and energy interests it serves have provoked much opposition amongst First Nations due to Bill C-45’s provisions relating to environmental protections of waterways, as well as unilateral changes to the Indian Act. As a response to these provocative actions, the Idle No More movement has arisen at the grassroots level, without being called into existence by the present Native leaders. It is important for us to understand why these developments are occurring, to see how they relate to the Renaissance Party of North America’s (RPN) Three Pillars, and to state RPN policy on this issue.<br />
<br />
The attempt to gut environmental protection by “streamlining” regulatory review, and the legislative reduction of protected waterways, as well as the closure of the Experimental Lakes Area with its paltry $1.5M annual budget, and continued Harperite Ministry of Public Safety paranoia in the matter of non-existent “environmental terrorists” and surveillance of Native activists all point to one entropic reality: Post-Peak Oil. The controversy and unrest have their roots at the foot of the First Pillar of the RPN.<br />
<br />
[..] Therefore, while signalling solidarity with Idle No More, the RPN is wary of promoting any such Reformist policy that would only serve to reinforce age old liberal White paternalism towards the First Nations. Instead, with a view towards our First Pillar of Post-Peak Oil energy devolution and our Second Pillar of directly related economic and political devolution of the nation-state into regional polities and economies, we call for full and true sovereignty of First Nations within their own secessionist ethno-states.<br />
<br />
Treaties with the Crown will not be honoured by the present Canadian state if these stand in the way of hyper-exploitation of natural resources in the final desperate hour of industrial global capital. As such, Reformism would be a cruel mirage at best, and would open the gateway to increasing corruption of the present Native leadership. In view of such a corruption possibility, the RPN’s offered alliance with Canadian Native Peoples rests with the grassroots voices, as reflected by Idle No More, and not with the “old guard” pampered leadership.<br />
<br />
In accordance with our Constitution then, and in view of the inevitable and rapid depletion of even the tar sands in light of Peak Oil and insurmountable global demand, we look forward to a secure future for independent First Nations, a robust and realistic secessionist strategy shared by both First Nations and White European bioregional secessionists, and sustainable local economies for both:<br />
<br />
2.2.6. To encourage North American secessionist movements and parties to acknowledge and promote an unconditional return to local and regionally-based agrarian economies, with a premium on independence, self-sufficiency, merit, small-scale and diversity rather than on corporate-based control and monoculture.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [Excerpt: <a href="http://www.renaissancevanguard.com/wordpress/?p=597">Renaissance Vanguard</a>]</span></strong></blockquote><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><a href="http://norway-v-breivik.blogspot.com/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Ijo4lR6bpXY/UQbtFDmsGdI/AAAAAAAAg5Y/78sdW8xUzJ0/s1600/IdleNoMore-IndigenousRights_598x126.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 126px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 598px;" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Pacific Sámi Searvi (Sámi Americans in the Pacific Northwest) Supports Idle No More</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Pacific Sami | 28 January 2013</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-UXOjkkDxvIk/UQbu16aAoHI/AAAAAAAAg6k/ktpqWakxMLA/s1600/IdleNoMOre-PacificSami_442x352.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-dtx3XTD34Vc/UQbutlBwGgI/AAAAAAAAg6Y/NfKpRWAQ034/s1600/IdleNoMOre-PacificSami_375x299.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 299px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 375px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote>After a discussion, web poll, and call-out to members, some of us gathered in Tacoma today to show support for <a href="https://www.facebook.com/IdleNoMoreCommunity">Idle No More</a>. Soon after, the photo above was posted on Facebook with our statement:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>We, the members of <a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/pacificsiida/?group_id=0">Pacific Sámi Searvi (Sámi Americans in the Pacific Northwest)</a> stand together with our Sámi brothers and sisters in solidarity with the Idle No More movement.</blockquote><br />
Within three hours, the photo was “liked” over 900 times and shared over 200 times. Wow.<br />
<br />
Among the Facebook comments was a not-unexpected question: What is a Sami?<br />
<br />
PSS member and PLU Professor <a href="http://www.plu.edu/~storfjta/">Troy Storfjell</a> answered:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“The Sámi are the Indigenous people< of northern Norway, Sweden, Finland and the Kola Peninsula of Russia, sometimes referred to as ‘Lapps’ or ‘Laplanders.’ There are 9 Sámi languages. Although reindeer herding is the most well-known Sámi livelihood, fishing, hunting and small-scale farming and sheep-raising are also traditional ways of life. Sámi participated in the co-founding of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Council_of_Indigenous_Peoples">World Council of Indigenous Peoples</a> in the 1970s, and participate in a number of global Indigenous forums and organizations today.”</blockquote><br />
Indigenous and non-indigenous people around the world are uniting to support the goals of Idle No More. The Sámi Parliament issued a statement of support on January 11th, <a href="http://pacificsearvi.wordpress.com/2013/01/11/sami-solidarity-with-idle-no-more/">as reported here earlier</a>, joining a river of other voices. Why the surge of international support?<br />
<br />
As environmentalist <a href="http://ecowatch.org/2013/idle-no-more-occupy/">Bill McKibben</a> says, after the hottest year on record, “the stakes couldn’t be higher, for Canada and for the world.” (Alberta’s tar sands and oil in the Arctic are two of the “<a href="http://www.straight.com/blogra/344936/alberta-tar-sands-among-worlds-biggest-climate-threats-greenpeace-says">world’s biggest dirty energy projects</a>,” according to Greenpeace, and threaten to push global climate change past “the point of no return.”)<br />
<br />
Indigenous people not only have a huge personal stake in the outcome but are uniquely capable of action:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“Corporations and governments have often discounted the power of native communities—because they were poor and scattered in distant places, they could be ignored or bought off. But in fact their lands contain much of the continent’s hydrocarbon wealth—and, happily, much of its wind, solar and geo-thermal resources, as well. The choices that Native people make over the next few years will be crucial to the planet’s future—and Idle No More is an awfully good sign that the people who have spent the longest in this place are now rising artfully and forcefully to its defense.”</blockquote><br />
With alarming losses to <a href="http://www.euractiv.com/climate-environment/arctic-sea-ice-loss-cause-pronou-news-516845">Arctic Sea ice</a> (the scantest ice cap in recorded history), the Sámi are not only vulnerable to global warming (even as oil companies anticipate increased exploration), but <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/mar/10/sami-finland-climate-change">uniquely poised to address it</a>.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“There is a lot to learn from the Sámi, they have the traditional ecological knowledge, they really know about nature,” said Helander-Renvall, head of the <a href="http://www.arcticcentre.org/?DeptID=4811">Arctic Indigenous Peoples Office</a> at the <a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=66.4853,25.7149&spn=0.01,0.01&q=66.4853,25.7149%20(University%20of%20Lapland)&t=h">University of Lapland</a> in Rovaniemi. “They have the most precise knowledge about the weather conditions, about the plants, the diet, the resources. The Sami people have an ethical relationship with nature; a respect for nature that also has a spiritual side.”<br />
<br />
The Arctic region is uniquely vulnerable to global warming, but if it is to weather the storm, it would do well to adopt Sami methods of land and resource management, communal co-operation and communication, local knowledge and best practice, she said.</blockquote><br />
Monday, January 28, is the World Wide Day of Action for Idle No More. Find out what is happening <a href="http://idlenomore.ca/">here</a>.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [<a href="http://pacificsearvi.wordpress.com/2013/01/28/pss-supports-idle-no-more/">Pacific Sami</a>]</span></strong></blockquote><br />
<div align="center"><a href="http://norway-v-breivik.blogspot.com/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Ijo4lR6bpXY/UQbtFDmsGdI/AAAAAAAAg5Y/78sdW8xUzJ0/s1600/IdleNoMore-IndigenousRights_598x126.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 126px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 598px;" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Sámi Solidarity with “Idle No More”</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">January 11, 2013 | Pacific Sami</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<br />
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-kzdZv8_gwTM/UQbuigMXrQI/AAAAAAAAg6I/X0Aa8UQcENg/s1600/IdleNoMore-Sami_01.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-MvL2_x729_I/UQbuZgdltBI/AAAAAAAAg58/6ZlMOIoT34o/s1600/IdleNoMore-Sami_01_375x234.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 234px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 375px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote>Today, Sámi Parliament President Egil Olli <a href="http://www.eradicatingecocideincanada.org/2013/01/sami-parliament-statement-of-sympathy-to-the-indigenous-peoples-of-canada/">expressed solidarity</a> with <a href="http://idlenomore.ca/">Idle No More</a>, the ongoing protest movement originating among the Aboriginal peoples in Canada and comprising the First Nations, Metis, and Inuit peoples, and their non-Aboriginal supporters in Canada and internationally.<br />
<br />
<blockquote><i>“I want from Sámediggi side to express our support and sympathy to the indigenous struggle in Canada. In particular, I wish to express my concern for the health of Chief Theresa Spence of the Attawapiskat nation, which now close to a month, went on hunger strike in protest against the narrow social and economic plight of Canada’s indigenous people live. I see it as natural that this will be one of the topics I will take up when I meet Canada’s Minister of Health in the Arctic Council 20 January.”</i></blockquote><br />
Yesterday the Church of Norway, including the Sámi Church Council, expressed <a href="http://www.kirken.no/index.cfm?event=doLink&famid=331745">solidarity</a>.<br />
<br />
The movement was launched in October, 2012 by four women (Nina Wilson, Sylvia McAdam, Jessica Gordon, and Sheelah McLean). On December 11, 2012, Attawapiskat Chief Theresa Spence began a fast, requesting a face-to-face meeting with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Governor General Stephen Johnston (the Queen’s representative) to discuss broken treaties and protection of natural resources.<br />
<br />
While Stephen Harper has agreed to meet with Chief Spence, Stephen Johnston has denied her <a href="http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/01/09/attending-no-more-chief-spence-snubs-harper-meeting-because-governor-general-not-going/">request</a>.<br />
<br />
Meanwhile, protests, drum circles, and fasts continue around the world in support of the movement. An interactive map of Idle No More events can be found <a href="http://www.mediacoop.ca/story/map-january-11th-idle-no-more-events/15540">here</a>.<br />
<br />
Learn more about Idle No More at this informative <a href="http://rabble.ca/blog/Krystalline%20Kraus/2013/01">blog</a> by Toronto journalist and Sami-American Krystalline Kraus (who many of us had the pleasure of meeting in Minnesota last summer at the 2012 Siidastallan).<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [<a href="http://pacificsearvi.wordpress.com/tag/idle-no-more/">Pacific Searvi</a>]</span></strong></blockquote><br />
<div align="center"><a href="http://norway-v-breivik.blogspot.com/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Ijo4lR6bpXY/UQbtFDmsGdI/AAAAAAAAg5Y/78sdW8xUzJ0/s1600/IdleNoMore-IndigenousRights_598x126.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 126px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 598px;" /></a></div><br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Sami Parliament statement of sympathy to the indigenous peoples of Canada</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">January 10, 2013 | Ron Hart | Eradicating Ecocide</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-7L2fvOlU1C8/UQbuCVMxV9I/AAAAAAAAg5w/F50Md_nA1ig/s1600/IdleNoMore-Sami-St_570x479.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-u7-yQhaPoGA/UQbt1J6Ne1I/AAAAAAAAg5k/4zTXETiTRbM/s1600/IdleNoMore-Sami-St_375x315.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 315px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 375px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote>Indigenous non-violent demonstrations under the “Idle No More” is a grassroots movement that is supported by many others in the Canadian society. The Sami Parliament is concerned about the situation and will, among other things, take the matter up with Canada’s Health Minister, who in the spring also takes over presidency chair of the Council.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>-I want from Sámediggi side to express our support and sympathy to the indigenous struggle in Canada now fighting. In particular, I wish to express my concern for the health of Chief Theresa Spence of the Attawapiskat nation, which is now close to a month, went on hunger strike in protest against the narrow social and economic plight of Canada’s indigenous people live. I see it as natural that this will be one of the topics I will take up when I meet Canada’s Minister of Health in the Arctic Council 20 January, says Sami Parliament President Egil Olli.</blockquote><br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [Excerpt: <a href="http://www.eradicatingecocideincanada.org/2013/01/sami-parliament-statement-of-sympathy-to-the-indigenous-peoples-of-canada/">Pacific Searvi</a> : <a href="http://www.sametinget.no/Internasjonalt-arbeid/Internasjonalt-urfolkssamarbeid/Sametinget-med-sympatierklaering-til-urfolk-i-Canada">Sametinget.NO</a>]</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327922598170048610" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JSpbgoKp8LA/SfCVX96zuGI/AAAAAAAAEIs/qqvoPLfHrLA/s400/400_BlackLine.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 7px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 620px;" />Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-43073689574783318752013-01-20T01:19:00.000+02:002013-02-05T16:44:04.488+02:00ECHR: Oslo District Courts Breivik Necessity Judgement is Discriminatory & Ineffective Remedy<div align="justify"><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">ECHR: European Court of Human Rights Application: Oslo District Courts Breivik Necessity Judgement is Discriminatory & Ineffective Remedy</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Right wing extremist terrorist Anders Breivik deserves a free and fair trial, and an objective and subjective enquiry into his political necessity evidence; by the Left wing extremist Norwegian Government; upon the same Norwegian rule of law due process principles; as left wing extremist terrorist Nelson Mandela deserved a free and fair trial, and an impartial objective and subjective enquiry into the evidence for his defence; by the Right wing extremist South African Apartheid government.</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">19 January 2013 | Ecofeminist v Breivik | Andrea Muhrrteyn</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-wkCF-5PI1f4/UPsmtf8Ms8I/AAAAAAAAgr0/cKcCgxK_f5I/s1600/ECHR_JvNO_Breivik.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-z355WBnLdEE/UPsnIMEeg5I/AAAAAAAAgsA/5QIu4JBLI3M/s1600/ECHR_JvNO_Breivik_350x338.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 338px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 350px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote><span style="font-size: 95%;">Human Rights Violations complained of: <br />
<br />
• <b>Discrimination</b>: 24 August 2012: Oslo District Court: Judge Wenche Arntzen: Norway v. Anders Breivik Necessity Judgement <br />
<br />
• <b>Discrimination and Denied Right to an Effective Remedy</b>: Supreme Court: Secretary General Gunnar Bergby: 10 September 2012 Decision<br />
<br />
• <b>Discrimination and Denied Right to an Effective Remedy</b>: Parliamentary Ombudsman: Head of Division: Berit Sollie: 15 November 2012 Ruling <br />
<br />
The (i) 10 September 2012, administrative decision of Norway Supreme Court Secretary General Gunnar Bergby, denying Applicant Access to Court by refusing to process her 27 August 2012, Application for Review of the Oslo District Court: ‘Breivik Judgement’; and (ii) the 15 November 2012 ruling by Parliamentary Ombudsman, that Secretary General’s Gunnar Bergby’s administrative decision, was a ‘judgement/decision by a court of law’, thereby justifying his refusal to order Secretary General Bergby to process Applicants Application for Review; were (iii) violations of applicants right to an Effective Remedy and (iv) were motivated acts of ideological discrimination against the ‘right wing’ or ‘cultural conservatives’, and against anyone – particularly anyone who is not ‘right wing’ -- who opposes, or objects to Ideological Discrimination against ‘right wing’ (cultural conservatives).</span></blockquote><a name='more'></a><div align="center"><a href="http://armigideon-knights.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-R0qzzurjUP4/T9WzLw5xK_I/AAAAAAAAacg/hZa3QwWxDds/s1600/NorwayVBreivik_FleurdeLis_MargaretHagen_556x119.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 119px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 556px;" /></a></div><br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Excerpts from ECHR Application alleging Oslo District Courts Breivik's Necessity Judgement is Discriminatory & an Ineffective Remedy</span></span></strong> </blockquote></div><br />
<blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">II. Statement of the Facts</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<b>14.1 Overview: Violations of Right to an Effective Remedy, by Supreme Court Secretary General and Parliamentary Ombudsman:</b><br />
<br />
<blockquote>A. The (i) 10 September 2012, administrative decision of Norway Supreme Court Secretary General Gunnar Bergby, denying Applicant Access to Court by refusing to process her 27 August 2012, Application for Review of the Oslo District Court: ‘Breivik Judgement’; and (ii) the 15 November 2012 ruling by Parliamentary Ombudsman, that Secretary General’s Gunnar Bergby’s administrative decision, was a ‘judgement/decision by a court of law’, thereby justifying his refusal to order Secretary General Bergby to process Applicants Application for Review; were (iii) violations of applicants right to an Effective Remedy and (iv) were motivated acts of ideological discrimination against the ‘right wing’ or ‘cultural conservatives’, and against anyone – particularly anyone who is not ‘right wing’ -- who opposes, or objects to Ideological Discrimination against ‘right wing’ (cultural conservatives).</blockquote><br />
<b>14.2 Overview: Discrimination and Right to an Effective Remedy:</b><br />
<br />
14.3 The Norwegian government has no justification to discriminate against an accused, by denying the accused his Right to a Free and Fair Trial (an effective remedy), simply because an accused is an ‘extreme right wing conservative’. <br />
<br />
14.4 The Norwegian government has no justification to discriminate against a ‘right wing’ accused, whose primary objective is to profit from such ‘liberal left wing’ discrimination against him, to attain ‘right wing’ martyr and victimhood status, thereby to emotionally outrage right wing conservatives, and contribute to greater polarisation of the public into left vs. right wing camps. <br />
<br />
14.5 The Norwegian government has no justification to discriminate against a ‘right wing’ accused, for the covert purposes of profiting from such left vs right wing polarisation consequences of denying a right wing accused his right to a free and fair trial. <br />
<br />
14.6 The Norwegian government has no justification to politically profit from denying a ‘hated’ accused their right to a free and fair trial, simply because the public is emotionally outraged and on a ‘right wing extremist witch hunt’ and obtain schadenfreude satisfaction from observing the judicial system discriminate against such ‘hated’ individual.<br />
<br />
14.7 The Norwegian government has no justification to discriminate against any individual who does not share the ‘right wing’ accused’s ideology, nor the public’s rabid emotional ‘right wing witch hunt’ hysteria for revenge and denial of the rule of law to the ‘right wing’ accused, who endorses the ‘right wing’ accused’s right to a free and fair trial.<br />
<br />
14.8 Anthropocentrically speaking: Right wing extremist terrorist Anders Breivik deserves a free and fair trial, and an objective and subjective enquiry into his political necessity evidence; by the Left wing extremist Norwegian Government; upon the same Norwegian rule of law due process principles; as left wing extremist terrorist Nelson Mandela deserved a free and fair trial, and an impartial objective and subjective enquiry into the evidence for his defence; by the Right wing extremist South African Apartheid government.<br />
<br />
<b>14.9 ‘Norway’s Politically Correct Discrimination & Censorship of Cultural Conservatives, by Feminists and Multiculturalists justified the Violent ‘Necessity’ of 22 July 2011 Attacks’ – Anders Breivik</b><br />
<br />
A. On 22 July 2011, a fertilizer truck bomb exploded in Oslo within Regjeringskvartalet, in front of the office of Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg, at 15:25:22 (CEST), killing eight and injuring at least 209; and ninety minutes later, a mass shooting occurred at a summer camp organized by the AUF, the youth division of the ruling Norwegian Labour Party (AP) on the island of Utøya in Tyrifjorden, Buskerud, by a gunman dressed in a homemade police uniform, killing 69, and injuring at least 110.<br />
<br />
B. The Norwegian Police arrested Anders Behring Breivik, born 13 February 1979, on Utøya island and charged him with both attacks. Breivik admitted to having carried out the actions he was accused of, but denied criminal guilt and claimed the defence of necessity (jus necessitatis).<br />
<br />
C. Breivik’s necessity justification – as detailed in his Manifesto: 2083 – A European Declaration of Independence and simplistically referred to as “Titanic Europe is on a demographic/immigration collision course with Islam Iceberg” -- was two-pronged: (1) Resist Eurabia: He believes Islam and cultural Marxism are involved in a ‘Eurabian’ demographic colonisation and ethnic cleansing of indigenous Norwegians and Europeans, and that it is a matter of necessity to resist “Eurabia”, to preserve European Christendom; (2) Gov & Media Censorship required Ultra violence to Access International Publicity: Non-violent resistance is futile, as democracy is no longer functioning in Norway, due to politically correct discrimination and exclusion – by means of censorship and persecution – of cultural conservatives by the left wing extremist Norwegian government and media. <br />
<br />
D. According to Oslo Organized Crime Police Investigation Report: “Explanation of 22 July 2011, doc 08,01”: “[Breivik] emphasizes that if he had not been censored by the media all his life, he would not have had to do what he did. He believes the media have the main responsibility for what has happened because they did not publish his opinions.... The low-intensity civil war that he had already described, had lasted until now with ideological struggle and censorship of cultural conservatives...... He explains that this is the worst day of his life and that he has dreaded this for 2 years. He has been censored for years. He mentions Dagbladet and Aftenposten as those who among other things have censored him..... He says that he also wrote “essays” that he tried to publish via the usual channels, but that they were all censored..... The subject summarizes: As long as more than twelve were executed, the operation will still be a success. The experts ask how the number twelve comes into consideration. Twelve dead are needed to penetrate the censorship wall, he explains..... About his thoughts on the Utøya killings now, the subject says: The goal was to execute as many as possible. At least 30. It was horrible, but the number had to be assessed based on the global censorship limit. Utøya was a martyrdom, and I am very proud of it..... He believes he had to kill at least twelve, because there is a censorship-wall preventing an open debate about what is happening in the country..... So I knew I had to cross a certain threshold to exceed the censorship-wall of the international media.” <br />
<br />
E. As argued in Anders Breivik 22 June 2012 Closing Statement: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>a. “Mullah Krekar [a Kurdish Islamic refugee in Norway] .. calls himself a Kurdish religious leader. He is one of the few Muslim leaders who are honest about Islam’s takeover of Europe. Krekar said, “In Denmark they printed drawings, but the result was that support of Islam increased. I, and all Muslims, are evidence. You have not managed to change us. It is we who are changing you. Look at the changes in the population of Europe, where Muslims reproduce like mosquitoes. Every Western woman in Europe has 1.4 children. Every Muslim woman in the same countries gives birth to 3.5 children.” <br />
<br />
b. “One of the most influential people in Norway, Arne Strand [a print and broadcast journalist and former member of Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland's cabinet] in Dagsavisen [the daily newspaper Strand edits, until 1999 the official organ of the Labor Party, now independent] has issued many statements about press subsidies. He proposes that everyone on the right, to the right of Carl I. Hagen [former Vice President of the Storting (Norwegian Parliament) and ex-chairman of the Progress Party], should be censored, and excluded from the democratic process. He says straight out that government press subsidies [to the Left, denied to the right] are necessary to preserve the current political hegemony. We must protect hegemony, we must not allow people the right to express themselves. The system of press subsidies ensures that Norway will never be a democracy, because those on the far right are excluded.” <br />
<br />
c. “This trial should be about finding the truth. The documentation of my claims—are they true? If they are true, how can what I did be illegal? Norwegian academics and journalists work together and make use of [..] methods to deconstruct Norwegian identity, Christianity, and the Norwegian nation. How can it be illegal to engage in armed resistance against this? The prosecution wondered who gave me a mandate to do what I did. [..] I have answered this before, but will do so again. Universal human rights, international law, and the right to self-defense provided the mandate to carry out this self-defense. Everything has been triggered by the actions of those who consciously and unconsciously are destroying our country. Responsible Norwegians and Europeans who feel even a trace of moral obligation are not going to sit by and watch as we are made into minorities in our own lands. We are going to fight. The attacks on July 22 were preventive attacks in defense of my ethnic group, the Norwegian indigenous people. I therefore cannot acknowledge guilt. I acted from necessity (nødrett) on behalf of my people, my religion and my country.”</blockquote><br />
14.10 Norwegian Prosecutors did not embark on legal proceedings to dispute and negate the evidence of Breivik’s ‘Necessity’ evidence, by means of a Political Necessity ‘Right Wing’ Terrorism trial, wherein Breivik’s Necessity evidence was proven unjustified, in accordance to the required Objective and Subjective test; but chose instead to proceed with a Stalinesque Political Psychiatry show trial, where Breivik was alleged to be ‘insane’, and was forced to prove his sanity. Once his sanity was proven, the matter of an impartial free and fair Terrorism Necessity trial, to determine his guilt or innocence, was ignored, as irrelevant. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.11 Applicant’s EcoFeminist Political Necessity Activism and Social Science Enquiry Ecological Biocentric worldview:</b><br />
<br />
14.12 Applicant is neither anthropocentrically liberal nor conservative, but an EcoFeminist Guerrylla Law Sustainable Security Radical Honoursty Transparency Primitivist and paralegal interested and active in Political Necessity civil disobedience activism. <br />
<br />
14.13 She is the founder of the unregistered Guerrylla Law Radical Honoursty Party, the aim of which is to establish a Green License to Vote, to elect a Green President, to transition South Africa into a Sustainable Voluntaryist (Honourable Free Society of Men and Women capable of ruling themselves) Green Republic. <br />
<br />
14.14 The Guerrylla Law Radical Honoursty Party, is founded on the Guerrylla Law Radical Honoursty Social Contract which include, among others, the following principles:<br />
<br />
A. <i><b>Radical Honoursty Problem Solving Communicator Status</b></i>: Any individual who desires this ‘status’ is required to follow the Radical Honoursty Problem Solving Communicator communication principles. All written communication for such members attention must be (a) acknowledged as received, (b) honestly answered or the questioner to be notified of a ‘by when’ date, when honest answers shall be provided. (c) Brutal honesty is considered honourable respect; sycophancy or PR is considered passive aggressive, manipulative and insulting. (d) In any disagreement or misunderstanding with another member, to commit to remain in discussion, with each other, until it is resolved. (e) Any member who ignores or evades another member’s attempts to resolve a disagreement, or to answer a question, will be put on the ‘Dishonourable Hit List’ for Party assassination after two final warning notices to the member, from the party to either: (a) resign, or (b) resolve the disagreement, by a specific date, in accordance to their Radical Honoursty Problem Solving Communicator Status oath.<br />
<br />
B. <i><b>Sustainability</b></i>: A Sustainable society regulates human procreation and/or resource utilization behaviour , to ensure sustainability. <br />
<br />
C. <i><b>Sustainable Rights</b></i>: Laws of Nature determine that Environmental or ecological rights and responsibilities are the sine qua non foundation for all other Rights . <br />
<br />
D. <i><b>Sustainable Security</b></i>: ‘There is no security without sustainability’ : In the absence of an international new moral order where Ecocentric Guerrylla laws are implemented to regulate and reduce human procreation and resource utilization behaviour, towards a sustainable, pre-industrial lifestyle paradigm; “overpopulation and resource scarcity will result in conflict and war” (perhaps nuclear ) confronting regions at an accelerated pace , resulting in the “collapse of the global economic system and every market-oriented national economy” by 2050 .<br />
<br />
E. <i><b>Guerrylla Laws</b></i>: define the procreation and consumption behaviour of an individual as an Eco-Innocent (sustainable) or Scarcity-Combatant (unsustainable), based upon (A) a sustainable bio-capacity of 1 global hectare (gha) (60 % of 1.8 gha ) in accordance with the proactive conservation policies of Bhutan ; and (B) the Oregon University study that concludes that every child increases a parents’ eco-footprint by a factor of 20 . <br />
<br />
F. A Green Voter is an individual whose procreation and consumption behaviour is sustainable, as defined by Guerrylla laws, as an Eco-Innocent .<br />
<br />
G. Only Green Voters can elect the Green President, whose general duty is to (A) protect the Constitution from the Tragedy of the Commons material greed and psychological and political dishonour of the nations Scarcity (breeding and consumption) combatants, who wish to exploit the country’s resources for short-term political and socio-economic profits, and (B) transition South Africa to a Sustainable Voluntaryist Green Republic. <br />
<br />
H. The Green President’s sustainable security legislative duty is to veto all legislation that obstructs, or fails to reduce, the nation’s Scarcity combatant’s procreation and/or consumption path to sustainability, based upon Guerrylla law sustainable rights and sustainable security principles. <br />
<br />
I. The Green Presidents sustainable security executive duty is to protect the Constitution, root out all corruption, by taking over the duty of executive supervision of the Ministry of Police and Ministry of Justice, including the appointment of all Magistrates and Justices. Magistrates and Judges shall be required to ascertain, verify, and transparently declare – as part of the court record - the Eco-Innocent (sustainable) or Scarcity-Combatant (unsustainable) status of all parties (including the Judge, legal representatives and State Representatives) to any court proceeding; including consideration of such status, where relevant to the legal proceedings. Any Eco-Innocent is entitled to be tried by an Eco-Innocent Prosecutor and Judge, and in any dispute with a Scarcity Combatant, may require the court to take notice of Scarcity Combatants behaviour as a relevant aggravating factor to Scarcity related socio-political problems, such as: crime, violence, unemployment, poverty, food shortages, inflation, political instability, loss of civil rights, conformism, political correctness, vanishing species, pollution, urban sprawl, toxic waste, energy depletion.<br />
<br />
J. An individual can only run for Green President, as (A) an Independent or from a Political Party, which practices 100% transparency disclosure of all campaign contributions, and (B) whose procreation and consumption lifestyle qualifies them as an Eco-Innocent .<br />
<br />
14.15 Applicant consequently partially agrees with Breivik, that not only Europe, but the World is at War, but considers the economic, political and military war between the Political Left and Right to be a deliberate distraction, from the real war that is being waged by both the Left and Right’s support for the Ind:Civ:F(x) world war against nature. <br />
<br />
14.16 <i><b>Ind:Civ:F(x) World War</b></i>: Industrial Civilization’s Exponential Economic Growth Breeding and Consumption War Scarcity combatant humans are at war with each other (Left v Right), Eco-Innocents, all other species for their preferential access to , and control of, nature’s finite resources. <br />
<br />
14.17 Applicant’s terrorism default working hypothesis is that much of terrorism – whether left or right -- is a result of Mainstream Access-to-Discourse Gatekeeper editor’s censorship of dissenter’s attempts at non-violent problem solving, creating a socio-political pressure cooker environment, where activists are forced to resort to violence for publicity, which benefits the media corporations ‘If It Bleeds, it Leads’ editorial policies and corporate profits.<br />
<br />
14.18 Applicant endorses everyone from the extreme left to right’s right to access to impartial courts. Applicant decided to test whether Breiviks allegations of Norway’s discrimination against and censorship of cultural conservatives was true, by means of embarking on a social science test to determine how Left Wing Norwegian Officials and media and right wing Breivik, would react to an EcoFeminist, supporting Breivik’s right to a free and fair trial. <br />
<br />
14.19 Applicant was particularly motivated to test Breivik’s allegations of discrimination against right wing / cultural conservatives, considering his Eco-Innocent status.<br />
<br />
<b>14.20 Anders Breivik: ‘Peacenik Innocent’ in Scarcity Combatants Ind.Civ.F(x) World War on Nature Theory:</b><br />
<br />
A. Dr. Jack Alpert defines Peace and Conflict not as descriptions of behaviour between nations, but as trends describing social conditions. Put differently: Conflict is not defined as the violence between neighbours and nations, but as the unwanted intrusion of one person’s existence and consumption behaviour upon another person. <br />
<br />
B. There are two kinds of conflict: Direct: he took my car, he enslaved me, he beat me, he raped me, he killed me; and Indirect. Indirect intrusions are the by-product of other people's behaviour. ‘All the trees on our island were consumed by our grandparents,’ is an indirect intrusion of a past generation on a present one. ‘The rich people raised the price of gasoline and we can't afford it,’ and ‘The government is offering people welfare to breed more children’ are current economic and demographic intrusions by one present group on another present group. <br />
<br />
C. System conflict is the sum of intrusions experienced by each constituent, summed over all the constituents. A measure of the existing global conflict is the sum of six billion sets of intrusions. A measure of Europe’s conflict is the sum of 740 million sets of intrusions. <br />
<br />
D. Using this definition of conflict, Dr. Alpert establishes that to move Earth’s socio-economic and political system toward peace – in terms of procreation -- would require the implementation of a one child per family policy . In the absence of such rapid population policy, civilization shall collapse . <br />
<br />
E. Consequently, as a result of Breivik’s ‘no children’ status, if his consumption footprint was below 20 global hectares, his status in the Ind.Civ.F(x) world war would be that of an Eco-Innocent. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.21 Social Science Enquiry into Breivik’s ‘Discrimination’ and ‘Censorship’ Allegations: 30 November 2011: Ecofeminist Application for Writ of Habeus Mentem and Review of Husby/Sorheim Psych Evaluation Report to Oslo District Court of Judge Nina Opsahl:</b><br />
<br />
A. On 30 November 2011, applicant filed an Application (PDF ) for a [I] writ of Habeus Mentem on behalf of Anders Breivik psycho-cultural integrity right to a free and fair trial; and [II] writ of Certiorari/Review of the Psychiatric Evaluation Report of Psychiatrists: Synne Sorheim and Torgeir Husby as to the Mens Rea political necessity criminal liability of Anders Breivik terrorist acts, on 22 July 2011. The application was filed electronically to the Oslo District Court Registrar.<br />
<br />
B. Notifications of the Application were sent to: 680 EU Members of Parliament on 04 December; 330 Norwegian Government Officials on 05 December; and 1,283 Norwegian Editors and Journalists on 07 December 2011. The Norwegian media did not consider an EcoFeminists (Breiviks enemy) legal support for Breivik to receive a free and fair trial, to be worthy of publicity; preferring the narrative that only the extreme right wing supported a free and fair trial for Breivik.<br />
<br />
C. On 15 December 2011 applicant requested the Registrar to “confirm: (1) the date my application is to be submitted to Judge Opsahl, or the relevant Judge, for their consideration, (2) the date the said Judge intends to provide me with their ruling on the matter.” There was no response from the Clerk of the Court. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.22 Social Science Enquiry into Breivik’s ‘Discrimination’ and ‘Censorship’ Allegations: 15 April 2012: Ecofeminist Application to Proceed as Amicus Curiae, to Oslo District Court of Judge Wenche Arntzen:</b><br />
<br />
A. On 15 April 2012, Applicant filed an Application to proceed as an Amicus Curiae (PDF ), to the Oslo District Court Registrar. <br />
<br />
B. Notifications were sent to 1,384 Norwegian Editors and Journalists on 16 April 2012. Again the media did not consider an EcoFeminists (Breiviks enemy) legal support for Breivik to receive a free and fair trial, to be worthy of publicity; preferring the narrative that only the extreme right wing supported a free and fair trial for Breivik.<br />
<br />
C. On 26 April 2012, Applicant requested the court to confirm “(1) The date my application is to be submitted to Judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen, or the relevant Judge, for her/their consideration. (2) The date the said Judge intends to provide me with their ruling approving or denying my application.” There was no response from the Clerk of the Court. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.23 Social Science Enquiry into Breivik’s ‘Discrimination’ and ‘Censorship’ Allegations: 10 May 2012: Ecofeminist Application for Review to Norway Supreme Court of Justice Tore Schei:</b><br />
<br />
A. On 10 May 2012, Applicant filed an Application to Review the Oslo District Court failure to act in accordance of due process to the Norway Supreme Court Registrar. <br />
<br />
B. On 11 May 2012 Applicant requested the Registrar to “kindly clarify when the Registrar shall issue a Case Number; or whether you require additional documentation or information?”<br />
<br />
C. On 15 May 2012, Deputy Secretary General Kjersti Buun Nygaard responded with: “Please be advised that the Supreme Court of Norway only handles appeals against judgments given by the lower courts and can consequently not deal with the issue mentioned in your e-mails. Further inquiries from you regarding the above issue can not be expected to be answered.”<br />
<br />
D. On 15 May 2012, Applicant responded (PDF ) detailing the Error in Supreme Court: Deputy Secretary General: Kjersti Buun Nygaard Response to SHARP Application to Supreme Court for Declaratory Orders and Review of Oslo District Court’s Decisions. There was no response from Ms. Nygaard or any other Supreme Court official.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.24 Social Science Enquiry into Breivik’s ‘Discrimination’ and ‘Censorship’ Allegations: Complaints against Judge Opsahl, Arentzen and Schei to Secretariat Supervisory Committee for Judges:</b><br />
<br />
A. On 30 May 2012, three complaints of Violation of Ethical Principles of Norwegian Judges, were submitted to Secretariat Supervisory Committee for Judges: against Judge Nina Opsahl (PDF ), Judge Wenche Arentzen (PDF ), and Justice Tore Schei (PDF ). The essence of the Oslo District Court complaints being that the Oslo District Court registrar refuses to process the applications, and refusal to provide any reasons for their refusal, clarifying for example, possible errors which require correction, were judicial ethics violations, and a failure of applicants right to due process, and an effective remedy. <br />
<br />
B. Two complaints of slow case processing – on 04 July 2012 (PDF ) and 02 September 2012 (PDF ) -- had to be filed against the Secretariat Supervisory Committee for Judges with the Parliamentary Ombudsman (Case 2012-1943), before the Secretariat issued Case Numbers: 12-071 (Opsahl), 12-072 (Arntzen) and 12-073 (Schei), on 03 September 2012, and informed the Applicant that “If a party have given a statement in the case, these will be provided the complainant. The Supervisory Committee has not received statements from the other parties involved.”<br />
<br />
C. On 23 October 2012, the Supervisory Committee for Judges changed their minds and decided they were not going to process the complaints in accordance to their ‘standard procedures’, of receiving a statement from the respective Judges, but were going to issue rulings in Norwegian, that all the complaint were ‘obviously unfounded’ (Google Translation). [Opsahl (PDF ), Arntzen (PDF ), and Schei (PDF )]<br />
<br />
D. Repeated requests for an English Translation of the ruling have been refused, including reasons why applicant was not informed, as part of ‘standard procedures’ that the ruling to her English complaint, would be issued in Norwegian.<br />
<br />
E. On 31 December 2012 , a complaint of Language Discrimination and Lack of Clear Principles by Secretariat Supervisory Committee for Judges Norwegian Language Rulings, in response to English Language complaints in Case 12-071: Judge Nina Opsahl, 12-072: Judge Wenche Arntzen, 12-073: Judge Tore Schei.” (PDF ), was submitted to the Parliamentary Ombudsman. As of date, no response has yet been received.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.25 Social Science Enquiry into Breivik’s ‘Discrimination’ and ‘Censorship’ Allegations: 19 June 2012: Appeal to Norway’s Environmental Appeals Board: Media Censorship of Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection:</b><br />
<br />
A. From 24 April to 14 May copies of the 22 April 2012: Earth Day report: <i><b>Acquittal or Firing Squad: If it Bleeds, it Leads, Media's Population Terrorism Connection</b></i> (PDF ) were distributed to: 677 EU Members of Parliament on 24 April; 863 UK Lords and Members of Parliament on 25 April; and on 14 May: 1,230 University of Oslo Law Professors and Lecturers , 482 Law Professors and Lawyers , 1,278 Norwegian Editors and Journalists , PM Jens Stoltenberg and 1676 Norwegian Government Officials , 104 NGO Officials and 258 Psychologists . Again the media did not consider an EcoFeminists (Breiviks enemy) legal support for Breivik to receive a free and fair trial, to be worthy of publicity; preferring the narrative that only the extreme right wing supported a free and fair trial for Breivik.<br />
<br />
B. The “<i><b>If It Bleads, It Leads :: Media Population-Terrorism Connection</b></i>”, Report (PDF ) argued that Mainstream Access-to-Discourse Editors censorship of non-violent political grievances and problem solving activism facilitate a pressure cooker socio-political reality for their “If it Bleads, It Leads” corporate propaganda profits, by (1) censoring the Scarcity (due to Overpopulation and Overconsumption) causes of violent resource war conflict; (2) that media abuse their publicity power in terms of their censorship of Ecocentric arguments submitted to courts; (3) Editors abuse their publicity power, by abusing public discourse/free speech resources; by providing certain parties with preferential and special access to such public discourse, and severely restricting or denying others any access to such public discourse; (4) Mainstream media avoid addressing or enquiring into root causes of problems as reported in Dr. Michael Maher’s report How and Why Journalists Avoid Population - Environment connection (PDF ); and censor non-violent root-cause problem solving activism.<br />
<br />
C. The report also included evidence that (i) 1,283 Norwegian Editors and Journalists had been Informed of the December 2011 Application to the Oslo District Court of Judge Nina Opsahl, all of whom had censored it from their readers; and (ii) 1,384 Norwegian Editors and Journalists had been informed of the April 2012 EcoFeminist Application to the Disctrict Court of Judge Wenche Arntzen, all of whom had censored it from their readers.<br />
<br />
D. On 25 May 2012, correspondence was submitted to: Adresseavisen: Editor: Arne Blix (PDF ); Aftenposten: Editor: Hilde Haugsgjerd (PDF ); Bergens Tidende: Editor: Trine Eilertsen (PDF ); Dagbladet: Editor: John Arne Markussen (PDF ); NRK: Editor: Hans Tore Bjerkaas (PDF ); TV2: Editor: Alf Hildrum (PDF ); VG: Editor: Torry Pedersen (PDF ); requesting the Editors to clarify their editorial decision-making to censor information about the Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection, during a Norwegian Terrorism trial being publicized by international media on the international stage; and their decision-making to censor information regarding the EcoFeminist Applications to the Oslo District Court on behalf of a free and fair trial, for the Feminist hating ‘right wing’ terrorist, from their readers. The editors refused to provide the requested information.<br />
<br />
E. On 19 June 2012, an Appeal (PDF ) was submitted to the Environmental Appeals Board: Request for Access to Environment and Health Information in terms of S.28 (Freedom of Information Act) and S.10 (Environmental Law) RE: Censorship in Norway’s Media: (I) Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection; (II) Norway’s Stalinesque Political Psychiatry Tyranny. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.26 Social Science Enquiry into Breivik’s ‘Discrimination’ and ‘Censorship’ Allegations: 10 September 2012: Environmental Appeal Board Ruling on Media Censorship:</b><br />
<br />
A. Initially Applicant’s media censorship complaint was deleted by the Environmental Appeals Board without reason. Upon complaint to Ministry of Environment , it was given a Reference number , with no apology for the deletion, implying the deletion was intentional and appropriate. On 04 July 2012, a complaint of Slow Case Processing (PDF ) was filed to the Parliamentary Ombudsman. The Environment Appeals Board refused to simply answer questions, delaying the complaint until ‘after summer’ , and refusing to say when the end of summer would be . Then promising it would be dealt with in August , only to do nothing in August . <br />
<br />
B. On 10 September 2012, the Secretariat of the Environmental Appeals Board issued a ruling (PDF ) – in violation of due process principles, without having received any statements from any media, or Bar Association parties – that Applicant’s Appeal was ‘unjustified’. <br />
<br />
C. On 11 September 2012, Applicant requested reasons for the Environmental Appeals Boards violations of general procedures of impartial enquiry and due process. <br />
<br />
D. On 18 September 2012, the Environmental Appeals Board responded that they violated general procedures of impartial enquiry and due process, because the Appeals ‘clearly had to be denied’. <br />
<br />
E. On 08 October 2012, Applicant responded that it was not clear why her Appeals ‘clearly had to be denied’, unless the Environmental Appeals board was massively corrupt. Applicant requested clarification of the Environmental Appeals Board’s ‘Environment’ definitions, and provided evidence how her appeals were both justified in accordance to the Aarhus convention’s definition of ‘environmental information’. <br />
<br />
F. On 03 November 2012, Applicant submitted an official written request (PDF ) to the Environmental Appeals Board in terms of Public Administration Act (PAA), Section 23, 24, 25 and Freedom of Information Act, Section 22, requesting clarification of the factual and legal grounds upon which the Environmental Appeals Board justified their ruling of ‘clearly had to be denied’, “including clarifying exactly how my complaints do not fit the definition of Environment as clarified by the Aarhus convention and LAW 2003-05-09 # 31: Act concerning the right to information and participation in public decision-making processes relating to the environment (environmental law)”.<br />
<br />
G. On 06 November 2012, the Environmental Appeals Board notified Applicant her request for factual and legal grounds for her denied Appeal, had been denied . <br />
<br />
H. On 11 November 2012, Applicant filed an Appeal (PDF ) to the Parliamentary Ombudsman: Erroneous Decision by Environment Appeals Board in Environmental Information Appeals re: [I] Editorial Decision-Making: Censorship of Media’s ‘Population-Environment-Terrorism’ Connection; [II] Bar Association: Anti-Environmental Complaints Policy. <br />
<br />
I. The Parliamentary Ombudsman Appeal against the Media Censorship Ruling argued (i) It was an Irregular Violation of Due Process: Irregular failure of Impartial Arbitration due process procedures; (ii) the Environmental Appeals Board failed to justify how the requested Population Growth and Consumptionism information requested from the Media is not ‘Environmental Information’: Population Growth and Corporate Advocacy of Consumptionism are primary factors in Resource Scarcity, Species Extinction and Environmental Degradation, and (iii) the Editor’s and Environmental Appeals Board’s Refusal of Access to Information from Media Respondents is Contrary to Provisions of Freedom of Information Act, Right to Environmental Information Act and Aarhus Convention.<br />
<br />
J. On 27 November 2012, the Parliamentary Ombudsman ruled (PDF ) that “The Ombudsman has reviewed your complaint and the enclosed documents, and your complaint does not give reasons to initiate further investigations regarding the Appeals Board case processing or decision.”<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.27 Social Science Enquiry into Breivik’s ‘Discrimination’ and ‘Censorship’ Allegations 27 August 2012: Application to Norway Supreme Court, for Review of Oslo District Court: Breivik Judgement ruling of 24 August:</b><br />
<br />
A. On 27 August 2012, an Application (PDF ) was submitted to Norway Supreme Court for Review of Oslo District Court: Breivik Judgement Necessity Ruling, which states that “As regards this submission, the Court briefly notes that neither the provisions of the Penal Code concerning necessity nor international human rights, which the defendant also invokes, allow the murder of government employees, politically active youth or others, to further extreme political goals. It is evident that this submission cannot be accepted.” <br />
<br />
B. <i><b>Review Orders Requested</b></i>: <br />
<br />
a. Set Aside the Judgements ‘Necessity (Nødrett) Ruling’ (pg.67 )<br />
<br />
b. Set Aside Defendant’s Conviction (Finding of Guilt) and Remit to Oslo District Court for hearing of Further Evidence to conclude Objective and Subjective Necessity Test Evidentiary Enquiry.<br />
<br />
C. <i><b>Grounds for Review</b></i>: <br />
<br />
a. The application for review is based on the grounds of (A) Irregularities & Illegalities in the Proceedings before the Oslo District Court: in terms of (1) A Failure of Justice and Failure of a True and Correct Interpretation of the Facts; (2) Judicially Un-Investigated Facts; (3) Failure of Application of Mind and (4) Rejection of Admissible or Competent Evidence: (i) Prosecutor & Judges failure to examine objective and subjective necessity test; and (ii) Courts denial of due process to applicants Habeus Mentem and Amicus Curiae applications .<br />
<br />
b. [A.1.a] Necessity Judgement fails to provide any necessity criminal provisions that prohibit killing of Government Officials in case of Necessity <br />
<br />
c. [A.1.b] Necessity Judgement Ignores that Criminal Necessity provisions do not prohibit the killing of Government Officials in case of objective and subjective Necessity.<br />
<br />
d. [A.1.c] Necessity Judgement’s Erroneous interpretation of Necessity related criminal law provisions and international necessity related human rights law.<br />
<br />
e. [A.1.d] Necessity and Guilt Judgement’s Failure to conduct required Objective and Subjective Tests for Defendant’s Necessity Defence<br />
<br />
f. [A.1.e] Necessity and Guilt Judgement’s Absence of Objective and Subjective Test Enquiry and Conclusions Renders it Inadequate<br />
<br />
g. [A.1.f] Necessity and Guilt Judgement’s Absence of Clarification Upon which party the Onus of Proof lies in a Case of Necessity; and how or why their evidence was insufficient renders the Judgements Conclusions inadequate.<br />
<br />
h. [A.1.g] Necessity and Guilt Judgement’s Absence of Objective and Subjective Test Enquiry and Conclusions Renders it Discriminatory Precedent<br />
<br />
i. [A.1.h] Necessity Judgements ‘Extreme Political Objectives’ conclusion is unsupported in the Absence of Objective and Subjective Necessity Test<br />
<br />
j. [A.1.i] Necessity Judgements ‘Extreme Political Objectives’ conclusion is unsupported in the Absence of Objective and Subjective Necessity Test<br />
<br />
D. <i><b>Failure of Justice: Judicially Un-Investigated Facts: Necessity and Guilt</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. No reference was made during court proceedings by any party alleging that any Norwegian or International specific necessity criminal statute specifically prohibits the killing of government or politically active young people, in the event of objective and subjective reasonably determined necessity.<br />
<br />
b. No International or Norwegian specific necessity criminal statute specifically prohibits the killing of government or politically active young people, in the event of objective and subjective reasonably determined necessity.<br />
<br />
c. Necessity criminal statutes do not specifically allow or disallow the killing of government or politically active young people, but provide for an objective and subjective test that examines each alleged criminal act to objectively and subjectively determine whether necessity existed, or the defendant honestly believed it existed, within the particular criminal act‘s relevant circumstances.<br />
<br />
d. The court, prosecution and defence counsel failed to conduct the required subjective and objective tests to examine the evidence for the Defendant‘s necessity motivations to determine (I) objectively whether the defendant‘s claims – simplistically rephrased as – “Titanic Europe is on a demographic/immigration collision course with Islam Iceberg”; and (II) secondly whether the defendant subjectively perceived the Titanic Europe/Islam Iceberg circumstances this way.<br />
<br />
e. The Judgement fails to disclose Norwegian law‘s Onus of Proof requirements in a case of necessity: i.e. upon which party – Defendant or State - does the Onus of Proof lie in case of Necessity? In South Africa, the proof in a defense of necessity, ruling out the reasonable possibility of an act of necessity, lies on the State. In the absence of the State ruling out the reasonable possibility of an act of necessity, the accused claim of necessity stands.<br />
<br />
f. It is clear that the Court's statement of reasons does not show the results of the courts objective and subjective enquiry into the Defendant‘s claim of necessity. Thus, it is also clear that the Court's statement of reasons for its “necessity finding of guilt”, are inadequate. Hence the finding of guilt needs to be set aside for further evidence to objectively and subjective evaluate the defendants necessity defence.<br />
<br />
g. Finally if the Courts statement of reasons remain uncorrected, they would set a bad precedent, encouraging other courts to deny necessity defendants their rights to an objective and subjective test of their necessity defence, including denying the defendant information clarifying upon whom the Onus of Proof in a defence of necessity lies.<br />
<br />
E. <i><b>Oslo Court: Breivik Defence of Necessity</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. On 17 April 2012, the Oslo Court tweeted to Journalists attending the Breivik trial: “Wrong translation in the 22-7 trial yesterday: Breivik said "nodrett", Correct translation: "Principle of Necessity", not "self defence".”<br />
<br />
b. The principle of Necessity is enshrined in Norwegian Law in Section 47 of the Penal Code : "No person may be punished for any act that he has committed in order to save someone's person or property from an otherwise unavoidable danger when the circumstances justified him in regarding this danger as particularly significant in relation to the damage that might be caused by his act."<br />
<br />
<br />
F. <i><b>Prosecutor Engh and Holden “Refuse to touch Breivik’s Principle of Necessity”</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. According to Document.NO , NRK , VG , NRK , the transcripts Prosecutor Engh and Holden violated their duty of objectivity in terms of (a) impartially enquiring into and/or responding to the Accuseds‘ Defence; and (b) providing the court with the Prosecution‘s evaluation and conclusion of the evidence for and against Breivik‘s invocation of his Necessity Defence.<br />
<br />
b. In her closing statement, Prosecutor Engh acknowledges that: (A) Norwegian prosecutors have a duty to conduct their investigation with objectivity; (B) Norwegian law allows for an accused to plead to necessity and/or self defence, (C) Where an accused does invoke necessity, it is the court and prosecutor‘s duty to investigate the accused‘s necessity defence arguments and evidence; (D) If an accused successfully invokes a necessity defence, this can and must result in either mitigation of sentence and/or a verdict of innocence; (E) Breivik invoked the defence of necessity; (F) Despite the fact that Breivik invoked the necessity defence, both Prosecutor Engh and Holden “refuse to touch the principle of necessity”.<br />
<br />
<br />
G. <i><b>Necessity in Norwegian Law</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. LAW-2005-05-20-28: Lov om straff (straffeloven). | Act on Punishment (Penal Code) , (Google Translation) says: § 17 Necessity: “An action that would otherwise be criminal, is legal when a) it is being undertaken to save lives, health, property or any interest from the danger of injury that can not be averted in any other reasonable manner, and b) the risk of injury is far greater than the risk of injury by the action.”<br />
<br />
b. LAW-1998-03-20-10-§ 5: Forskrift om sikkerhetsadministrasjon | Regulations relating to security management allows for “security breaches without criminal liability if the terms of the principle of necessity or self defence in criminal law law § 47 or § 48 is met.”<br />
<br />
<br />
H. <i><b>Norwegian Law Necessity Judgement: Subjective and Objective Test</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. In LE-2012-76983 Eidsivating Appeal – Judgment of 29 May 2012, an Eritrean man was accused of several Perjury related Immigration offences to help his sister to come to Norway. He admitted the facts, but claimed necessity. In court he was found guilty on all counts and sentenced to 90 days' imprisonment. The Court of Appeal suspended the appeal to test his conviction on one point (whether the court a quo had seriously enquired into his necessity defence).<br />
<br />
b. The Norwegian Court of Appeal agreed with the Defendant‘s argument that asserted that the court a quo had not considered the circumstances that were invoked as the basis for the existence of a principle of necessity situation. The judgement stated that it is clear that “the courts statement of reasons does not show that the court has considered this argument. Thus it is also clear that the Court‘s statement of reasons in so far are inadequate.”<br />
<br />
<br />
I. <i><b>Necessity Defence: International and Foreign Law</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. The rationale of the necessity defense is not that a person, when faced with the pressure of circumstances of nature, lacks the mental element which the crime in question requires. Rather, it is this reason of public policy: the law ought to promote the achievement of higher values at the expense of lesser values, and sometimes the greater good for society will be accomplished by violating the literal language of the criminal law. <br />
<br />
b. The principle of the necessity defence is rooted in common law and any accused pleading to necessity argues that their actions were justified or an exculpation for breaking the law. Defendants who plead to necessity – whether common law necessity, political necessity (civil disobedience) or military necessity - argue that they should not be held liable for their actions as being criminal, because their conduct was necessary to prevent some greater harm.<br />
<br />
<br />
J. As argued in <i>The Necessity Defense in Civil Disobedience Cases: Bring in the Jury</i>, by William P. Quigley:<br />
<br />
a. [..] The doctrine of necessity, with its inevitable weighing of choices of evil, holds that certain conduct, though it violates the law and produces harm, is justified because it averts a greater evil and hence produces a net social gain or benefit to society. <br />
<br />
b. Glanville Williams expressed the necessity doctrine this way: “[S]ome acts that would otherwise be wrong are rendered rightful by a good purpose, or by the necessity of choosing the lesser of two evils.” He offers this example: “Suppose that a dike threatens to give way, and the actor is faced with the choice of either making a breach in the dike, which he knows will result in one or two people being drowned, or doing nothing, in which case he knows that the dike will burst at another point involving a whole town in sudden destruction. In such a situation, where there is an unhappy choice between the destruction of one life and the destruction of many, utilitarian philosophy would certainly justify the actor in preferring the lesser evil.” <br />
<br />
K. In <i>Nuclear War, Citizen Intervention, and the Necessity Defense</i> , Robert Aldridge and Virginia Stark, document numerous cases of Common Law and Civil Disobedience Necessity Defence Cases which resulted in Innocence verdicts or severe Mitigation of Sentencing.<br />
<br />
L. <i><b>Common Law Necessity Defence Cases Resulting in Innocence Verdicts or Severe Mitigation of Sentencing</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. In <i>Regina v Dudley and Stephens</i> (1884) 14 QBD 273, three crew members and a cabin boy escaped a shipwreck to spend eighteen days on a boat, over 1,000 miles from land, with no water and only two one pound tins of turnips. After four days, they caught and ate a small turtle. That was the only food that they had eaten prior to the twentieth day of being lost at sea. Ultimately, two of the crew members killed the ailing cabin boy and “fed upon the body and blood of the boy for four days.” Four days later, they were rescued. Two of the men were charged with murder. The court found that the cabin boy would likely have died by the time they were rescued and that the crew members, but for their conduct, would probably have died as well. The Queen's Bench Division Judges held that the defendants were guilty of murder in killing the cabin boy and stated that their obvious necessity was no defence. The defendants were sentenced to death, but this was subsequently commuted to six months' imprisonment.<br />
<br />
b. In <i>Spakes v. State</i>, 913 S.W.2d 597 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996), the Texas Criminal Appeals Court allowed the jury to be instructed on the necessity defense before deliberating the verdict for an inmate whose three cellmates had planned an escape and threatened to slit his throat if he did not accompany them. The defendant inmate argued that because of the terribly violent crimes of which his cellmates had been convicted (one had bragged about chopping his girlfriend up with an ax), it was a necessity that he break the law, by accompanying them in their escape.<br />
<br />
c. In <i>United States v. Ashton</i>, 24 F. Cas. 873, 873-74 (C.C.D. Mass 1834) (No. 14,470), sailors prosecuted for mutiny were found not guilty, after arguing the necessity for their mutiny based upon the dangerously leaky ship and that this danger had been concealed from them until after they left port. Circuit Justice Story found them not guilty of mutiny.<br />
<br />
d. In <i>United States v. Holmes</i>, 26 F. Cas. 360 (E.D. Pa. 1842) (No. 15,383), Holmes was involved in a shipwreck, where the crew were charged with manslaughter for throwing sixteen passengers overboard in a frantic attempt to lighten a sinking lifeboat. The Prosecutor argued the passengers should be protected at all costs, whereas the Defence placed the jurors in the sinking lifeboat with the defendant. The Defendant was found guilty, but the jurors requested leniency, to which the court complied by sentencing the defendant to six months in prison and a fine of twenty dollars.<br />
<br />
e. In the 1919 Arizona decision of <i>State v. Wooten</i>, commonly referred to as the Bisbee Deportation case, Professor Morris describes the acquittal of a Sherrif based upon the “necessity” for committing Kidnapping.<br />
<br />
f. In <i>Surocco v. Geary</i>, 3 Cal. 69 (1853), a large fire threatened the unburned half of the then small town of San Francisco. A public officer ordered the destruction of houses to create a firebreak and was subsequently sued by one of the owners. On appeal, the California Supreme Court held that the action was proper because: “The right to destroy property, to prevent the spread of a conflagration, has been traced to the highest law of necessity, and the natural rights of man, independent of society and the civil government. "It is referred by moralists and jurists as the same great principle which justifies the exclusive appropriation of a plank in a shipwreck, though the life of another be sacrificed; with the throwing overboard goods in a tempest, for the safety of the vessel; with the trespassing upon the lands of another, to escape death by an enemy. It rests upon the maxim, Necessitas inducit privilegium quod jura private." [Necessity leads to privileges because of private justice].”<br />
<br />
M. <i><b>Civil Disobedience Political Necessity Defence Cases Resulting in Innocence Verdicts or Severe Mitigation of Sentencing</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. In the United States, 23 cases of left wing/liberal political protestors necessity defence cases have resulted in innocence or severe mitigation of sentencing, whereas only 1 case of right wing/conservative political protestors cases have resulted in innocence or severe mitigation of sentencing. <br />
<br />
b. Left Wing/Liberal: Anti Nuclear (10): State v. Mouer (Columbia Co. Dist. Ct., Dec. 12-16, 1977), People v. Brown (Lake County, Jan. 1979); People v. Block (Galt Judicial Dist., Sacramento Co. Mun. Ct., Aug. 14, 1979); California v. Lemnitzer, No. 27106E (Pleasanton-Livermore Mun. Ct. Feb. 1, 1982); State v. McMillan, No. D 00518 (San Luis Obispo Jud. Dist. Mun. Ct., Cal. Oct. 13, 1987); Massachusetts v. Schaeffer-Duffy (Worcester Dist. Ct. 1989); West Valley City v. Hirshi, No. 891003031-3 MC (Salt Lake County, Ut. Cir. Ct., W. Valley Dept. 1990); Washington v. Brown, No. 85-1295N (Kitsap County Dist. Ct. N. 1985); California v. Jerome, Nos. 5450895, 5451038, 5516177, 5516159 (Livermore-Pleasanton Mun. Ct., Alameda County, Traffic Div. 1987); Washington v. Karon, No. J85-1136-39 (Benton County Dist. Ct. 1985)<br />
<br />
c. Left Wing/Liberal: Anti US Central American Foreign Policy (3); Vermont v. Keller, No. 1372-4-84-CNCR (Vt. Dist. Ct. Nov. 17, 1984); People v. Jarka, Nos. 002170, 002196-002212, 00214, 00236, 00238 (Ill. Cir. Ct. Apr. 15, 1985); Colorado v. Bock (Denver County Ct. June 12, 1985)<br />
<br />
d. Left Wing/Liberal: Anti-Military Industrial Complex (4): Michigan v. Jones et al., Nos. 83-101194-101228 (Oakland County Dist. Ct. 1984); Michigan v. Largrou, Nos. 85-000098, 99, 100, 102 (Oakland County Dist. Ct. 1985); Massachusetts v. Carter, No. 86-45 CR 7475 (Hampshire Dist. Ct. 1987); Illinois v. Fish (Skokie Cir. Ct. Aug. 1987)<br />
<br />
e. Left Wing/Liberal: Anti-Apartheid (3): Chicago v. Streeter, Nos. 85-108644, 48, 49, 51, 52, 120323, 26, 27 (Cir. Ct., Cook County Ill. May 1985); Washington v. Heller (Seattle Mun. Ct. 1985); Washington v. Bass, Nos. 4750-038, -395 to -400 (Thurston County Dist. Ct. April 8, 1987)<br />
<br />
f. Left Wing/Liberal: Pro-Environment/Cycling (1): People v. Gray, 571 N.Y.S.2d 851, 861-62 (N.Y. Crim. Ct.1991)<br />
<br />
g. Left Wing/Liberal: AIDS: Clean Needles Campaign (2) California v. Halem, No. 135842 (Berkeley Mun. Ct. 1991); In 1993, a jury acquitted a Chicago AIDS activist charged with illegally supplying clean needles because of the necessity defense. <br />
<br />
h. Right Wing/Conservative: Anti-Abortion (1): In 1990, in Omaha, Nebraska, a jury acquitted seventeen anti-abortion protestors because of the necessity defense. The trial judge relied on the defense to overturn the trespassing convictions of an additional eighteen defendants. <br />
<br />
i. Neutral: Anti-Corruption (1): In 1988, a North Carolina court acquitted two Tuscarora Indians of charges in connection with their taking of twenty hostages at the office of a local newspaper to protest the alleged corruption of county officials. <br />
<br />
j. Neutral: Anti-Alcohol Advertising (1): In 1991, a Chicago jury acquitted a Catholic priest of criminal charges for damage to the inner-city neighborhood where he was pastor after he admitted painting over three tobacco- and alcohol-related billboards. The defendant argued he should not be convicted because of the necessity defense. The jury deliberated ninety minutes before acquitting the defendant. <br />
<br />
k. <i><b>Military Necessity and International Humanitarian Law</b></i>:<br />
<br />
l. <i>Crimes of War</i> and <i>Diakona</i> define military necessity as: “a legal concept used in international humanitarian law (IHL) as part of the legal justification for attacks on legitimate military targets that may have adverse, even terrible, consequences for civilians and civilian objects. It means that military forces in planning military actions are permitted to take into account the practical requirements of a military situation at any given moment and the imperatives of winning. The concept of military necessity acknowledges that even under the laws of war, winning the war or battle is a legitimate consideration, though it must be put alongside other considerations of IHL.”<br />
<br />
m. Luis Moreno-Ocampo, Chief Prosecutor at the International Criminal Court, investigated allegations of War Crimes during the 2003 invasion of Iraq and published an open letter containing his findings. In a section titled "Allegations concerning War Crimes" he did not call it military necessity but summed up the term: “Under international humanitarian law and the Rome Statute, the death of civilians during an armed conflict, no matter how grave and regrettable, does not in itself constitute a war crime. International humanitarian law and the Rome Statute permit belligerents to carry out proportionate attacks against military objectives, even when it is known that some civilian deaths or injuries will occur. A crime occurs if there is an intentional attack directed against civilians (principle of distinction) (Article 8(2)(b)(i)) or an attack is launched on a military objective in the knowledge that the incidental civilian injuries would be clearly excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage (principle of proportionality) (Article 8(2)(b)(iv).”<br />
<br />
N. <i><b>Military Necessity Justifies use of Nuclear Weapons for Self-Preservation</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. In the International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion of 8 July 1996, on The legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons , the final paragraph states “that such threat or use would generally be contrary to international humanitarian law. The opinion went on to state, however, that the court “cannot lose sight of the fundamental right of every State to survival, and thus its right to resort to self-defence . . . when its survival is at stake.” The court held, by seven votes to seven, with its president‘s casting vote, that it “cannot conclude definitively whether the threat or use of nuclear weapons would be lawful or unlawful in an extreme circumstance of self defence in which the very survival of a State would be at stake.”<br />
<br />
O. <i><b>Military Necessity in Nuremberg German High Command Trial</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. In the <i>Trial of Wilhelm von Leeb and Thirteen Others</i>: United States Military Tribunal, Nuremberg, 30th December, 1947 – 28 the October, 1948 <br />
<br />
b. Wilhelm von Leeb and the other thirteen accused in this case were former high-ranking officers in the German Army and Navy, and officers holding high positions in the German High Command (OKW) were charged with Crimes against Peace, War Crimes, Crimes against Humanity and with Conspiracy to commit such crimes. The War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity charged against them included murder and ill-treatment of prisoners of war and of the civilian population in the occupied territories and their use in prohibited work; discrimination against and persecution and execution of Jews and other sections of the population by the Wehrmacht in co-operation with the Einsatzgruppen and Sonderkommandos of the SD, SIPO and the Secret Field Police; plunder and spoliation and the enforcement of the slave labour programme of the Reich.<br />
<br />
c. They were acquitted of some of the charges, where it was ascertained that military necessity existed objectively and/or subjectively in the particular circumstances.<br />
<br />
d. The Tribunal argued that “The devastation prohibited by the Hague Rules and the usages of war is that not warranted by military necessity. This rule is clear enough but the factual determination as to what constitutes military necessity is difficult. Defendants in this case were in many instances in retreat under arduous conditions wherein their commands were in serious danger of being cut off. Under such circumstances, a commander must necessarily make quick decisions to meet the particular situation of his command. A great deal of latitude must be accorded to him under such circumstances. What constitutes devastation beyond military necessity in these situations requires detailed proof of an operational and tactical nature. We do not feel that in this case the proof is ample to establish the guilt of any defendant herein on this charge.”<br />
<br />
e. Thus, in dealing with Reinhardt's alleged responsibility for plunder and spoliation, the Tribunal said: “The evidence on the matter of plunder and spoliation shows great ruthlessness, but we are not satisfied that it shows beyond a reasonable doubt, acts that were not justified by military necessity.”<br />
<br />
P. <i><b>Military Necessity: The Rendulic Rule: Importance of the Subjective Test</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. In <i>The Law of Armed Conflict: International Humanitarian Law in War</i>, Gary D Solis provides an overview of the Rendulic Rule in evaluation of the subjective test in evaluating a defence of Military Necessity: <br />
<br />
b. “In October 1944, Generaloberst Lothar Rendulic was Armed Forces Commander North, which included command of Nazi Forces in Norway. (Between World Wars I and II, Rendulic had practiced law in his native Austria.) Following World War II, he was prosecuted for, among other charges, issuing an order “for the complete destruction of all shelter and means of existence in, and the total evacuation of the entire civilian population of the northern Norwegian province of Finmark...” Entire villages were destroyed, bridges and highways bombed, and port installations wrecked. Tried by an American military commission, Rendulic's defence was military necessity. He presented evidence that the Norwegian population would not voluntarily evacuate and that rapidly approaching Russian forces would use existing housing as shelter and exploit the local population's knowledge of the area to the detriment of retreating German forces. The Tribunal acquitted Rendulic of the charge, finding reasonable his belief that military necessity mandated his orders. His case offers one of the few adjudicated views of what constitutes military necessity.<br />
<br />
c. <i>From the Tribunals opinion</i>:<br />
<br />
d. “Military necessity has been invoked by the defendant's as justifying.. the destruction of villages and towns in an occupied territory... The destruction of property to be lawful must be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war... There must be some reasonable connection between the destruction of property and the overcoming of the enemy forces. It is lawful to destroy railways, lines of communication, or any other property that might be utilized by the enemy. Private homes and churches even may be destroyed if necessary for military operations. It does not admit the wanton devastation of a district or the wilful infliction of suffering upon its inhabitants for the sake of suffering alone...<br />
<br />
e. “The evidence shows that the Russians had very excellent troops in pursuit of the Germans. Two or three land routes were open to them as well as landings by sea behind German lines... The information obtained concerning the intentions of the Russians was limited.. It was with this situation confronting him that he carried out the "scorched earth" policy in the Norwegian province of Finmark.. The destruction was as complete as an efficient army could do it...<br />
<br />
f. “There is evidence in the record that there was no military necessity for this destruction and devastation. An examination of the facts in retrospect can well sustain this conclusion. But we are obliged to judge the situation as it appeared to the defendant at the time. If the facts were such as would justify the action by the exercise of judgement, after giving consideration to all the factors and existing possibilities, even though the conclusion reached may have been faulty, it cannot be said to be criminal. After giving careful consideration to all the evidence on the subject, we are convinced that the defendant cannot be held criminally responsible although when viewed in retrospect, the danger did not actually exist....<br />
<br />
g. “..... We are not called upon to determine whether urgent military necessity for the devastation and destruction in the province of Finmark actually existed. We are concerned with the question whether the defendant at the time of its occurrence acted within the limits of honest judgement on the basis of the conditions prevailing at the time. The course of a military operation by the enemy is loaded with uncertainties... It is our considered opinion that the conditions, as they appeared to the defendant at the time, were sufficient upon which he could honestly conclude that urgent military necessity warranted the decision made. This being true, the defendant may have erred in the exercise of his judgement but he was guilty of no criminal act. We find the defendant not guilty of the charge. <br />
<br />
h. The Rendulic standard remains unchanged. Fifty-four years later, in 2003, the ICTY wrote: “In determining whether an attack was proportionate it is necessary to examine whether a reasonably well-informed person in the circumstances of the actual perpetrator, making reasonable use of the information available to him or her, could have expected excessive civilian casualties to result from the attack.” <br />
<br />
Q. <i><b>Military Necessity: Rendulic Rule: Subjective Honesty in current Military Doctrine</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. In <i>Unexpected Consequences From Knock-On Effects: A Different Standard for Computer Network Operations?</i> , Eric Talbot Jensen writes:<br />
<br />
b. “The standard the Court held General Rendulic to was the requirement to give "consideration to all factors and existing possibilities" as they "appeared to the defendant at the time."”<br />
<br />
c. “Note that the requirement to give consideration to all factors and existing possibilities is balanced with the overarching constraint of taking facts as they appear at the time of the decision. Must the commander remain in inaction until he feels he has turned over every stone in search of that last shred of information concerning all factors and possibilities that might affect his decision? The answer must be "no." Instead, he must act in good faith and, in accordance with GPI, do everything feasible to get this information.”<br />
<br />
R. <i><b>Onus of Proof: Norwegian State or Breivik to Prove Necessity?</b></i>:<br />
<br />
a. In South African law the Onus of Proof lies on the State in a defence of necessity, to rule out the reasonable possibility of an act of necessity.<br />
<br />
b. In <i>S v Pretorius</i> 1975 (2) SA 85 (SWA) Judge AJ Le Grange found that “The onus of proof in a defence of necessity as in self-defence rests on the State to rule out the reasonable possibility of an act of necessity. It is not for the accused to satisfy the court that she acted from necessity (p 293). .. (proceed) by gathering an objective view of the circumstances from the evidence itself, and the magistrate‘s finding whether the prevailing circumstances were “alarming” if viewed objectively…. Viewed objectively… was the accused confronted with a situation that …… lives were in danger….<br />
<br />
c. “[90] [If the evidence gives a picture of threatening danger and fear, which gave rise to necessity and which would have justified the accused‘s conduct, provided the accused did not exceed the limits of necessity…. Proceed to consider whether the proven circumstances satisfy the tests for necessity set out by B & Hunt at p. 285 of their work: (a) the threatening disaster endangered the accused‘s legal interests. This in fact gave rise to a duty to act. (b) the danger was threatening and imminent. The fact that symptoms relating to the danger may only appear later does not detract from the situation… if it cannot immediately be ascertained whether or not the symptoms are dangerous, necessity arises… (d) the chances that harm would have resulted and it would have been of a serious nature.. the greater the harm, the greater the necessity…”<br />
<br />
d. If Norwegian law also places the Onus of Proof to lie on the State in a defence of necessity, to rule out the reasonable possibility of an act of necessity; it would appear that the Prosecutor‘s decision to “refuse to touch the principle of necessity” should weigh heavily in the Defendant‘s favour.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.28 28 August – 06 September 2012: No Response from the Norwegian Supreme Court:</b><br />
<br />
A. On 28 August 2012, I contacted the Supreme Court Registrar with a request for a Case Number for my application for Review of the Oslo District Court’s Brievik Judgement.<br />
<br />
B. On 31 August 2012, I again contacted the Supreme Court Registrar with a request for a Case Number for my application for Review of the Oslo District Court’s Brievik Judgement.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.29 02 September 2012: Complaint to Parliamentary Ombudsman: Slow Case Processing by Supreme Court Registrar:</b><br />
<br />
A. On 02 September 2012, I submitted a complaint (PDF ) to the Parliamentary Ombudsman: Slow Case Processing / Failure to Provide Case Processing by Supreme Court Registrar; to Application for Review of ‘Breivik Judgement’. <br />
<br />
B. 10 September 2012: Response from Supreme Court Secretary General: Gunnar Bergby: No Legal Standing:<br />
<br />
a. On 11 September 2012, I was informed of the decision by Supreme Court of Norway: Secretary General: Gunnar Bergby in: Application for review of Oslo District Court Judgement of 24 August 2012 (2011-188627-24).<br />
<br />
b. Secretary General Bergby implied that my application was an ‘Appeal’, and stated that I lacked legal standing, because I was not a ‘party to the case’. Mr. Anders Behring Breivik and the prosecution authority “are the only parties in the specific case mentioned above, and the right of appeal is constricted to these”. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.30 11 Sep 2012: Response to Supreme Court: Secretary General:</b><br />
<br />
A. On 11 September 2012, applicant responded (PDF ) to Secretary General Gunnar Bergby. Applicant requested the Secretary General to provide her with the relevant statute in Norway that provides the Secretary General the authority to refuse to process a case, citing lack of locus standi/legal standing; thereby denying such applicant due process access to be heard by an impartial court? <br />
<br />
B. Applicant argued that it was for the court to decide the matter of locus standi, not the Secretary General; citing Scottish Salmon Growers Association Limited v. EFTA Surveillance Authority (Case E-2/94); Private Barnehagers Landsforbund v EFTA Surveillance Authority, supported by Kingdom of Norway (Case E-5/07) ; and Hans Chr. Bugge, Professor of Environmental Law at the Department of Public and International Law, University of Oslo, in his article: General background: Legal remedies and locus standi in Norwegian law : “There is no clear definition or delimitation of the concept. Whether a person has "legal interest" is decided discretionary in each case, and depends on individual circumstances.”<br />
<br />
C. Applicant clarified her application was not an ‘Appeal’, which ‘locus standi’ was restricted to the ‘parties in the specific case’, but one of Certiorari/Review, where her locus standi/legal standing was based upon her being a member of a group of activists: known as political necessity activists, who have ‘legal interest’ in the judgement, due to its violations of ECHR Article 13 and 14, and its necessity ruling was not sufficiently precise, as required in Lithgow & others v. United Kingdom , in order to allow Political Necessity Activists to regulate their activism in accordance with the law. <br />
<br />
D. The Oslo District Courts ‘Breivik Judgement’, discriminated against Breivik, by denying him a Free and Fair Subjective and Objective Test Enquiry into his Necessity evidence; and set a discriminatory legal precedent against future Norwegian Political Necessity activists, and furthermore due to the international prominence of the trial on the world stage, the Judgement sent a publicity message that a Court could deny an Accused pleading to Necessity, a Free and Fair Subjective and Objective Test Enquiry into their Necessity evidence, on the world stage. <br />
<br />
E. Denying Mr. Breivik his right to an objective and subjective test of his necessity evidence, set a legal precedent where environmental, immigrant, religious or other necessity activists are also denied their right to an objective and subjective examination of their necessity evidence (or can due to ignorance from the Breivik trial’s publicity, deny themselves, by lacking the knowledge to assert their right thereto).<br />
<br />
F. Applicants was consequently demanding her Article 13 Right to an Effective Remedy, and in terms of Article 14: to Prohibit this Discriminatory Erroneous Necessity Ruling against Breivik, herself and other Necessity Activists.<br />
<br />
G. The applicant confirmed that the principle of an Application for Review existed in Norwegian courts, as documented by (1) Former President of Norwegian Supreme Court Justice Carsten Smith , (2) Chief Justice of the Norway Supreme Court: Tore Schei ; and (3) Supreme Court Justice: Karen Bruzelius .<br />
<br />
H. Applicant requested that her Application be interpreted in terms of Article 13 ECHR read in conjunction with Protocol 7 ECHR and the EFTA Courts Judicial Review Posten Norge Judgement ; effectively interpreted as the Right to Judicial Review of an Administrative Decision or a Court Order.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.31 08 October 2012, 2nd Request to Secretary General Gunnar Bergby:</b><br />
<br />
A. Applicant sent a reminder request to Secretary General Bergby.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.32 03 November 2012: Parliamentary Ombudsman: Complaint of Supreme Crt Registrar Slow Case Processing:</b><br />
<br />
A. On 03 November 2012, applicant filed a complaint (PDF ) of Slow Case Processing by Supreme Court: Secretary General: Gunnar Bergby.<br />
<br />
14.33 15 November 2012: Parliamentary Ombudsman Rules that Norway Supreme Court: Secretary General: Gunnar Bergby’s ‘Administrative Decision’ is a “Decision of a Court of Law’:<br />
<br />
A. On 15 November 2012, the Parliamentary Ombudsman responded to Complaint on Supreme Court of Norway (PDF ), declining to investigate it, because “the Storting's Ombudsman for Public Administration, section 4, first paragraph, litra c), decisions of the courts of law can not be handled by the Ombudsman”. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>14.34 Contradictions between Parliamentary Ombudsman’s “Slow Case Processing” by Courts Administrative Officials of (a) 11 July 2012 Supervisory Committee for Judges: Secretariat: Espen Eiken, and (b) 15 November 2012: Supreme Court: Secretary General: Gunnar Bergby.</b><br />
<br />
A. In the 11 July 2012 Parliamentary Ombudsman ruling: Lack of Response from the Supervisory Committee for Judges; in response to a complaint of Slow case processing from the Supervisory Committee for Judges, the Ombudsman’s directions were to “submit "a written request to Tilsynsutvalget for dommere, where you call for answers to your applications. If you do not receive a response to this request within a reasonable time, you can contact the Ombudsman, with an enclosed copy of the last request to Tilsynsutvalget for dommere."”<br />
<br />
B. The Parliamentary Ombudsman clearly believed they had the authority to require the Supreme Court Administration: Supervisory Committee for Judges: Secretariat, to provide the applicant with due process, processing of her complaints against Judges Opsahl, Arntzen and Schei. <br />
<br />
C. In the 15 November 2012 the Parliamentary Ombudsman responded to Complaint on Supreme Court of Norway; in response to a complaint of “Slow Case Processing by Supreme Court: Secretary General: Gunnar Bergby: Re: Request for Statute Granting Sec Gen Authority to make ruling on Legal Standing”; the Ombudsman’s directions are that “decisions of the courts of law can not be handled by the Ombudsman.”<br />
<br />
D. Here the Parliamentary Ombudsman, chose to interpret the erroneous ‘locus standi’ administrative decision by Secretary General Gunnar Bergby, as a “decision of a court of law”, and hence to deny themselves the authority to require Secretary General Gunnar Bergby to provide Applicant with a response to her question requesting the Statute granting a Secretary General the authority to make a ruling on legal standing. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">III. Statement of alleged violation(s) of the Convention and/or Protocols and of relevant arguments</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
15.1 <i><b>Discrimination: Oslo District Court: Breivik Judgement</b></i>: <br />
<br />
15.2 The Oslo District Court: Breivik Judgement Ruling, by Judge’s Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen, Arne Lyng; and Lay Judges Ernst Henning Eielsen, Diana Patricia Fynbo and Anne Elisabeth Wisloff, delivered on 24 August 2012, violates Article 14 Prohibition of Discrimination and Article 6: Right to a Fair Trial. <br />
<br />
15.3 The Necessity ruling states that necessity statutes ‘prohibit the killing of government or politically active young people’; irrespective of the fact that:<br />
<br />
A. No reference was made during court proceedings by any party alleging that any Norwegian or International specific necessity criminal statute specifically prohibits the killing of government or politically active young people, in the event of objective and subjective reasonably determined necessity; and <br />
<br />
B. The Necessity Judgement ruling fails to cite any International or Norwegian specific necessity criminal statute specifically prohibiting the killing of government or politically active young people, in the event of objective and subjective reasonably determined necessity.<br />
<br />
C. Necessity criminal statutes do not specifically allow or disallow the killing of government or politically active young people, but provide for an objective and subjective test that examines each alleged criminal act to objectively and subjectively determine whether necessity existed, or the defendant honestly believed it existed, within the particular criminal act‘s relevant circumstances.<br />
<br />
14.35 The Necessity Judgement endorses the court, prosecution and defence counsel failure to conduct the required subjective and objective tests to examine the evidence for the Defendant‘s necessity motivations to determine (I) objectively whether the defendant‘s Necessity claims – simplistically rephrased as – “Titanic Europe is on a demographic/immigration collision course with Islam Iceberg” were reasonable; and (II) secondly whether the defendant subjectively sincerely perceived the Titanic Europe/Islam Iceberg circumstances this way, in accordance to the Military Necessity Rendulic Rule.<br />
<br />
14.36 The Judgement fails to disclose Norwegian law‘s Onus of Proof requirements in a case of necessity: i.e. upon which party – Defendant or State - does the Onus of Proof lie in case of Necessity? If the proof in a defense of necessity, ruling out the reasonable possibility of an act of necessity, lies on the State, and the State failed to rule out the reasonable possibility of an act of necessity, the accused claim of necessity stands.<br />
<br />
14.37 It is clear that the Court's statement of reasons does not show the results of the courts objective and subjective enquiry into the Defendant‘s claim of necessity. Thus, it is also clear that the Court's statement of reasons for its “necessity finding of guilt”, are inadequate. Hence the finding of guilt needs to be set aside for further evidence to objectively and subjective evaluate the defendants necessity defence.<br />
<br />
14.38 Finally if the Courts statement of reasons remain uncorrected, they would set a bad precedent, encouraging other courts to deny necessity defendants their rights to an objective and subjective test of their necessity defence, including denying the defendant information clarifying upon whom the Onus of Proof in a defence of necessity lies.<br />
<br />
14.39 The discriminatory ‘Necessity ruling’, in response to Prosecutor Engh and Holden’s refusal to “touch Breivik’s Principle of Necessity” sets a Norwegian legal precedent, which if upheld will set a legal precedent denying future necessity activists, a right to a fair trial, since it is based on two unequivocal legal falsehoods: (a) necessity activists have no right to an objective and subjective enquiry into their necessity defense evidence; and (b) necessity statutory provisions prohibit the killing of government officials or civilians.<br />
<br />
14.40 The Necessity ruling, also sets an international intellectual and psychological precedent, due to the international publicity it received, by publicizing these legal ‘Necessity’ trial falsehoods, as allegedly true and correct, and thereby educating citizens and future necessity activists that (a) they have no right to an objective and subjective enquiry into their necessity defense evidence; and (b) necessity statutory provisions prohibit the killing of government officials or civilians.<br />
<br />
14.41 The Necessity ruling – particularly as a result of the international uncritical publicity it received -- creates confusion and obfuscation by contradicting all other necessity precedents, but providing no legal precedent justifications for its conclusions; thereby the most well known necessity precedent for the average layperson, is the one based upon falsehoods and totally lacking in legal justifications. This is a violation of the Right to an Effective: clear, succinct, legally justified precedent, to enable laypersons and necessity activists to respectively effectively understand, plan and regulate their activism in accordance with the law.<br />
<br />
15.4 <i><b>Denied Right to an Effective Remedy by Supreme Court Sec. Gen. Bergby</b></i>:<br />
<br />
15.5 The 10 September 2012 administrative decision of Norway Supreme Court Secretary General Gunnar Bergby, denying Applicant Access to Court by refusing to process her 27 August 2012, Application for Review of the Oslo District Court: ‘Breivik Judgement were violations of applicants right to an Effective Remedy.<br />
<br />
15.6 Secretary General Bergby’s refusal to process my Application for Review, in the absence of a due process impartial enquiry into the merits of the application; by (1) pretending not to understand the difference between an Appeal and a Review, and (2) pretending that I had no locus standi (legal standing) to file an Application for Review, while refusing to provide me with the relevant Norwegian statute that provides the Secretary General the authority to refuse to process a case, citing lack of locus standi/legal standing; thereby denying such applicant due process access to be heard by an impartial court were violations of applicants right to an Effective Remedy.<br />
<br />
15.7 <i><b>Discrimination by Supreme Court Sec Gen. Bergby</b></i>: <br />
<br />
15.8 Secretary General Gunnar Bergby’s decisions and actions to refuse to process Applicants Application for Review, denying Applicant her right to an effective remedy to address the errors and irregularities regarding the Courts ‘Necessity’ judgement, were motivated acts of ideological discrimination against the ‘right wing’ or ‘cultural conservatives’, and against anyone – particularly anyone who is not ‘right wing’ -- who opposes, or objects to Ideological Discrimination against anyone, including Cultural Conservatives.<br />
<br />
15.9 Everyone, irrespective of their extreme left or extreme right ideology, who pleads to necessity should be entitled to an objective and subjective test of their respective necessity evidence. It is blatant discrimination for a Prosecutor and a Judge to publicly endorse the denial of a ‘right wing’ accused’s ‘necessity’ evidence to be subjectively and objectively examined. <br />
<br />
15.10 When a court sets such a discriminatory irregular and erroneous legal precedent, such a precedent can be used to deny other necessity activists their due process rights to an objective and subjective test of their necessity evidence. <br />
<br />
15.11 I subsequently filed a Complaint of Slow Case Processing to the Parliamentary Ombudsman<br />
<br />
15.12 <i><b>Denied Right to an Effective Remedy by Parliamentary Ombudsman</b></i>:<br />
<br />
15.13 The 15 November 2012 ruling by Parliamentary Ombudsman, that Secretary General’s Gunnar Bergby’s administrative decision denying Applicant’s access to the court and an effective remedy, was an official ‘judgement/decision by a court of law’, was a violations of applicants right to an Effective Remedy.<br />
<br />
15.14 Secretary General Bergby’s 10 September 2012 administrative decision to refuse to process Applicants application, due to alleged lack of ‘locus standi’; and subsequent refusal to provide any statutory authority granting him the right to deny applicant access to a court for a full due process impartial enquiry into the merits of her legal standing; was made without a full impartial due process enquiry into the merits of the application, therefore denying applicant an effective remedy to her application. <br />
<br />
15.15 The Parliamentary Ombudsman’s decision to refuse to order Secretary General Bergby to either (a) process applicants application, or (b) provide applicant with the relevant statutory authority granting him the authority to deny applicants application based upon an un-investigated allegation of lack of legal standing; denies applicant access to a court, and an effective remedy to impartially determine (a) the status of applicants legal standing, and if so (b) her allegations of irregularity regarding the Oslo Courts ‘Necessity’ judgement. <br />
<br />
15.16 <i><b>Discrimination by Parliamentary Ombudsman</b></i>:<br />
<br />
15.17 The Parliamentary Ombudsman’s (a) ruling of 11 July 2012, in the complaint of ‘Slow Case Processing’ by Courts Administration Official: Supervisory Committee for Judges: Secretariat: Espen Eiken, contradicts the (b) ruling of 15 November 2012, in the complaint of ‘Slow Case Processing’ by Courts Administration Official: Supreme Court: Secretary General: Gunnar Bergby.<br />
<br />
15.18 In the 11 July 2012 Parliamentary Ombudsman ruling they believed they had the authority to remedy slow case processing administrative decision making by the Supreme Court Administration: Supervisory Committee for Judges: Secretariat, yet in the 15 November 2012 the Parliamentary Ombudsman ruling they now believed that they did not have the authority to remedy slow case processing administrative decision making by the Supreme Court Administration.<br />
<br />
15.19 It is alleged the Parliamentary Ombudsman’s 15 November 2012 decision to refuse to address Applicants Slow Case Processing complaint by ordering Director General Bergby to either (a) process applicants application, or (b) provide applicant with the relevant statutory authority granting him the authority to deny applicants application based upon an un-investigated allegation of lack of legal standing; were motivated acts of ideological discrimination against the ‘right wing’ or ‘cultural conservatives’, and against anyone – particularly anyone who is not ‘right wing’ -- who opposes, or objects to Ideological Discrimination against anyone, including Cultural Conservatives.<br />
<br />
15.20 <i><b>Prohibition of Discrimination: Motive for Denial of Effective Remedy’s: Political & Ideological Discrimination</b></i>:<br />
<br />
15.21 Applicant asserts that Supreme Court, Deputy Secretary General Nygaard, Secretary General Bergby, the Supervisory Committee for Judges and the Parliamentary Ombudsman’s legal gymnastics decision-making are motivated by either their (A) own personal Liberal/Left Wing prejudice towards Breivik / right wing cultural conservatives, as alleged by Breivik, (B) their -- lack of intellectual backbone - inability to withstand Liberal/Left Wing Politically Correct Peer Pressure endorsing political, media, and legal discrimination against right wing conservatives, and anyone who speaks up for the rights of extreme right wing conservatives (Norway, Pakistan, India, Malaysia and South Korea are culturally the strictest conformists, with the least resistance to cultural and political or ideological peer pressure ). <br />
<br />
15.22 It is possible their discriminatory decision-making towards denying Applicant the ability to support the rule of law and a free and fair trial for a right wing conservative terrorist, are a result of their paranoid fear of impartially objectively and subjective investigating the evidence of Breivik’s necessity defense, (a) fearing that some of Breivik’s allegations may in fact be found to be factually correct; and/or (b) their knowledge that some of Breivik’s allegations are in fact factually correct, and/or (c) their conformist inability to resist the Norwegian Politically Correct narrative, and (d) hence the need to obediently conform and deny any investigation of Breivik’s allegations, which would expose these realities.<br />
<br />
15.23 If Norwegian Officials sincerely believed that Breivik’s Resist Eurabia ideology, discrimination against, and censorship of cultural conservatives allegations were an absolute bunch of nonsense, totally and utterly without any factual basis, their would be no need to fear an objective and subjective test of Breivik’s necessity defense evidence, since it would be exposed as erroneous and unjustified.<br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">V. Statement of the object of the application</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
[19.] <b>The Oslo District Courts 24 August 2012 Breivik Judgement Discriminatory Necessity ruling</b>:<br />
<br />
19.1 sets a Norwegian legal precedent, which if upheld will set a legal precedent denying future necessity activists, a right to a fair trial, since it is based on two unequivocal legal falsehoods: (a) necessity activists have no right to an objective and subjective enquiry into their necessity defense evidence; and (b) necessity statutory provisions prohibit the killing of government officials or civilians.<br />
<br />
19.2 creates confusion and obfuscation by contradicting all other International legally justified necessity precedents, but providing no legal precedent justifications for its conclusions – as a result of the international uncritical publicity it received -- therefore the most well known Internationally necessity precedent for the average layperson, is the one based upon falsehoods and totally lacking in legal justifications. <br />
<br />
19.3 sets an international intellectual and psychological Discriminatory precedent against all Political Necessity activists, due to the uncritical international publicity it received, by publicizing these legal ‘Necessity’ trial falsehoods, as allegedly true and correct, and thereby implying that necessity activists of any ideological, political, religious or cultural persuasion (a) have no right to an objective and subjective enquiry into their necessity defense evidence; and (b) and if, or where such necessity actions involve the killing of government officials or civilians, that International Human Rights law necessity statutory provisions prohibit the killing of government officials or civilians.<br />
<br />
19.4 The Norwegian Necessity Judgement – and its international publicity – discriminates against Necessity Activists, by denying them the Right to an Effective: clear, succinct, legally justified precedent, to enable laypersons and necessity activists to respectively effectively understand, plan and regulate their Necessity activism in accordance with accurate necessity jurisprudence .<br />
<br />
19.5 Consequently, Applicant requests the following Declaratory Orders Relief: <br />
<br />
19.6 The Oslo District Court: Breivik Judgement Necessity Ruling , by Judge’s Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen, Arne Lyng; and Lay Judges Ernst Henning Eielsen, Diana Patricia Fynbo and Anne Elisabeth Wisloff, delivered on 24 August 2012, violates Article 14 Prohibition of Discrimination and Article 6: Right to a Fair Trial, and consequently to: <br />
<br />
A. Set Aside the Judgements Discriminatory Irregular ‘Necessity (Nødrett) Ruling’ (pg.67 ) for (i) failing to provide any necessity criminal provisions that prohibit killing of Government Officials in case of Necessity; (ii) Erroneous interpretation of Necessity related criminal law provisions and international necessity related human rights law, (iii) Failure to conduct the required Objective and Subjective Tests of Defendant’s Necessity Defence evidence, renders it a (iv) Discriminatory Necessity Precedent for other Necessity activists to be denied the required Objective and Subjective tests of their necessity evidence, (v) Failure to Clarify upon which party the Onus of Proof lies in a Case of Necessity; and how or why their evidence was sufficient/insufficient; and (vi) ‘Extreme Political objectives’ conclusion is unsupported in the absence of an objective and subjective necessity test of the defendants necessity evidence. <br />
<br />
B. Set Aside Defendant’s Conviction (Finding of Guilt) for remittance to Oslo District Court for hearing of Further Evidence to conclude Objective and Subjective Necessity Test Evidentiary Enquiry.<br />
<br />
C. Alternatively, a Non-Precedent Setting Ruling: If Defendant Breivik prefers to abide by, and socio-politically profit from (as a political martyr), the Oslo District Courts discriminatory Necessity ruling against him, a declaratory order that the Defendant’s failure to uphold his demand that the court objectively and subjectively test his necessity defence evidence, that the Oslo courts discriminatory ‘Necessity Ruling’ is not to be deemed ‘Necessity precedent’, whereby other political activists can be denied their necessity rights for a court to objectively and subjectively test their necessity evidence.<br />
<br />
D. Furthermore, the (i) 10 September 2012, administrative decision of Norway Supreme Court Secretary General Gunnar Bergby, denying Applicant Access to Court by refusing to process her 27 August 2012, Application for Review of the Oslo District Court: ‘Breivik Judgement’; and (ii) the 15 November 2012 ruling by Parliamentary Ombudsman, that Secretary General’s Gunnar Bergby’s administrative decision, was a ‘judgement/decision by a court of law’, thereby justifying his refusal to order Secretary General Bergby to process Applicants Application for Review; were (iii) violations of applicants right to an Effective Remedy and an obstruction to the execution of a final judicial decision on the merits of her application, and (iv) were motivated by ideological prejudice towards people who are ‘right wing’, and/or against anyone – particularly anyone who is not ‘right wing’ -- who opposes, or objects to Ideological Discrimination against anyone, including Cultural Conservatives.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [Excerpts from <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/eu-court-human-rights.html">ECHR: Johnstone v Norway</a> :: <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/10-jan-13-application.html">Application</a>]</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<br />
<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327922598170048610" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JSpbgoKp8LA/SfCVX96zuGI/AAAAAAAAEIs/qqvoPLfHrLA/s400/400_BlackLine.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 7px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 620px;" />Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-87809132300590573392013-01-18T21:46:00.000+02:002013-02-01T09:40:37.365+02:00‘Indigenous Rights’ King Anders Breivik of Norway vs ‘Multiculti’ Queen Elisabeth II response to Idle No More Red People’s Indigenous Rights Movement<div align="justify"><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">‘Indigenous Rights’ King Anders Breivik of Norway vs. ‘Multiculti’ Queen Elisabeth II response to Idle No More Red People’s Indigenous Rights Movement</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;"></span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Andrea Muhrrteyn | Ecofeminist v Breivik | 18 January 2013</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-d1JZDYEu6Z8/UPmgkIQV0bI/AAAAAAAAgl0/BqPEr7npJN4/s1600/IndigRightsKingBreivik-QEII-IdleNoMore_660x610.PNG"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-YSyLlR1nKT4/UPmgbKHcfQI/AAAAAAAAglo/0OCq0t9lFMg/s1600/IndigRightsKingBreivik-QEII-IdleNoMore_350x324.PNG" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 324px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 350px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote><span style="font-size: 95%;">Correspondence (<a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/0/7/13072327/13-01-18_breivik_idle-no-more_indigenous-movement.pdf">PDF</a>) to Anders Behring Breivik c/o & via: Geir Lippestad <br />
<br />
CC: Queen Elisabeth II c/o Martin Callanan MEP<br />
CC: Prime Minister Stephen Harper <br />
CC: Idle No More: Sheelah McLean, Sylvia McAdam, Jess Gordon, Nina Wilson<br />
CC: Former Senator Sam Nunn, CEO: Nuclear Threat Initiative<br />
CC: Canada Treaty Policy Directorate<br />
CC: Army General Martin E Dempsey, c/o US Army Environmental Command <br />
CC: Richard B Fadden, Dir: CSIS, c/o: Royal Canadian Mounted Police<br />
<br />
<b> RE: Request Clarification: What would ‘Indigenous Rights’ King Anders Breivik of Norway’s suggestion be to ‘Multiculti’ Queen Elisabeth II, in response to Indigenous Rights Protest Demands of Attawapiskat Chief Theresa Spence and the Idle No More Red People’s Indigenous Rights Movement? </b><br />
<br />
Question #1: Should Queen Elisabeth honour the Treaty’s made with the First Nations, by Queen Victoria and demand that Prime Minister Stephen Harper meet with First Nation Leaders, to establish a Nation to Nation relationship between First Nations and the Government of Canada, rather than a relationship as defined in the Indian Act to address issues and (2) social and environmental sustainability?<br />
<br />
Question #2: If we are to establish a credible International European Code of Honour, we should demand the assassination of any European leader who (a) legislates Flat Earth ‘War is Peace Whore’ Tragedy of the Constitutional Commons Suicide Pacts, i.e. a ‘Peace Treaty’ which ignores confronting the Scarcity Combatant role of overpopulation and overconsumption to scarcity as an underlying cause of conflict; and/or (b) refuses to address and resolve Flat Earth ‘War is Peace Whore’ Treaties enacted by their dishonourable European predecessors who ignored confronting the Scarcity Combatant role of overpopulation and overconsumption to scarcity as an underlying cause of conflict? </span></blockquote><a name='more'></a><div align="center"><a href="http://armigideon-knights.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-R0qzzurjUP4/T9WzLw5xK_I/AAAAAAAAacg/hZa3QwWxDds/s1600/NorwayVBreivik_FleurdeLis_MargaretHagen_556x119.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 119px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 556px;" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">RE: Request Clarification: What would ‘Indigenous Rights’ King Anders Breivik of Norway’s suggestion be to ‘Multiculti’ Queen Elisabeth II, in response to Indigenous Rights Protest Demands of Attawapiskat Chief Theresa Spence and the Idle No More Red People’s Indigenous Rights Movement? </span></span></strong><br />
<br />
Question #1: Should Queen Elisabeth honour the Treaty’s made with the First Nations, by Queen Victoria and demand that Prime Minister Stephen Harper meet with First Nation Leaders, to establish a Nation to Nation relationship between First Nations and the Government of Canada, rather than a relationship as defined in the Indian Act to address issues and (2) social and environmental sustainability?<br />
<br />
Question #2: If we are to establish a credible International European Code of Honour, we should demand the assassination of any European leader who (a) legislates Flat Earth ‘War is Peace Whore’ Tragedy of the Constitutional Commons Suicide Pacts, i.e. a ‘Peace Treaty’ which ignores confronting the Scarcity Combatant role of overpopulation and overconsumption to scarcity as an underlying cause of conflict; and/or (b) refuses to address and resolve Flat Earth ‘War is Peace Whore’ Treaties enacted by their dishonourable European predecessors who ignored confronting the Scarcity Combatant role of overpopulation and overconsumption to scarcity as an underlying cause of conflict?<br />
<br />
<b>Issues Addressed:</b> <br />
<br />
• Euro/Norwegian Indigenous Rights Freedom Fighter Anders Breivik<br />
• Red People’s Idle No More Indigenous Rights Movement<br />
• Queen Elisabeth declines to intervene in Chief Spence’s protest<br />
• British Crowns Responsibility to Treaties Signed with First Nations<br />
• Historical Treaties of Canada: British Crown and First Nations<br />
• Colonization of Indigenous People’s is a consequence of Overpopulation and/or Overconsumption, and Flat Earth War is Peace Whore’ Tragedy of the Constitutional Commons Suicide Pacts, i.e. ‘Peace Treaties’ which ignore/d confronting the Scarcity Combatant role of overpopulation and overconsumption to scarcity as an underlying cause of conflict.<br />
• International Military Doctrine Environmental Security & Peace Strategies addressing Scarcity as an underlying Cause of Violent Conflict<br />
• Credible Peace Treaty must include National Environmental Security and Peace Strategy, confronting Overpopulation and Overconsumption’s Role in Scarcity as underlying Cause of Conflict<br />
• SA Concourt Endorses Flat Earth ‘War is Peace Whore’ Tragedy of the Constitutional Commons Suicide Pact & SA’s Impending Race War<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Euro/Norwegian Indigenous Rights Freedom Fighter Anders Breivik:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
In your closing statement to the court on 22 June 2012, you said: “This trial should be about finding the truth. .. Norwegian academics and journalists work together and make use of [..] methods to deconstruct Norwegian identity, Christianity, and the Norwegian nation. How can it be illegal to engage in armed resistance against this? The prosecution wondered who gave me a mandate to do what I did. [..] I have answered this before, but will do so again. Universal human rights, international law, and the right to self-defense provided the mandate to carry out this self-defense. Everything has been triggered by the actions of those who consciously and unconsciously are destroying our country. Responsible Norwegians and Europeans who feel even a trace of moral obligation are not going to sit by and watch as we are made into minorities in our own lands. We are going to fight. The attacks on July 22 were preventive attacks in defense of my ethnic group, the Norwegian indigenous people. I therefore cannot acknowledge guilt. I acted from necessity (nødrett) on behalf of my people, my religion and my country.” <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Red People’s Idle No More Indigenous Rights Movement:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-7aABE82c_uI/UPmhFykE1BI/AAAAAAAAgmM/9nAD_kASxgk/s1600/Idle_No_More_Logo.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-N7-FE0OIpqk/UPmg_XsTBsI/AAAAAAAAgmA/Uxke2CxYQHw/s1600/Idle_No_More_Logo_600x388.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 388px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
The movement was initiated by activists Nina Wilson, Sheelah Mclean, Sylvia McAdam and Jessica Gordon in November 2012, during a teach-in at Station 20 West in Saskatoon called "Idle No More", held in response to the Harper government's introduction of Bill C-45.<br />
<br />
C-45 is a large omnibus bill implementing numerous measures, many of which activists claim weaken environmental protection laws. In particular, laws protecting all of the country's navigable waterways were limited in scope to protect only a few waterways of practical importance for navigation. Many of the affected waterways pass through land reserved to First Nations.<br />
<br />
Law blog writer/observer Lorraine Land, and Idle No More itself, have identified the following current bills as affecting natives or native sovereignty:<br />
<br />
• Bill C-38 (Budget Omnibus Bill #1)<br />
• Bill C-45 (Budget Omnibus Bill #2)<br />
• Bill C-27 First Nations Financial Transparency Act<br />
• Bill S-2 Family Homes on Reserve and Matrimonial Interests or Right Act<br />
• Bill S-6 First Nations Elections Act<br />
• Bill S-8 Safe Drinking Water for First Nations<br />
• Bill C-428 Indian Act Amendment and Replacement Act<br />
• Bill S-207 An Act to amend the Interpretation Act<br />
• Bill S-212 First Nations Self-Government Recognition Bill<br />
• “First Nations” Private Ownership Act<br />
<br />
This led to a series of teach-ins, rallies and protests that were planned by the founders in a National Day Of Action on Dec. 10th which coincided with Amnesty Internationals Human Rights Day. These coincided with similar protests already underway in British Columbia over the Northern Gateway and Pacific Trails pipelines. <br />
<br />
The protests were timed to coincide with the announcement that Chief Theresa Spence of Attawapiskat was launching a hunger strike (no solid foods, limited to tea, water and broth) to demand a meeting with Prime Minister Harper and the Governor General of Canada to discuss Aboriginal rights. The Assembly of First Nations then issued an open letter 16 December to Governor General David Johnston, calling for a meeting to discuss Spence's demands. <br />
<br />
Also on 17 December the Confederacy of Treaty No. 6 First Nations issued a press release saying that they did not recognize the legality of any laws passed by the federal parliament, "including but not limited to Bill C-45, which do not fulfill their constitutionally recognized and affirmed Treaty and Aboriginal rights; as well as the Crown's legal obligations to meaningfully consult and accommodate First Nations." <br />
<br />
As of January 4, 2013, the main goals have been narrowed down to (1) the establishment of a Nation to Nation relationship between First Nations and the Government of Canada, rather than a relationship as defined in the Indian Act to address issues and (2) social and environmental sustainability. <br />
<br />
<i><b>Idle No More Manifesto</b></i><br />
<br />
</blockquote><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-C7Kl6Nx48xI/UPmhexx3Q4I/AAAAAAAAgmk/T4RY6kqtHMQ/s1600/RedNationsRising.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-C7Kl6Nx48xI/UPmhexx3Q4I/AAAAAAAAgmk/T4RY6kqtHMQ/s1600/RedNationsRising.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 300px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 300px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote><a href="http://idlenomore.ca/" target="_blank">We</a> contend that:<br />
<br />
The Treaties are nation to nation agreements between Canada and First Nations who are sovereign nations. The Treaties are agreements that cannot be altered or broken by one side of the two Nations. The spirit and intent of the Treaty agreements meant that First Nations peoples would share the land, but retain their inherent rights to lands and resources. Instead, First Nations have experienced a history of colonization which has resulted in outstanding land claims, lack of resources and unequal funding for services such as education and housing.<br />
<br />
Canada has become one of the wealthiest countries in the world by using the land and resources. Canadian mining, logging, oil and fishing companies are the most powerful in the world due to land and resources. Some of the poorest First Nations communities (such as Attawapiskat) have mines or other developments on their land but do not get a share of the profit. The taking of resources has left many lands and waters poisoned – the animals and plants are dying in many areas in Canada. We cannot live without the land and water. We have laws older than this colonial government about how to live with the land.<br />
<br />
Currently, this government is trying to pass many laws so that reserve lands can also be bought and sold by big companies to get profit from resources. They are promising to share this time…Why would these promises be different from past promises? We will be left with nothing but poisoned water, land and air. This is an attempt to take away sovereignty and the inherent right to land and resources from First Nations peoples.<br />
<br />
There are many examples of other countries moving towards sustainability, and we must demand sustainable development as well. We believe in healthy, just, equitable and sustainable communities and have a vision and plan of how to build them.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Queen Elisabeth declines to intervene in Chief Spence’s protest:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
</blockquote><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Zrj0vUC9wcg/UPmkJD6eDZI/AAAAAAAAgoE/WCK8jbpMgHU/s1600/buckingham-palace-460.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-JKGpNRAlsUw/UPmj-GarbgI/AAAAAAAAgn4/Z4pt1h57-OU/s1600/buckingham-palace-460_350x449.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 449px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 350px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote>In a letter dated Jan. 7, Buckingham Palace wrote to Jonathan Francoeur, a small businessman in British Columbia who took it upon himself to write to the Queen on Dec. 15, that the chief should deal instead with the federal cabinet.<br />
<br />
Buckingham Palace’s Deputy to the Senior Correspondence Officer: Jennie Vine wrote: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>The Queen as asked me to thank you for your recent letter, from which Her Majesty has taken careful note of the concern you express for the welfare of Attawapiskat First Nations Chief Theresa Spense who is currently on a politically-motivated hunger strike in Canada.<br />
<br />
Perhaps I might explain, however, that this is not a matter in which The Queen would intervene. As a constitutional Sovereign, Her Majesty acts through her personal representatives, the Governor-General, on the advice of her Canadian Ministers and, therefore, it is to them that your appeal should be directed.<br />
<br />
Nevertheless, your concern for the welfare of First Nations Chief Theresa Spence is understood.</blockquote><br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">British Crowns Responsibility to Treaties Signed with First Nations:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<blockquote>“This stone was taken from the grounds of Balmoral Castle in the Highlands of Scotland – a place dear to my great-great-grandmother, Queen Victoria. It symbolises the foundation of the rights of First Nations peoples reflected in treaties signed with the Crown during her reign. Bearing the cypher of Queen Victoria as well as my own, this stone is presented to the First Nations University of Canada in the hope that it will serve as a reminder of the special relationship between the sovereign and all First Nations peoples.” - Elizabeth II, Queen of Canada, 2005 </blockquote><br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Dy2m_44VloI/UPmjUWl8iAI/AAAAAAAAgns/vfyLzMprzv0/s1600/13-01-17_London-BuckPalace_QVictoriaFnt_MonarchSignedTreaties.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-EwVNqyC1Aps/UPmjJdWRf6I/AAAAAAAAgng/0RVTkSXHdCM/s1600/13-01-17_London-BuckPalace_QVictoriaFnt_MonarchSignedTreaties_600x400.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 400px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Historical Treaties of Canada: British Crown and First Nations: </span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<b>1867 Canada Confederation</b>: By the time Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Ontario and Quebec form the Dominion of Canada, the Robinson Treaties, Upper Canada Land Surrenders and Peace and Friendship Treaties are already in place.<br />
<br />
<b>1870 Purchase of Rupert's Land</b>: Canada acquires Rupert’s Land and the adjacent North-Western Territory from the Hudson’s Bay Company. Manitoba enters Confederation.<br />
<br />
<b>1871 Treaty No. 1 & Treaty No. 2</b>:. The first post-Confederation treaty, Treaty One, is concluded in August 1871 and covers Manitoba as it existed then. Treaty Two is concluded a few weeks later and covers areas needed for expansion and settlement in the west and north of the Province. British Columbia enters Confederation on the understanding that construction of the east-west railway will begin in two years and will be completed in ten.<br />
<br />
<b>1873 Treaty No. 3</b>: After three years of negotiations, the Dominion of Canada and the Saulteaux tribe of Ojibway Indians entered into treaty at the North-West Angle of the Lake of the Woods. With the Saulteaux surrendering title to an area of 14,245,000 hectares, Canada acquired land for agriculture, settlement and mineral discovery. More importantly, Canada secured communications with the North-West Territories, including the route of the future Canadian Pacific Railway. In 1873, Prince Edward Island enters Confederation, bringing the number of provinces in the Dominion to seven.<br />
<br />
<b>1874 Treaty No. 4</b>: Initiated by Indians and Métis concerned about the declining numbers of animals which provided them with a living. Treaty 4 covers present-day southern Saskatchewan. Provisional boundary set in northern Ontario.<br />
<br />
<b>1875 Treaty No. 5</b>: This treaty originated in two historical processes. The southern part, negotiated in 1875, was one of the southern Prairie treaties, and was in large part a result of the insistence of the Native people of that region that their aboriginal rights be recognized by the Canadian government, which had recently acquired title to their lands. The northern part of Treaty 5 was negotiated in 1908.<br />
<br />
<b>1876 TreatyNo. 6</b>: The negotiation of this treaty took place during a difficult period for the Plains Cree, who were suffering from the rapid decline of the buffalo. The documents indicate that their concerns included medical care and relief in case of need.<br />
<br />
<b>1877 Treaty No. 7</b>: The last of the numbered treaties negotiated and signed during the 1870s. The treaty covers the southern part of present-day Alberta.<br />
<br />
<b>1880 Addition of Arctic Islands</b>: British rights to these islands pass to Canada.<br />
<br />
<b>1881 Addition to Manitoba</b>:. The boundaries of Manitoba are extended to include substantially all the area covered by Treaties One, Two and Three.<br />
<br />
<b>1889 Treaty No. 6 Adhesion (Montreal Lake)</b>: Addition to Ontario (Kenora District)<br />
<br />
<b>1898 Creation of the Yukon</b>: The Yukon becomes a Territory separate from the North-West Territories. The boundaries of Quebec are extended north, almost complementing the revised northern boundary of Ontario.<br />
<br />
<b>1899 Treaty No. 8</b>: The first of the northern treaties covered an area of 324,900 sq miles and represents the most geographically extensive treaty activity undertaken. It comprises what is now the northern half of Alberta, the northeast quarter of British Columbia, the northwest corner of Saskatchewan, and the area south of Hay River and Great Slave Lake in the Northwest Territories.<br />
<br />
<b>1905 Treaty No. 9</b>: In response to continuous petitions from the Cree and Ojibwa people of northern Ontario, and in keeping with its policy of paving the way for settlement and development, the federal government in 1905-1906 negotiated Treaty 9, also known as the James Bay Treaty. For the first and only time, a provincial government took an active role in negotiations. Together with the area acquired by adhesions in 1929-1930, Treaty 9 covers almost two-thirds of the are that became northern Ontario. In 1905, Alberta and Saskatchewan are created.<br />
<br />
<b>1906 Treaty No. 10</b>: Covers 220,000 square kilometres of northern Saskatchewan and Alberta. Unlike the land in southern Saskatchewan, the Treaty 10 lands were deemed unsuitable for agriculture and so the federal government did not respond to demands from the region’s Native people for a treaty until the early 20th century, when the mixed-blood people of northern Saskatchewan began to demand compensation for loss of aboriginal rights and the Provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta had been created.<br />
<br />
<b>1908 Adhesion to Treaty No. 5</b>: Though requested for many years by the Native people, this adhesion was the result of government initiative.<br />
<br />
<b>1912 Ontario and Manitoba attain their present boundaries</b>: Quebec extends northward to absorb the Ungava District and agrees to negotiate surrender of the Indian title to the territory; the Quebec-Labrador boundary remains in contention.<br />
<br />
<b>1921 Treaty No. 11</b>: The last of the numbered treaties covers most of the Mackenzie District . The land in the area was deemed unsuitable for agriculture, so the federal government was reluctant to conclude treaties. Immediately following the discovery of oil at Fort Norman in 1920, however, the government moved to begin treaty negotiations.<br />
<br />
<b>1923 Williams Treaties</b>: Treaty-making activities along the north shore of Lake Ontario in 1783-84, variously known as the Toronto Purchase, the Carrying Place Purchase, the Crawford Purchases and the Gunshot Treaty, produced lingering uncertainties that are resolved in large part by the Chippewa and Mississauga Agreements negotiated in 1923.<br />
<br />
<b>1949</b> Newfoundland and Labrador enter Confederation.<br />
<br />
<b>1999</b> Creation of Nunavut.<br />
<br />
</blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_p9j15Faxt0/UPmiFCR8X3I/AAAAAAAAgm8/ga3MQ68Nk94/s1600/Historical-Treaties-of-Canada.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Y4Ag9gZ-DlY/UPmh8m9xTNI/AAAAAAAAgmw/WC1mADepaWY/s1600/Historical-Treaties-of-Canada_600x425.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 425px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Colonization of Indigenous People’s is a consequence of Overpopulation and/or Overconsumption, and Flat Earth War is Peace Whore’ Tragedy of the Constitutional Commons Suicide Pacts, i.e. ‘Peace Treaties’ which ignored confronting the Scarcity Combatant role of overpopulation and overconsumption to scarcity as an underlying cause of conflict.</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/guerrylla-warrior.html">SQSwan</a> is a black swan movement to alter Human Eco-Consciousness. Anyone, from extreme right to extreme left is welcome as an individual, or group; as long as you subscribe to the SQSwan principles.<br />
<br />
SQSwans assert that a majority of society's problems - crime, violence, unemployment, poverty, inflation, food shortages, political instability, vanishing species, garbage and pollution urban sprawl, traffic jams, toxic waste, energy and non-renewable resources (NNR) depletion and scarcity are symptoms of Ecological Overshoot, resulting from Ind:Civ:F(x) world war against nature . Ecological Overshoot and Scarcity as a cause of conflict, cannot be addressed without confronting Overpopulation and Overconsumption.<br />
<br />
The European colonization of Canada, USA, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand resulted from an overpopulated and over-consuming greedy Europe, hungry for other nation’s natural resources. <br />
<br />
The Muslim colonization of Europe is the migratory result of an overpopulated Middle East and Africa. The overpopulation of Africa is a result of the greed of Anglo-Americans. <br />
<br />
Colonization of Indigenous People’s and their cultures – whether white, black, brown or red, by each other, or by ethnically unconscious Multinational ‘Multicultural’ corporations to exterminate all cultures into one ‘multiculti consumptionist’ zombie culture -- shall not end until International Law is established which clearly and succinctly defines Sustainability, Sustainable Rights and Sustainable Security, including Guerrylla Laws to regulate procreation and resource utilization behaviour. <br />
<br />
Seriously confronting Overpopulation and Overconsumption requires clear and succinct definitions of Sustainability, Sustainable Rights and Sustainable Security, including Guerrylla Laws to regulate procreation and resource utilization behaviour. <br />
<br />
These Guerrylla Laws must (A) simply and very specifically clarify the difference between the consumption and procreation behaviour of a <i><b>Scarcity Combatant</b></i> (Unsustainable) vs an <i><b>Eco-Innocent</b></i> (Sustainable); (B) International Implementation of Dr. Jack Alpert and Jason Brent's One Child Only per family policy, for all future procreators until humanity is once more living in harmony with natural law’s carrying capacity requirements; and (C) until then be used in courts to confront Scarcity Combatants of their Breeding / Consumption combatant behaviours aggravation of Scarcity related socio-economic problems.<br />
<br />
<i><b>Sustainability</b></i>: A Sustainable society regulates human procreation and/or resource utilization behaviour , to ensure sustainability. <br />
<br />
<i><b>Sustainable Rights</b></i>: Laws of Nature determine that Environmental or ecological rights and responsibilities are the sine qua non foundation for all other Rights . A Scarcity Combatant whose procreation or consumption violates their region’s carrying capacity laws of nature, should not be entitled to the same rights as an Eco-Innocent whose procreation and consumption lifestyle is in accordance to the laws of nature (carrying capacity), and who consequently should be entitled to all other rights. <br />
<br />
<i><b>Sustainable Security</b></i>: ‘There is no security without sustainability’ : In the absence of an international new moral order where Ecocentric Guerrylla laws are implemented to regulate and reduce human procreation and resource utilization behaviour, towards a sustainable, pre-industrial lifestyle paradigm; “overpopulation and resource scarcity will result in conflict and war” (perhaps nuclear ) confronting regions at an accelerated pace , resulting in the “collapse of the global economic system and every market-oriented national economy” by 2050 .<br />
<br />
<i><b>Guerrylla Laws</b></i>: define the procreation and consumption behaviour of an individual as an Eco-Innocent (sustainable) or Scarcity-Combatant (unsustainable), based upon (A) a sustainable bio-capacity of 1 global hectare (gha) (60 % of 1.8 gha ) in accordance with the proactive conservation policies of Bhutan ; and (B) the Oregon University study that concludes that every child increases a parents’ eco-footprint by a factor of 20 . <br />
<br />
<i><b>Eco-Innocent</b></i>: <br />
* 0 children, consumption < 20 gha (Intn'l Biocapacity (1 gha) x 20) <br />
* 1 child, consumption < 1 gha (Intn'l biocapacity (1 gha (2007)) <br />
* 2 children, consumption < 0.05 gha (Intn'l biocapacity 1 gha ÷ 20) <br />
* 3 children, consumption < 0.025 gha (Intn'l biocapacity 1 gha ÷ 40) <br />
<br />
<i><b>Scarcity Combatant</b></i>:<br />
* 0 children, consumption > 20 gha (Intn'l biocapacity (1 gh) x 20)<br />
* 1 child, consumption > 1 gha (Intn'l biocapacity (1 gh (2007))<br />
* 2 children, consumption > 0.05 gha (Intn'l biocapacity 1 gh ÷ 20)<br />
* 3 children, consumption > 0.025 gha (Intn'l biocapacity 1 gh ÷ 40)<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">International Military Doctrine Environmental Security & Peace Strategies addressing Scarcity as an underlying Cause of Violent Conflict </span></span></strong><br />
<br />
</blockquote><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-o4neKBWqvuk/UPmi3-XpckI/AAAAAAAAgnU/2-8Og3Mr5tM/s1600/Murphy_SusSec_ResourceScarcity_865x860.PNG"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-TK8XIOaAieo/UPmiqQc5ENI/AAAAAAAAgnI/URnLri26GoI/s1600/Murphy_SusSec_ResourceScarcity_350x348.PNG" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 348px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 350px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote><blockquote>“There is also a new and different threat to our national security emerging—the destruction of our environment. The defense establishment has a clear stake in this growing threat... one of our key national security objectives must be to reverse the accelerating pace of environmental destruction.” - Senator Sam Nunn (D-GA), Senate, June 28, 1990<br />
<br />
“According to a growing body of literature, scarcity of freshwater to meet the many needs of Third World countries is rapidly escalating. Furthermore, many of the remaining exploitable sources of freshwater are in river basins shared by two or more sovereign states. These facts present the potential for violent conflict over water unless affected states can develop and use their common water resources in a cooperative, sustainable, and equitable manner. The United States, in its National Security Strategy and Foreign Affairs Policy, has called attention to the problem of resource scarcity as having important implications for American security.” <br />
<br />
“The effect of environmental problems on national security, now commonly referred to as "environmental security," is important to the US military. The concept first appeared in the 1991 National Security Strategy (NSS), when President Bush recognized that the failure to competently manage natural resources could contribute to potential conflict. The 1993 National Security Strategy echoed this concern and included the environment as an element of economic power. When A National Security Strategy of Engagement and Enlargement was published in February 1996, it amplified the importance of the environment as a component of United States national security even further. The 1996 NSS recognizes that competition for natural resources "is already a very real risk to regional stability around the world." It also states that national and international environmental degradation poses a direct threat to economic growth and to global and national security. Thus, as one of the institutions charged with protecting our national security, the US military also should be concerned with all aspects of environmental security.” <br />
<br />
“Environmental issues can adversely influence our national security in two important ways. One of these is potential or actual conflict between nations or groups that can arise as a result of disputes over natural resources or transnational environmental problems. A second way that environmental issues can directly affect national security is by destabilizing governments or institutions in a country afflicted with environmental degradation. Haiti is a good example. As early as 1978, the President's Council on Environmental Quality noted that deforestation in Haiti was almost complete and then predicted that social disruption and instability would soon follow. It took 16 more years and a military overthrow of duly elected President Aristide to spark renewed US military involvement in Haiti. However, it is clear that the environmental devastation of that country's forests, soil and water supplies created a cause and effect between environmental issues and Haiti's economic deprivation, massive migration and the basic instability of virtually every economic or governmental institution in the country.” </blockquote><br />
<b>1974: NSSM 200: National Security Study Memorandum: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth For U.S. Security and Overseas Interests (The Kissinger Report) :</b><br />
<br />
<blockquote>Rapid population growth adversely affects every aspect of economic and social progress in developing countries. It absorbs large amounts of resources needed for more productive investment in development. It requires greater expenditures for health, education and other social services, particularly in urban areas. It increases the dependency load per worker so that a high fraction of the output of the productive age group is needed to support dependents. It reduces family savings and domestic investment. It increases existing severe pressures on limited agricultural land in countries where the world's "poverty problem" is concentrated. <br />
<br />
It creates a need for use of large amounts of scarce foreign exchange for food imports (or the loss of food surpluses for export). Finally, it intensifies the already severe unemployment and underemployment problems of many developing countries where not enough productive jobs are created to absorb the annual increments to the labor force.<br />
<br />
Even in countries with good resource/population ratios, rapid population growth causes problems for several reasons: First, large capital investments generally are required to exploit unused resources. Second, some countries already have high and growing unemployment and lack the means to train new entrants to their labor force. <br />
<br />
Third, there are long delays between starting effective family planning programs and reducing fertility, and even longer delays between reductions in fertility and population stabilization. Hence there is substantial danger of vastly overshooting population targets if population growth is not moderated in the near future.<br />
<br />
[..] Moderation of population growth offers benefits in terms of resources saved for investment and/or higher per capita consumption. If resource requirements to support fewer children are reduced and the funds now allocated for construction of schools, houses, hospitals and other essential facilities are invested in productive activities, the impact on the growth of GNP and per capita income may be significant. <br />
<br />
In addition, economic and social progress resulting from population control will further contribute to the decline in fertility rates. The relationship is reciprocal, and can take the form of either a vicious or a virtuous circle.<br />
<br />
<b>Implications of Population Pressures for National Security </b><br />
<br />
It seems well understood that the impact of population factors on the subjects already considered -- development, food requirements, resources, environment -- adversely affects the welfare and progress of countries in which we have a friendly interest and thus indirectly adversely affects broad U.S. interests as well.<br />
<br />
[..] A recent study* of forty-five local conflicts involving Third World countries examined the ways in which population factors affect the initiation and course of a conflict in different situations. The study reached two major conclusions:<br />
<br />
1. ". . . population factors are indeed critical in, and often determinants of, violent conflict in developing areas. Segmental (religious, social, racial) differences, migration, rapid population growth, differential levels of knowledge and skills, rural/urban differences, population pressure and the special location of population in relation to resources -- in this rough order of importance -- all appear to be important contributions to conflict and violence...<br />
<br />
2. Clearly, conflicts which are regarded in primarily political terms often have demographic roots: Recognition of these relationships appears crucial to any understanding or prevention of such hostilities."<br />
<br />
[..] Professor Philip Hauser of the University of Chicago has suggested the concept of "population complosion" to describe the situation in many developing countries when (a) more and more people are born into or move into and are compressed in the same living space under (b) conditions and irritations of different races, colours, religions, languages, or cultural backgrounds, often with differential rates of population growth among these groups, and (c) with the frustrations of failure to achieve their aspirations for better standards of living for themselves or their children. To these may be added pressures for and actual international migration. <br />
<br />
These population factors appear to have a multiplying effect on other factors involved in situations of incipient violence.<br />
<br />
These adverse conditions appear to contribute frequently to harmful developments of a political nature: Juvenile delinquency, thievery and other crimes, organized brigandry, kidnapping and terrorism, food riots, other outbreaks of violence; guerrilla warfare, communal violence, separatist movements, revolutionary movements and counter-revolutionary coupe. All of these bear upon the weakening or collapse of local, state, or national government functions.<br />
<br />
Beyond national boundaries, population factors appear to have had operative roles in some past politically disturbing legal or illegal mass migrations, border incidents, and wars. If current increased population pressures continue they may have greater potential for future disruption in foreign relations.<br />
<br />
Perhaps most important, in the last decade population factors have impacted more severely than before on availabilities of agricultural land and resources, industrialization, pollution and the environment. All this is occurring at a time when international communications have created rising expectations which are being frustrated by slow development and inequalities of distribution.<br />
<br />
Population growth and inadequate resources. Where population size is greater than available resources, or is expanding more rapidly than the available resources, there is a tendency toward internal disorders and violence and, sometimes, disruptive international policies or violence. The higher the rate of growth, the more salient a factor population increase appears to be. A sense of increasing crowding, real or perceived, seems to generate such tendencies, especially if it seems to thwart obtaining desired personal or national goals.<br />
<br />
2. Populations with a high proportion of growth. The young people, who are in much higher proportions in many LDCs, are likely to be more volatile, unstable, prone to extremes, alienation and violence than an older population. These young people can more readily be persuaded to attack the legal institutions of the government or real property of the "establishment," "imperialists," multinational corporations, or other ── often foreign ── influences blamed for their troubles.<br />
<br />
3. Population factors with social cleavages. When adverse population factors of growth, movement, density, excess, or pressure coincide with racial, religious, color, linguistic, cultural, or other social cleavages, there will develop the most potentially explosive situations for internal disorder, perhaps with external effects. When such factors exist together with the reality or sense of relative deprivation among different groups within the same country or in relation to other countries or peoples, the probability of violence increases significantly.</blockquote><br />
<b>Butts, Kent (25 April 1994): Environmental Security: A DOD Partnership for Peace ; US Army War College:</b><br />
<br />
<blockquote>[Report on the Dept of Defense effort to create a Proactive Environmental Security Peace Strategy as part of the Fifth Senior Environmental Leadership Conference.]<br />
<br />
“Environmental degradation imperils nations' most fundamental aspect of security by undermining the natural support systems on which all of human activity depends.” - Michael Renner, 1989 <br />
<br />
The DOD environmental security mission has its roots in the fact that environmental problems that lead to instability and contention are being ignored, and U.S. combat forces are becoming involved in the resulting conflict. In addition, DOD's environmental security mission supports the National Security Strategy (NSS) of the United States and must be understood in that context.<br />
<br />
As stated by the National Security Strategy, "The stress from environmental challenges is already contributing to political conflict." Recognizing the importance of environmental issues to U.S. national security interests, the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Environmental Security defined DOD's role in environmental security to include "mitigating the impacts of adverse environmental actions leading to international instability." <br />
<br />
Instability and conflict often result from the poverty created by the economic regression of resource depletion or scarcity. The abuse of power by the leaders of many developing countries has frequently manifested itself in exploitive resource management practices, a wasting away of the economic infrastructure, human suffering and ethnic-based competition for increasingly scarce resources, and, ultimately, to conflict.<br />
<br />
[..] The global population has grown geometrically and will double over the period from 1950 to 2000, bringing environmental issues to the fore. Rates of global population continue to increase, particularly in the vulnerable developing world, accelerating demand for food and a broad range of other natural resources. The global rates of consumption of natural resources are far greater than the ecosystem has previously endured.10 The world is rapidly moving beyond local shortages, which historically have created local conflict, to regional or transboundary resource shortages with the potential to escalate into far reaching hostilities involving U.S. forces. In numerous regions the ability of the earth to replenish its renewable resources, even with the human intervention of irrigation and fertilizer, has already been exceeded. Indeed, these very interventions often create unforeseen, adverse environmental consequences. Thus, the frequently ignored, long-lead-time environmental factors have reached their thresholds and are causing instability that security policy analysts cannot ignore. <br />
<br />
[..] The most notable environmental threats to U.S. security are: <br />
<br />
• Global: competition for or threatened denial of strategic resources; ozone depletion; global warming; loss of biodiversity; proliferation of weapons of mass destruction; effects of demilitarization of nuclear, chemical, biological and conventional weapons; space debris; and inability or unwillingness of countries to comply with international environmental agreements and standards.<br />
<br />
• Regional: environmental terrorism, accident or disaster; vector-borne communicable diseases; regional conflicts caused by scarcity/denial of resources; cross border and global common contamination; and environmental factors affecting military access to land, air, and water.<br />
<br />
• State: environmental degradation of the resource base on which governmental legitimacy depends; risks to public health and the environment from DOD activities; increasing restrictions on military operations and access to air, land, and water; inefficient use of military resources; reduced weapons systems performance; demilitarization of nuclear, chemical, and conventional weapons systems; and erosion of public trust.<br />
<br />
Recommendations: <br />
<br />
• Appoint a special assistant to the National Security Advisor for International Environmental Security Affairs and create an interagency working group, chaired by the Special Assistant, to develop a Presidential Decision Document establishing U.S. environmental security policy.<br />
<br />
• Establish environmental security as a principal objective of the National Security Strategy and include environmental issues in National Security Council threat assessments and foreign policy planning.<br />
<br />
• Emphasize the linkage between environmental security objectives and the achievement of current, primary congressional and administration interests of democratic reform, economic development, and conflict resolution.<br />
<br />
• In conjunction with the United Nations, use DOD capabilities to enforce international treaties and agreements. <br />
<br />
• Create a DOD Environmental Crisis Monitoring Center to warn the policymaking community of chronic environmental issues before political positions have hardened and policy options have narrowed.</blockquote><br />
<b>Department of the Army, Field Manual 100-23, Peace Operations . Washington, DC: Headquarters, Department of the Army, December 1994, p. 28.</b><br />
<br />
<blockquote>The seventh principle of humanitarian action in armed conflict says: “Contextualization: Effective humanitarian action should encompass a comprehensive view of overall needs and of the impact of interventions. Encouraging respect for human rights and <b><i>addressing the underlying causes of conflicts are essential elements</i></b>. (own emphasis)</blockquote><br />
<b>1995: White House: National Security Strategy :</b> <br />
<br />
<blockquote>“Increasing competition for the dwindling reserves of uncontaminated air, arable land, fisheries and other food sources, and water, once considered 'free' goods, is already a very real risk to regional stability around the world. The range of risks serious enough to jeopardize international stability extends to massive population flight from man-made or natural catastrophes, such as Chernobyl or the East African drought, and to large-scale ecosystem damage caused by industrial pollution, deforestation, loss of biodiversity, ozone depletion, desertification, oceanic pollution and ultimately climate change. </blockquote><br />
<b>April 1996: MAJ William E David, USA Military Intelligence: Environmental Scarcity as a Cause of Violent Conflict , School of Advanced Military Studies; United States Army Command and General Staff College</b><br />
<br />
<blockquote>This monograph argues that the Army is unprepared for the implications of environmental scarcity as a cause of violent conflict. The proof follows in the next three chapters. Chapter Tow provides a conceptual model for examining the causal relationship between environmental scarcity and violent conflict. It shows causation by answering two questions. First, does scarcity cause specific social effects, such as population migration and poverty? Second, so the social effects that result from scarcity cause violent conflict? [..] [This chapter concludes that conflicts arising from environmental scarcity will occur more frequently in the future and threaten U.S. national security interests. Third, does doctrine address conflicts caused by environmental scarcities? The doctrinal review reveals that the Army does not recognize environmental scarcity as a cause of conflict. Chapter Four synthesizes the findings from the preceding chapters, showing that the Army is intellectually unprepared for conflicts caused by environmental scarcity. The monograph ends with two recommendations. First, the Army should recognize environmental causes of war in its doctrine. Second, the Army should adopt the Modified Conflict Causality Model as a doctrinal tool for predicting and evaluating future conflicts.<br />
<br />
[..] Humans adversely affect the environment. Contaminated water, deforestation, soil erosion, and the depletion of fisheries are but some of the outcomes. Although few people would disagree with the causation between human activities and environmental degradation, their reactions place them in one of two categories: cornucopians or neo-Malthusians. Cornucopians do not worry about protecting any single natural resource. They believe that human ingenuity will always allow the substitution of more abundant resources to produce the same products and services. Neo-Malthusians put less faith in ingenuity, arguing that "renewable resources' is a misleading term. <br />
<br />
[..] The divergence between cornucopians and neo-Malthusians enters into the debate corcerning the causes of conflict. Corncopians remain prisoners of the industrial revolution. They assume that there are only social cuases for social and political changes, neglecting the role of nature. However, Robert Kaplan noted: "nature is coming back with a vengeance, tied to population growth. It will have incredible security implications"[1] Neo-Malthusians realize that humans cannot seperate themselves from nature. The following causality analysis adheres to the neo-Malthusian perspective. therefore, it takes a holistic approahc toward causality, combining conflict studies and the study of the physical environment. After providing a conflict causality model, this chapter uses six case studies to prove that violent conflicts can arise from environmental scarcities.</blockquote><br />
<b>13 Mar 1997: Col BX Bush: Promoting Environmental Security during Contingency Operations ; US Army War College</b><br />
<br />
<blockquote>“The effect of environmental problems on national security, now commonly referred to as "environmental security," is important to the US military. The concept first appeared in the 1991 National Security Strategy (NSS), when President Bush recognized that the failure to competently manage natural resources could contribute to potential conflict.[1] The 1993 National Security Strategy echoed this concern and included the environment as an element of economic power.[2] When A National Security Strategy of Engagement and Enlargement was published in February 1996, it amplified the importance of the environment as a component of United States national security even further.[3] The 1996 NSS recognizes that competition for natural resources "is already a very real risk to regional stability around the world."[4] It also states that national and international environmental degradation poses a direct threat to economic growth and to global and national security.[5] Thus, as one of the institutions charged with protecting our national security, the US military also should be concerned with all aspects of environmental security.” <br />
<br />
“Environmental issues can adversely influence our national security in two important ways. One of these is potential or actual conflict between nations or groups that can arise as a result of disputes over natural resources or transnational environmental problems. A second way that environmental issues can directly affect national security is by destabilizing governments or institutions in a country afflicted with environmental degradation. Haiti is a good example. As early as 1978, the President's Council on Environmental Quality noted that deforestation in Haiti was almost complete and then predicted that social disruption and instability would soon follow.[6] It took 16 more years and a military overthrow of duly elected President Aristide to spark renewed US military involvement in Haiti. However, it is clear that the environmental devastation of that country's forests, soil and water supplies created a cause and effect between environmental issues and Haiti's economic deprivation, massive migration and the basic instability of virtually every economic or governmental institution in the country.”</blockquote><br />
<b>Spring 1997: Canadian Security Intelligence Service Archived: Commentary No. 71: Environmental Scarcity and Conflict , by Peter Gizewski, Project on Environment Population and Security, Peace and Conflict Studies Program, University of Toronto</b><br />
<br />
<blockquote>The past decade has witnessed growing recognition of the importance of environmental factors for national and international security. In 1987, the UN World Commission on Environment and Development pointed to environmental stress as "a possible cause as well as a result of conflict". In 1992, the UN Security Council warned that sources of instability in the economic, social, humanitarian, and ecological fields included military and political "threats to peace and stability". <br />
<br />
Two years later, the Clinton Administration observed that "terrorism, narcotics trafficking, environmental degradation, rapid population growth and refugee flows ...have security implications for present and long-term American policy".<br />
<br />
A wealth of popular commentary in the past few years has asserted the existence of general links between environmental stress and violence and security concerns. But proponents of such linkages tend to sensationalise the issue, ignoring empirical research and exaggerating the importance of environmental pressures as a conflict-generating force. In fact, until recently, scholars and policy makers functioned with relatively limited understanding of the causal mechanisms by which environmental scarcity can lead to conflict.<br />
<br />
Recent work has yielded results which partially fill this gap. Employing a series of detailed examples in which environment exhibits a prima facie link to social instability, such case studies carefully trace a causal connection between scarcity and conflict, and advance a set of key propositions which describe these links and the conditions under which they apply.<br />
<br />
<i>General Insights</i>:<br />
<br />
Current work on linkages between environment and conflict emphasizes the conflict-generating potential of renewable resource scarcities (i.e. cropland, fresh water, fuel wood and fish). While the strategic significance of non-renewable resources (e.g. petroleum, minerals) has long been recognized, market forces which reduce their demand and stimulate substitution and technical innovation have served increasingly to mitigate their scarcity and conflict-generating potential. Such forces have been less effective in preventing scarcities of renewables-scarcities which, growing evidence shows, threaten the internal stability of a number of developing countries.<br />
<br />
According to the University of Toronto's Thomas Homer-Dixon, scarcities of agricultural land, forests, fresh water and fish are those which contribute the most to violence. These deficiencies can be demand-induced, a function of population growth within a region; supply-induced, resulting from the degradation of resources within the region; or structural, the result of an unequal distribution of resources throughout the society. The three processes are not mutually exclusive and may-and often do-occur simultaneously, acting in tandem.<br />
<br />
The degradation and depletion of renewable resources can generate a range of social effects. It can work to encourage powerful groups within society to shift resource distribution in their favour. This process, known as "resource capture" generates profits for elites while intensifying the effects of scarcity among the poor or weak. <br />
<br />
A process of "ecological marginalization" often follows with poorer groups forced to seek the means of survival in more ecologically fragile regions such as steep upland slopes, areas at risk of desertification, tropical rain forests, and low quality public lands within urban areas. The high population densities in these regions, combined with a lack of capital to protect the local ecosystem, breeds severe environmental scarcity and chronic poverty.<br />
<br />
Other social effects can include decreased agricultural potential, regional economic decline, population displacement and a disruption of legitimized institutions and social relations. Most significantly, these scarcities can, either individually or in combination, generate forces and processes which contribute to violent conflict among groups within society.<br />
<br />
Such scarcities may act to strengthen group identities based on ethnic, class or religious differences, most notably by intensifying competition among groups for ever dwindling resources. At the same time, they can work to undermine the legitimacy of the state and its capacity to meet challenges. As the balance of power gradually shifts from the state to the challenging groups, the prospects for violence increase. Such violence tends to be subnational, diffuse and persistent.<br />
<br />
States may prove capable of avoiding suffering and social stress by adapting to scarcities. They can pursue programs and policies which encourage more sustainable resource use. Alternatively, a state may disengage itself from reliance on scarce resources by producing goods and services less dependent on such resources. The resulting products could then be traded for items which local scarcities preclude the state from producing. More often, however, countries lack the social and technical ingenuity needed to adapt successfully to the shortages they face.</blockquote><br />
<b>10 Apr 2000: LTC Kurt F. Ubbelohde: Freshwater Scarcity in the Nile River Basin , US Army War College</b><br />
<br />
<blockquote>“According to a growing body of literature, scarcity of freshwater to meet the many needs of Third World countries is rapidly escalating. Furthermore, many of the remaining exploitable sources of freshwater are in river basins shared by two or more sovereign states. These facts present the potential for violent conflict over water unless affected states can develop and use their common water resources in a cooperative, sustainable, and equitable manner. The United States, in its National Security Strategy and Foreign Affairs Policy, has called attention to the problem of resource scarcity as having important implications for American security.”</blockquote><br />
<b>Sep 2010: Bundeswehr: Peak Oil: Security Policy Implications of Scarce Resources <br />
Effects of Peak Oil on Armed Forces </b><br />
<br />
<blockquote>Severe impediments to mobility as a consequence of peak oil would have a considerable effect on all German security bodies, including the Bundeswehr.<br />
<br />
In the long run, not only all societies and economies worldwide but armed forces as well will be faced with the various and difficult challenges of transformation towards a “post-fossil” age. Implications for Germany: A markedly reduced mobility of the German Armed Forces would have various consequences – not only for the available equipment and training, but also for their (global) power projection and intervention capabilities. Given the size and complexity of many transport and weapon systems as well as the high standards set for qualities like robustness in operation, alternative energy and drive propulsion systems would hardly be available to the necessary extent in the short term. One of the consequences to be initially expected would be further cutbacks in the use of large weapon systems for training purposes in all services, thus raising the need for more “virtualised” training. However, effects on current and planned missions would most likely be even more severe. Deployment to the theatre of operations, the operation of bases and the mission itself are considerably more energy- and above all fuel-intensive than the mere upkeep of armed forces.<br />
<br />
[..] Peak oil, however, is unavoidable. This study shows the existence of a very serious risk that a global transformation of economic and social structures, triggered by a long-term shortage of important raw materials, will not take place without frictions regarding security policy. The disintegration of complex economic systems and their interdependent infrastructures has immediate and in some cases profound effects on many areas of life, particularly in industrialised countries.</blockquote><br />
<b>2010: White House: National Security Strategy :</b> <br />
<br />
<blockquote>Challenges like climate change, pandemic disease, and resource scarcity demand new innovation. Meanwhile, the nation that leads the world in building a clean energy economy will enjoy a substantial economic and security advantage. That is why the Administration is investing heavily in research, improving education in science and math, promoting developments in energy, and expanding international cooperation. Transform our Energy Economy: As long as we are dependent on fossil fuels, we need to ensure the security and free flow of global energy resources. But without significant and timely adjustments, our energy dependence will continue to undermine our security and prosperity. This will leave us vulnerable to energy supply disruptions and manipulation and to changes in the environment on an unprecedented scale.</blockquote><br />
<b>2012: January: Department of Defense: Sustaining U.S. Global Leadership: Priorities for the 21st Century Defense :</b><br />
<br />
<blockquote>In this resource-constrained era, we will also work with NATO allies to develop a “Smart Defense” approach to pool, share, and specialize capabilities as needed to meet 21st century challenges. [..] Whenever possible, we will develop innovative, low-cost, and small-footprint approaches to achieve our security objectives, relying on exercises, rotational presence, and advisory capabilities. [..] A reduction in resources will require innovative and creative solutions to maintain our support for allied and partner interoperability and building partner capacity. However, with reduced resources, thoughtful choices will need to be made regarding the location and frequency of these operations. [..] The balance between available resources and our security needs has never been more delicate.</blockquote><br />
<b>Dec 2012: U.S. Forest Service: Report Predicts a Strain on Natural Resources Due to Rapid Population Growth .</b><br />
<br />
<blockquote>U.S. Forest Service report outlines how a growing population and increased urbanization in the next 50 years will drain the nation's natural resources including water supplies, open space, and forests. <br />
<br />
Agriculture Under Secretary Harris Sherman had this to say about the report: "We should all be concerned by the projected decline in our nation’s forests and the corresponding loss of the many critical services they provide such as clean drinking water, wildlife habitat, carbon sequestration, wood products and outdoor recreation."</blockquote><br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Credible Peace Treaty must include National Environmental Security and Peace Strategy, confronting Overpopulation and Overconsumption’s Role in Scarcity as underlying Cause of Conflict:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<blockquote>Nobel Peace Prizes Awarded for Reducing Scarcity: 0<br />
Nobel Peace Prizes Awarded for Reducing Overpopulation: 0<br />
Nobel Peace Prizes Awarded for Reducing Overconsumption: 0<br />
<a href="http://www.youtu.be/j7jhs-bGyFQ" target="_blank">900 Vietnam</a>, <a href="http://www.youtu.be/YX9PVC0phhI" target="_blank">40 Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans</a> returned their ‘bullshit’ medals to U.S. Congress and NATO.<br />
Nobel Peace Laureates returned their War is Peace Whore Medals: 0</blockquote><br />
The Norwegian Nobel Committee’s Nobel Peace Prize is effectively a ‘War is Peace Whore’ Prize. Its mandate is to award ‘Peace Prizes’ to individuals who "work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses." <br />
<br />
Not one of the Norwegian Nobel Peace Prizes has ever been awarded to any individual who addresses the root causes of war, by educating and advocating on behalf of Sustainable Security: living in harmony with nature’s carrying capacity, by reducing overpopulation and overconsumption, which are the primary causes of resource scarcity.<br />
<br />
The Norwegian Nobel Peace Prize Committee has refused to consider the role of overpopulation and overconsumption as root cause factors of resource scarcity pushing society to conflict and war, where surplus populations are used as standing armies, and how those profiteering from overconsumption use their profits to promote pretend peace congresses and pretend Nobel Peace Prizes, awarding War is Peace Whore Prizes to perpetuate the ‘Control of Reproduction’ Human Farming War Economy Racket paradigm. <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">SA Concourt Endorses Flat Earth ‘War is Peace Whore’ Tragedy of the Constitutional Commons Suicide Pact & SA’s Impending Race War:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
The <a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/cct-alien-v-afriforum.html" target="_blank"><i><b>Alien on Pale Blue Dot v. Afriforum, et al</b></i></a> Application to the South African Constitutional Court requests a (A) Review of the “Kill Boere” Mediation Agreement order of the Supreme Court of Appeal, Bloemfontein under case number 815/2011 that was Entered into by and between: ANC, Mr. Malema, Afriforum and TAU-SA., as unconstitutionally vague and ambiguous; (B) Review of the Truth and Reconciliation Commissions Anthropocentric Flat Earth Worldview and Tragedy of Constitutional Commons Suicide Pact; and (C) a Declaratory Order that a Credible Proactive Peace Plan requires confronting Peak NNR & Sustainable Security: Scarcity as Cause of Violent Conflict; (D) Alternatively; to order all South African’s to prepare for SA’s Race War in the impending Peak NNR Crisis of Conflict.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Declaring that a Credible Proactive Peace Plan for South Africa requires (a) confronting geopolitical reality of Peak Non-Renewable Resources (NNR) and implementing (b) Sustainable Environmental Security plan in accordance with the Scarcity as cause of Violent Conflict principle, by (c) Determining the answers to the questions:<br />
<br />
1. If Peace and conflict are defined not as descriptions of behaviour between nations, but as trends describing social conditions. Put differently: Conflict is not defined as the violence between neighbours and nations, but as the unwanted intrusion of one person’s existence and consumption behaviour upon another person. <br />
<br />
2. There are two kinds of conflict: Direct: he took my car, he enslaved me, he beat me, he raped me, he killed me; and Indirect. Indirect intrusions are the by-product of other people's behaviour. ‘All the trees on our island were consumed by our grandparents,’ is an indirect intrusion of a past generation on a present one. ‘The rich people raised the price of gasoline and we can't afford it,’ and ‘The government is offering people welfare to breed more children’ are current economic and demographic intrusions by one present group on another present group. <br />
<br />
3. System conflict is the sum of intrusions experienced by each constituent, summed over all the constituents. A measure of the existing global conflict is the sum of six billion sets of intrusions. A measure of South Africa’s conflict is the sum of 50 million sets of intrusions. <br />
<br />
4. Using this definition of conflict, to establish whether South Africa’s socio-economic and political system is moving towards peace or towards conflict; based upon the questions: <br />
<br />
A. How many children per family leads to peace; or conversely how many children per family, contributes to greater resource scarcity, and exponential increase in conflict, i.e. an individuals’ ‘breeding war combatant’ status? [According to the research of <a href="http://sqswans.weebly.com/human-predicament.html" target="_blank">Dr. Jack Alpert</a> , the answer is one child per family]<br />
<br />
B. How much consumption relative to the nation’s footprint carrying capacity leads to peace; or conversely how much consumption relative to the nations bio-capacity per person, contributes to greater resource scarcity, and exponential increase in conflict, i.e. an individuals ‘consumption combatant status’?</blockquote><br />
The application was filed on 28 November 2012, however the Constitutional Court Registrar refuses to process the application, or to provide the Constitutional Court Justices with the appeal of her refusal to process the application.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [<a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/rh-18-jan-2013.html">EcoFeminist v Breivik</a> :: (<a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/0/7/13072327/13-01-18_breivik_idle-no-more_indigenous-movement.pdf">PDF</a>)]</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327922598170048610" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JSpbgoKp8LA/SfCVX96zuGI/AAAAAAAAEIs/qqvoPLfHrLA/s400/400_BlackLine.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 7px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 620px;" />Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-40194605847133321532013-01-13T18:08:00.000+02:002013-01-31T21:21:22.209+02:00Green Right Wing: What do Native Americans think of multiculturalism?<div align="justify"><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">The Right Wing Organic Farmers of Germany</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;"></span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Sally McGrane | New Yorker | January 11, 2013</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<br />
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-GfIBIxrl7Wo/UPLTzBTr2WI/AAAAAAAAgac/C2ixOOm_oAU/s1600/trees-300x227.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-GfIBIxrl7Wo/UPLTzBTr2WI/AAAAAAAAgac/C2ixOOm_oAU/s1600/trees-300x227.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 227px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 300px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote><span style="font-size: 95%;"> Compilation of:<br />
<br />
** <b>The Right Wing Organic Farmers of Germany</b>: “I am not a Nazi,” he said. “But ask your Native Americans what they think of multiculturalism.” (Sally McGrane | New Yorker | January 11, 2013)<br />
<br />
** <b>The Stark Truth: Greg Johnson on Eco-Fascism</b>: Greg Johnson’s definition of fascism; * Human-centrism versus nature-centrism, and its religious roots; * Savitri Devi and Pentti Linkola; * Vegetarianism and the quality of life of farm animals; (April 2, 2012 | Reason Radio | Robert Stark & Greg Johnson)<br />
<br />
** <b>German far-right extremists tap into green movement for support</b>: Support for ecological movement and conservation used to try to recruit a new generation of supporters (Kate Connolly | The Observer | 28 April 2012 23.51 BST)</span></blockquote><a name='more'></a><div align="center"><a href="http://armigideon-knights.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-oKszl8GGBG0/UPLbMngieNI/AAAAAAAAgfM/DfyRJ_aDxtk/s1600/NorwayVBreivik_FleurdeLis_MargaretHagen_556x119.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 119px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 556px;" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">The Right Wing Organic Farmers of Germany</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">“I am not a Nazi,” he said. “But ask your Native Americans what they think of multiculturalism.”</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Sally McGrane | New Yorker | January 11, 2013</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-CJG2OXSWQQc/UPLWWhrHC_I/AAAAAAAAgc0/eaFPZHyBkZg/s1600/Blut_und_Boden_L_547x709.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-i2-FfJ2ceJs/UPLWJWHRX5I/AAAAAAAAgco/CmgaPpNs-tE/s1600/Blut_und_Boden_L_350x454.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 454px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 350px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote>As the afternoon sun slanted into the farmhouse at the edge of the forest in this idyllic rural corner of northeast Germany, Helmut Ernst poured two glasses of cloudy apple juice and started talking. The forty-five-year-old organic corn farmer and sometime activist is against genetically-engineered crops, industrial soy farms in South America, and imported butter’s carbon footprint. Petite, blue-eyed, and engaging, Ernst does not belong to the Green Party. Rather, he says that he is a former member of the National Democratic Party (N.P.D.), which, for most Germans, is pretty much the same as announcing that you are a virulent neo-Nazi. Ernst said that he left the N.P.D. because “too many people were nostalgic for National Socialism,” but that many elements of the ultra-right political platform (drastically reducing immigration, cutting off Israel) still appeal to him. “I am not a Nazi,” he said. “But ask your Native Americans what they think of multiculturalism.”<br />
<br />
Every fifth German buys organically-grown foods on a regular basis. Most simply assume that their pesticide-free carrots and still-dirty locally-grown potatoes come from ideologically progressive left-leaning farms. But “Brown Environmentalists,” a book published a year ago by the Heinrich Böll Stiftung, the Green Party’s political foundation, highlighted another phenomenon: right-wing extremists championing environmental causes and engaging in organic farming, particularly in the depopulated, rural former east. “What we’re seeing is a stable right-wing movement in Eastern Germany,” said Hubertus Buchstein, who is a political science professor at the University of Greifswald and one of the book’s authors. “Some of them have started organic farming—it seems to fit the right wing. Now, instead of being militant, a new strategy is to live in the country and sell organic apples. Some are vegan, very strict.”<br />
<br />
As the Böll foundation’s book points out, environmentalism in Germany—an issue that today, while mainstream, is still strongly identified with the left—has deep right-wing roots. Late nineteenth-century “blood and soil” narratives celebrated a racist, often anti-Semitic and socially-Darwinistic picture of the German countryside. The Nazis, who adopted the “blood and soil” idea, were proponents of a quasi-mystical connection between the land and ethnic identity. “Today, neo-Nazis still like to point out that Hitler’s environmental protection laws stayed on the books until the 1970s,” writes the journalist Toralf Staud in “Brown Environmentalists.” Even the Green Party had an extreme right-wing contingent at its founding in 1980 (the left prevailed, and the party thrived). Counterintuitive as it may be, the extremists’ glossy environmental magazine Umwelt & Aktiv (“Environment & Active”), which slips xenophobic tracts on Islamic religious practices in along with articles about harmful pesticides, is not historically inaccurate with its slogan, “Environmental Protection Isn’t Green.”<br />
<br />
In a country of “organic mamas” that is also deeply sensitive to any signs of a re-ascendency of the ideas of “the man with the mustache” (as one organic farmer referred to Hitler), the story has caught on. In the year since “Brown Environmentalists” came out, it’s been picked up by most major German papers (“Idyll in Green-Brown”; “What Color is Organic?”). The number of actual right-wing organic farmers, however, appears to be quite small. “For the most part, the organic-farming movement comes out of a progressive, leftist movement, not a conservative one,” said Alexander Gerber, the head of BÖLW, the German league of organic food producers. “The ‘blood and soil’ idea is in no way dominant. It’s just a few cases.” Just to be clear, though, this summer BÖLW issued a resolution stating that organic farming stands for “a respectful relationship with nature, animals and people,” and is in no way compatible with ideologies that are “contemptuous of humanity.”<br />
<br />
Günther Hoffmann, a sanguine outdoorsman with stained teeth, gray hair to his shoulders, and a big Eurasian dog, is an expert on right-wing extremism; recently, he served as a consultant to a large organic label looking to draft a similar “no neo-Nazis” addendum. We met at noon in a cozy, rundown, G.D.R.-time-capsule of a tavern in the tiny town of Bugewitz, about an hour from the Polish border. “These [organic] organizations are in the process of self-examination, of asking themselves, ‘what are our values?’” said Hoffmann, whose German is inflected with French terms like degoutant, the word he applies, with feeling, to the N.P.D. In certain realms, the distinction between left and right can be murky: “At a place like Demeter”—an international organic label, whose certification standards are based on Rudolf Steiner’s teachings—“with its anthroposophic philosophy, an esoteric strain of Nazi thought can find a place, without calling attention to itself,” he said. “They had this problem, and they hadn’t noticed it.”<br />
<br />
Still, the Böll report notwithstanding, neo-Nazi organic farmers are a marginal phenomena, stressed Hoffmann. “You have to understand, it’s a very small part of a bigger picture.” A recent study found that nearly sixteen per cent of people living in the former East Germany hold extreme right-wing attitudes; this heterogeneous group includes well-organized, aggressive young men, barflies, lawyers, women, volunteer firemen, and the sect-like back-to-the-land colonies of right-wing families, some of them second and third generation Nazis, whose women wear ankle-length skirts and whose affinity for Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, with its gently rolling fields and hauntingly beautiful lakes, has earned the region a reputation in recent years as a “Tuscany for neo-Nazis.” Indeed, when Hoffmann moved here with his family shortly after the Wall fell, he wasn’t expecting to become an expert on the right-wing scene. Originally from Munich, he had simply fallen in love with the area’s moody, romantic landscape. Then a high-ranking right-wing extremist moved in down the road.<br />
<br />
The N.P.D., which only gets about one and a half per cent of the vote in the country as a whole, has done well in the east: with between five and six per cent of the vote, they now have seats in the state legislatures in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and Saxony. One softer tactic they employ is acting as “helpers,” assisting with unemployment bureaucracy, organizing kids’ parties, and taking old people to the doctor (a strategy known as “the nice Nazi from next door”). Another is to champion popular environmental causes, often with xenophobic undertones: they are against “nuclear death from Poland,” genetically-altered crops made by American companies, and giant pig farms. Hoffmann’s phone rang: an official announcement had been made that some of the funding for an N.S.U. terror cell had come from this area; he would be available later that day to for media comments. He hung up, rubbed his eyes and rolled a cigarette. “Buying an apple once in a while from Mr. Ernst,” he said, “it’s not the same as putting up a swastika.”<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [<a href="http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/culture/2013/01/the-right-wing-organic-farmers-of-germany.html">New Yorker</a>]</span></strong></blockquote><br />
<div align="center"><a href="http://military-gospel.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-nG9laZlEICY/UPLejW2aPZI/AAAAAAAAghM/hSxkWEirrvI/s1600/BrownNewGreen_MilitaryGospel_580x85.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 85px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 580px;" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">The Stark Truth: Greg Johnson on Eco-Fascism</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">April 2, 2012 | Reason Radio | Robert Stark & Greg Johnson</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<br />
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-QjAirhqSLfg/UPLUGbwDawI/AAAAAAAAgao/OQj1Ov7Ws5M/s1600/Savitri_Devi.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-QjAirhqSLfg/UPLUGbwDawI/AAAAAAAAgao/OQj1Ov7Ws5M/s1600/Savitri_Devi.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 300px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 274px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote>Robert <a href="http://reasonradionetwork.com/20120402/the-stark-truth-greg-johnson-on-eco-fascism">interviews</a> Dr. Greg Johnson. Topics include:<br />
<br />
* Greg Johnson’s definition of fascism;<br />
<br />
* Human-centrism versus nature-centrism, and its religious roots;<br />
<br />
* Savitri Devi and Pentti Linkola;<br />
<br />
* Vegetarianism and the quality of life of farm animals;<br />
<br />
* Martin Heiddeger and his views on modernity’s assumptions about nature;<br />
<br />
* Henry Williamson and Jorian Jenks.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [<a href="http://reasonradionetwork.com/20120402/the-stark-truth-greg-johnson-on-eco-fascism">Reason Radio</a>]</span></strong></blockquote><br />
<div align="center"><a href="http://military-gospel.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-nG9laZlEICY/UPLejW2aPZI/AAAAAAAAghM/hSxkWEirrvI/s1600/BrownNewGreen_MilitaryGospel_580x85.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 85px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 580px;" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">German far-right extremists tap into green movement for support</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Support for ecological movement and conservation used to try to recruit a new generation of supporters<br />
</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Kate Connolly in Berlin | The Observer | 28 April 2012 23.51 BST</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-xPdEuSmdJUQ/UPLRUDxGrMI/AAAAAAAAgYc/k0wxsfm7rjA/s1600/npd-green.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-jW5pPHJRurA/UPLRKJA62DI/AAAAAAAAgYQ/dbdWn-eXLRU/s1600/npd-green_350x210.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 210px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 350px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote>German consumers are being warned that when they buy organic produce they may be supporting the far-right movement, following the revelation that rightwing extremists in Germany have embraced the ecological movement and are using it to tap into a new generation of supporters.<br />
<br />
Debunking the popular view that equates eco-friendliness with cuddly, left-leaning greens, rightwing extremists have even begun to publish their own conservation magazine, which is believed to have the backing of the far-right National Democratic party (NPD). Alongside gardening tips and reports on the dangers of genetically modified milk are articles riddled with rightwing ideology and racial slurs. Bavaria's domestic intelligence agency has described the magazine, Umwelt und Aktiv (Environment and Active), as a "camouflage publication" for the NPD.<br />
<br />
"We have to get used to the fact that the term 'bio' [organic] does not automatically mean equality and human dignity," said Gudrun Heinrich of the University of Rostock, who has just published a study on the topic called Brown Ecologists, a reference to the Nazi Brownshirts and their modern-day admirers.<br />
<br />
Hotbeds of far-right eco-warriors are to be found throughout Germany. In the Mecklenburg region in the north, they have been quietly settling in communities since the 1990s in an effort to reinvigorate the traditions of the Artaman League – a farming movement whose roots lie in the 19th century romantic ideal of "blood and soil" ruralism, which was adopted by the Nazis. Heinrich Himmler, the SS leader, was a member. "They propagate a way of living which involves humane raising of plants and animals, is both nationalistic and authoritarian, and in which there's no place for pluralism and democracy," said Heinrich, adding that the NPD is closely linked to the settlers, helping the party become "deeply rooted in these rural areas".<br />
<br />
The settlers produce "German honey", bake bread from homegrown wheat, produce fruit and vegetables for sale, and knit their own woollen sweaters. Observers have noted that the far-right farmers have been able to profit from the cheap and spacious swaths of land left by a population exodus from impoverished states in the former East Germany, such as Mecklenburg.<br />
<br />
Political scientists argue that the NPD is trying to wrest the ecological movement back from the left, particularly the German Greens, who rose to prominence in the 1980s to become Europe's most successful ecological party.<br />
<br />
Hans-Günter Laimer, a farmer in Lower Bavaria who once ran for election for the NPD and is linked to Umwelt und Aktiv, questions why the left has been allowed to dominate the organic scene for so long. "What is the difference between my cucumbers and those of someone from the Green party?" he said.<br />
<br />
A representative of the Centre for Democratic Culture, in Roggentin in Mecklenburg, who did not wish to be identified for security reasons, recently told the Süddeutsche Zeitung newspaper: "They want that people don't think about politics when they hear the word NPD. They want as far as possible to build subtle bridges into the lives of other citizens … ecological topics are becoming increasingly important for rightwing extremists."<br />
<br />
At the same time as it was butchering millions of people, the Nazi party supported animal rights and nature conservation. But it is disturbing for many Germans to think that while they support local producers and reject genetically modified food, pesticides and intensive livestock farming, there is now little – superficially at least – to distinguish a supposedly well-meaning, leftist Green from a far-right eco enthusiast.<br />
<br />
The department of rural enlightenment in the state of Rheinland Pfalz has even produced a brochure called Nature Conservation versus Rightwing Extremism, which aims to help organic farmers resist the infiltration of fascists into their ranks and to be able to respond to any far-righters they might encounter. Its author, historian Nils Franke, said: "Because of the success of the eco topic in the wider society, the NPD has a heightened interest in wanting to fly the flag with it."<br />
<br />
Biopark, an organic cultivation organisation that vets its members before certifying them as organic farmers, said there was little it could do to exclude the rightwing extremist members it knew were in its ranks.<br />
<br />
"I don't appreciate the ideology of these people and I can understand if people choose not to buy from us as a result, but I can't vet them according to their political affiliations, only based on their cultivation methods," said its manager, Delia Micklich.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/apr/28/germany-far-right-green-movement">Guardian</a>, via <a href="http://www.theneworder.org/news/2012/07/germany's-right-goes-green/">New Order</a>]</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327922598170048610" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JSpbgoKp8LA/SfCVX96zuGI/AAAAAAAAEIs/qqvoPLfHrLA/s400/400_BlackLine.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 7px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 620px;" />Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-48193193448818739412013-01-09T16:39:00.000+02:002013-02-05T16:36:25.881+02:00Parl Ombud Complaint: Language Discrimination by Supervisory Committee for Judges<div align="justify"><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Parl Ombud Complaint: Language Discrimination by Supv Comm for Judges</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Language Discrimination and Lack of Clear Principles by Secretariat Supervisory Committee for Judges Norwegian Language Rulings, in response to English Language complaints in Case 12-071: Judge Nina Opsahl, 12-072: Judge Wenche Arntzen, 12-073: Judge Tore Schei.</span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">Andrea Muhrrteyn | Ecofeminist v. Breivik | 09 January 2013</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-iyF8353I-6M/UO2AwxkeGhI/AAAAAAAAgUM/_H1OaRKOHO4/s1600/SC4J_Opsahl-Arntzen-Schei.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-iyF8353I-6M/UO2AwxkeGhI/AAAAAAAAgUM/_H1OaRKOHO4/s1600/SC4J_Opsahl-Arntzen-Schei.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 358px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 318px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote><span style="font-size: 95%;">Language Discrimination and Lack of Clear Principles by Secretariat Supervisory Committee for Judges Norwegian Language Rulings, in response to English Language complaints in Case 12-071: Judge Nina Opsahl, 12-072: Judge Wenche Arntzen, 12-073: Judge Tore Schei.<br />
<br />
Argument: <br />
<br />
[1] Secretariat Supervisory Committee for Judges Norwegian Language Rulings to complaints filed in English are in violation of Article 14: Prohibition of Discrimination and Article 13: Right to an Effective Remedy , read in conjunction with Article 6 (3)(a): Right to a Fair Hearing in a language which you understand .<br />
<br />
[2] Secretariat Supervisory Committee for Judges failure to clearly inform me of their intention to provide Rulings in Norwegian, in response to my complaints filed in English, are in violation of ECHR ruling in Lithgow & Others v. United Kingdom , where it held that the rule of law requires provisions of legislation to be adequately accessible and sufficiently precise to enable people to regulate their affairs in accord with the law.<br />
<br />
Relief Requested:<br />
<br />
Request for English Translation of Supervisory Committee for Judges Rulings in Complaints against (i) Judge Nina Opsahl (12-071), (2) Judge Wenche Arntzen (12-072) and (3) Justice Tore Schei (12-073). </span></blockquote><a name='more'></a><div align="center"><a href="http://armigideon-knights.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-R0qzzurjUP4/T9WzLw5xK_I/AAAAAAAAacg/hZa3QwWxDds/s1600/NorwayVBreivik_FleurdeLis_MargaretHagen_556x119.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 119px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 556px;" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Complaint to Parliamentary Ombudsman: Language Discrimination by Secretariat Supervisory Committee for Judges</span></span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Language Discrimination and Lack of Clear Principles by Secretariat Supervisory Committee for Judges Norwegian Language Rulings, in response to English Language complaints in Case 12-071: Judge Nina Opsahl, 12-072: Judge Wenche Arntzen, 12-073: Judge Tore Schei. (<a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/0/7/13072327/12-12-31_po-cf_ssc4j_disc-amb_encl-comp-abc.pdf">PDF</a>)</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<b>Overview:</b><br />
<br />
On 30 May 2012 and 06 June 2012, I filed three complaints with the Secretariat of the Supervisory Committee of Judges respectively against: (1) <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/12-073-justice-tore-schei.html">Judge Tore Schei</a>, (2) <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/12-072-judge-wenche-arntzen.html">Judge Wenche Arntzen</a> and (3) <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/12-071-judge-nina-opsahl.html">Judge Nina Opsahl</a>. <br />
<br />
After much delay and obstruction, on 03 September 2012, I was issued Case Numbers and informed that my complaints had been given the case numbers of 12-071 (Judge Nina Opsahl), 12-072 (Judge Wenche E. Arntzen) and 12-073 (Justice Tore Schei). Furthermore that “If a party have given a statement in the case, these will be provided the complainant. The Supervisory Committee has not received statements from the other parties involved.”<br />
<br />
I was never informed the rulings of the Judges would be in Norwegian. I was also never provided with any parties statements. <br />
<br />
On 23 October 2012, the Supervisory Committee for Judges issues the rulings in the matter (without hearing any of the parties statements, or providing me with a response to their statements), and issued the rulings in Norwegian. <br />
<br />
On 12 November I requested an English translation. On 14 November the Supervisory Committee for Judges refused to provide me with an English translation, stating that the ‘decisions are always in Norwegian’. Furthermore that allegedly “there has never been a tradition to write the decisions in English even if the complaint is in English”. The Supervisory Committee for Judges did not provide any evidence for this statement. <br />
<br />
Requests on 14 November and 15 December for English translations have been ignored. <br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">ARGUMENT:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
[1] Secretariat Supervisory Committee for Judges Norwegian Language Rulings to complaints filed in English are in violation of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Convention_on_Human_Rights#Article_14_-_discrimination">Article 14: Prohibition of Discrimination</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Convention_on_Human_Rights#Article_13_-_effective_remedy">Article 13: Right to an Effective Remedy</a>, read in conjunction with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Convention_on_Human_Rights#Article_6_-_fair_trial">Article 6 (3)(a): Right to a Fair Hearing in a language which you understand</a>.<br />
<br />
The Secretariat Supervisory Committee for Judges accepted my complaint filed in English. <br />
<br />
If an organisation, government body or court accepts a complaint written in a particular language, then they should provide the speaker of such language with the response in that particular language.<br />
<br />
If an organisation, government body or court does not accept complaints in any particular language, then they should inform the complainant that they do not accept complaints in such particular language, and reasons therefore, when the complainant files their complaint. <br />
<br />
The Secretariat Supervisory Committee for Judges did not notify me of any ‘standard procedures’, that I would not be provided with a ruling in the language in which I filed the complaint. <br />
<br />
[2] Secretariat Supervisory Committee for Judges failure to clearly inform me of their intention to provide Rulings in Norwegian, in response to my complaints filed in English, are in violation of ECHR ruling in <a href="http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-57526">Lithgow & Others v. United Kingdom</a>, where it held that the rule of law requires provisions of legislation to be adequately accessible and sufficiently precise to enable people to regulate their affairs in accord with the law.<br />
<blockquote>“As regards the phrase "subject to the conditions provided for by law", it requires in the first place the existence of and compliance with adequately accessible and sufficiently precise domestic legal provisions (see, amongst other authorities, the alone judgment of 2 August 1984, Series A no. 82, pp. 31-33, paras. 66-68).”</blockquote><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">RELIEF REQUESTED:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
Request for English Translation of Supervisory Committee for Judges Rulings in Complaints against (i) Judge Nina Opsahl (12-071), (2) Judge Wenche Arntzen (12-072) and (3) Justice Tore Schei (12-073).<br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
On 06 June 2012 I noted that I had not yet received any information detailing the process and procedure for my complaints, and additionally provided the completed signed “Skjema for klage på dommere til Tilsynsutvalget for dommere (TU)” forms for my complaints in English.<br />
<br />
On 04 July, I submitted to Parliamentary Ombudsman: Slow Case Processing or Failure to Provide Case Processing by Secretariat of the Supervisory Committee of Judges: RE: Violation of Ethical Principles for Norwegian Judges Complaints in Norway v. Breivik matter against (i) Chief Justice Tore Schei, (2) Judge Wenche Arntzen & (3) Judge Nina Opsahl. (<a href="http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/120704_ombud_sscj?mode=window&viewMode=doublePage">PDF</a>)<br />
<br />
On 11 July, Parliamentary Ombudsman: Head of Division: Berit Sollie: Case Ref: 2012-1943: Lack of Response from the Supervisory Committee for Judges, <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/1/post/2012/07/120711_po-sscj.html">responded</a> that I had to submit an additional "written request to Tilsynsutvalget for dommere, where you call for answers to your applications. If you do not receive a response to this request within a reasonable time, you can contact the Ombudsman, with an enclosed copy of the last request to Tilsynsutvalget for dommere."<br />
<br />
On 20 July I again <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/1/post/2012/07/120720_sscj-po.html">submitted a request</a> to Secretariat of the Supervisory Committee for Judges: National Courts Administration: <i>RE: 30 May 2012 Violation of Ethical Principles for Norwegian Judges complaints against Complaint against Chief Justice Tore Schei; Judge Wenche Arntzen and Judge Nina Opsahl</i>. <br />
<br />
<blockquote>I am still waiting for the Secretariat of the Supervisory Committee for Judges, to provide me with a Case and/or Reference Number for my complaint/s, including details about processing of my complaint/s in Norway v. Breivik matter against respectively: (1) Judge Nina Opsahl, (2) Judge Wenche Arntzen & (3) Chief Justice Tore Schei. <br />
<br />
Please Note: In case of Absence of Response from Secretariat of the Supervisory Committee for Judges, providing a case number and details of processing of my complaint (or alternatively a final date by when such information shall be provided to me by the Committee), by 27 July 2012; the complaint shall be submitted to: Parliamentary Ombudsman. </blockquote><br />
On 20 July 2012 I responded to Parliamentary Ombudsman: Case 2012-1943, that I was still waiting for a response to my Complaint to Secretariat for Supv. Committee of Judges: Against Justice Tore Schei | Judge Wenche Arntzen | Judge Nina Opsahl <br />
<br />
On 31 July 2012, I received a <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/1/post/2012/07/120731_da-eikene.html">response</a> from Supv. Comm. for Judges: <br />
<br />
Response from Secretariat Supervisory Committee for Judges: Court Administration: Senior Advisor: Ms Espen Eiken: Re: Tilsynsutvalget for dommere - Klage: Justice Tore Schei, Judge Wenche Arntzen, Judge Nina Opsahl: "We refer to your three complaints to the Supervisory Committee for Judges (Tilsynsutvalget for dommere). Your complaints will be handled according to our standard procedure. According to our standard procedure we don’t send a confirmation letter to inform that we have received a complaint. Each complaint will be given a case number. The average handling time for the Supervisory Committee has lately been up to six months."<br />
<br />
On 01 August 2012, I <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/1/post/2012/08/120801_scj_eikene.html">responded</a> to Supv. Comm. for Judges:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Can you please clarify; so that I am crystal clear about the Committee's process, and can continue these proceedings with confidence in the Committee's impartial objectivity and professionalism: 1. It will take six months for me to be issued a case number? 2. Or, it will take six months to complete the complaint enquiry?</blockquote><br />
21 August 2012: Correspondence to Supv. Comm. for Judges:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>I have still received No Response from Supv. Comm. for Judges to my questions (01 August 2012) in response to your correspondence (31 July 2012). </blockquote><br />
31 August: <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/1/post/2012/08/120831_ssc4j-caseno.html">Correspondence</a> to Supervisory Comm. for Judges: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>I am still awaiting a response to the questions in my correspondence of 01 August 2012, and 21 August, in response to your correspondence of 31 July 2012.<br />
<br />
Awaiting clarification on (1) Committee does not Acknowledge Receipt of Complaints; (2) Standard Procedure: <br />
<br />
Can you please clarify; so that I am crystal clear about the Committee's process, and can continue these proceedings with confidence in the Committee's impartial objectivity and professionalism: (1) It will take six months for me to be issued a case number?; (2) Or, it will take six months to complete the complaint enquiry?</blockquote><br />
02 Sept: <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/1/post/2012/09/120902_po-ssc4j1.html">Complaint to Parl. Ombudsman</a>: Slow Case Processing:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Complaint (<a href="http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/120902_po-sscj?mode=window&viewMode=singlePage">PDF</a>) submitted to the Parliamentary Ombudsman: Slow Case Processing or Failure to Provide Case Processing by Secretariat of the Supervisory Committee of Judges: RE: Violation of Ethical Principles for Norwegian Judges Complaints in Norway v. Breivik matter against (i) Chief Justice Tore Schei, (2) Judge Wenche Arntzen & (3) Judge Nina Opsahl. <br />
<br />
Slow Case Processing: Supv. Comm. for Judges/ Tilsynsutvalget for dommere have obstructed my requests for a Case number since 06 June 2012, and for information about the level of transparency of their ‘standard procedure’ since 31 July 2012.<br />
<br />
Failure to Provide Case Processing: Supv. Comm. for Judges/ Tilsynsutvalget for dommere appear to be attempting to refuse to provide me with a Case Number, in their attempts to obstruct my complaint from the public record. [Withdrawn on 04 Sept: PO: 02.09 Supv. Comm. for Judges Complaint resolved on 03.09] </blockquote><br />
03 Sept: <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/1/post/2012/09/120903_ssc4j-1445.html">Response</a> from Supv. Comm. for Judges: Issuance of Case Number: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>"Your complaints have been given the case numbers 12-071 (Judge Nina Opsahl), 12-072 (Judge Wenche E. Arntzen) and 12-073 (Justice Tore Schei). The complete handling time can be close to six months.<br />
<br />
If a party have given a statement in the case, these will be provided the complainant. The Supervisory Committee has not received statements from the other parties involved." </blockquote><br />
03 Sept 2012: <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/1/post/2012/09/120903_ssc4j-1520.html">Response</a> to Supv. Comm. for Judges: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>"Thank you for the information. I am now clear of what is expected of me. I shall wait to receive the parties statements; and acknowledge that I am aware that the complete handling time can be upto six months. I have no objections thereto. <br />
<br />
Until I receive any parties statement, I do not expect you to be hearing from me, until I respond thereto. <br />
<br />
I filed a subsequent complaint of slow case handling to the Parliamentary Ombudsman, on 02 September. I shall notify them, that it is no longer necessary, and withdraw the complaint to the Parliamentary Ombudsman. I shall provide you a copy of my withdrawal of the complaint for your records. I hope to do so later today." [<a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/1/post/2012/09/120904_po-ssc4j.html">Withdrawn on 04 Sept</a>: PO: 02.09 Supv. Comm. for Judges Complaint resolved on 03.09] </blockquote><br />
<b>23 Oct: Supv. Comm. for Judges Ruling: 'Obviously Unfounded'</b><br />
<br />
[Received 02 November] On 23 October, the Supervisory Committee for Judges changed their minds and decided they were not going to process the complaints. <br />
<br />
Previously they had said that the complaints would be processed, whereby all the Judges would be required to submit a statement about their reasons, in accordance to the issues raised in the complaints. <br />
<br />
However the Supervisory Committee for Judges now decided that all the Judges do not have to submit their affidavits, and the complaints will be ruled as 'obviously unfounded' (Google translation). <br />
<br />
The decisions by the Committee are in Norwegian.<br />
<br />
12 Nov: <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/1/post/2012/11/121112_ssc4j.html">Correspondence</a> to Supv. Comm. For Judges: Req for Info & English Translation of Ruling:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>I have received the rulings. Thank you.<br />
<br />
1. Could you clarify why they are in Norwegian? <br />
<br />
2. Could you clarify who the person was who made the decision that the rulings should be made in Norwegian<br />
<br />
3. Could you provide an English translation? <br />
<br />
4. If not, could you provide me with the name of the person who refuses to provide an English translation.<br />
<br />
5. Finally: Could you also confirm whether the Supervisory Committee received any verbal or written statements from the parties; and if so, why such statements were not provided to me.<br />
<br />
Espen Eiken: 03 Sep: "If a party have given a statement in the case, these will be provided the complainant. The Supervisory Committee has not received statements from the other parties involved."</blockquote><br />
14 Nov: <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/1/post/2012/11/121114_ssc4j1.html">Correspondence</a> from Ms. Eiken: Req for Info Re: Language Policy:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>The decisions of the Supervisory Committee for Judges are always written in Norwegian. There has never been a tradition to write the decisions in English even if the complaint is in English. There was no individual person who decided that the decisions should be made in Norwegian. The Committee has no arrangement for translating its decisions. It is therefore assumed that the complainants provides necessary translations. The Supervisory Committee have not received any statements from the parties. </blockquote><br />
14 Nov: <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/1/post/2012/11/121114_ssc4j1.html">Response</a> to Supervisory Committee for Judges: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>So, are you saying that the Supervisory Committee for Judges who dealt with my complaints cannot speak or write English? Who translated my complaint for them, or did they just ignore it, cause they do not speak English, and refuse all complaints that are not in Norwegian? <br />
<br />
Surely if a court accepts a complaint written in a particular language, then they should provide the speaker of such language with the response in their language, or they should inform the complainant to fuck off, because they refuse to accept complaints in any language except Norwegian? <br />
<br />
How did the Justices know what the complaint was about, if they cannot speak English? Does the Supervisory Committee for Judges accept complaints in English? If so, how can they justify providing a ruling that is not in the language of the complaint? <br />
<br />
Either they should only accept complaints in Norwegian, or if they accept complaints in other languages, then they should provide a ruling in that particular language? </blockquote><br />
15 Dec: <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/1/post/2012/12/121215_ssc4j.html">Reminder Request</a> to Supv. Committee for Judges: Ms. Eiken:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>I am still awaiting a response to my email of 14 November: I repeat: <br />
<br />
Are you saying that the Supervisory Committee for Judges who dealt with my complaints cannot speak or write English? Who translated my complaint for them, or did they just ignore it, cause they do not speak English, and refuse all complaints that are not in Norwegian? <br />
<br />
Surely if a court accepts a complaint written in a particular language, then they should provide the speaker of such language with the response in their language, or they should inform the complainant to fuck off, because they refuse to accept complaints in any language except Norwegian? <br />
<br />
How did the Justices know what the complaint was about, if they cannot speak English? Does the Supervisory Committee for Judges accept complaints in English? If so, how can they justify providing a ruling that is not in the language of the complaint? <br />
<br />
Either they should only accept complaints in Norwegian, or if they accept complaints in other languages, then they should provide a ruling in that particular language?</blockquote><br />
There has been no response from the Supervisory Committee of Judges or Ms. Eiken.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [<a href="http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/12-12-31_po-cf_ssc4j_disc-amb_encl-comp-abc?mode=window&viewMode=singlePage">ISSUU</a> :: <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/0/7/13072327/12-12-31_po-cf_ssc4j_disc-amb_encl-comp-abc.pdf">PDF</a> :: <a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/12-1943-court-admin.html">Parl Ombud Complaint</a>]</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<br />
<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327922598170048610" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JSpbgoKp8LA/SfCVX96zuGI/AAAAAAAAEIs/qqvoPLfHrLA/s400/400_BlackLine.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 7px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 620px;" />Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2238880389442028.post-63793286669214502632012-12-27T01:27:00.000+02:002013-02-05T16:32:33.294+02:00Parl Ombud rules Supreme Court 'admin decision', re Review of Breivik Judgement is an Official Court Judgement <div align="justify"><br />
<br />
<div align="center"><blockquote><strong><span style="font-size: 130%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Parliamentary Ombudsman rules Supreme Court Secretary General: Gunnar Bergby's 10 September 'admin decision' re: Review of Breivik Judgement; is an Official Court Judgement </span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;"></span></span></strong> <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 95%;">27 December 2012 | EcoFeminist v. Breivik</span></strong></blockquote></div><br />
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Pu92GlOrVsg/UNuDGug6gOI/AAAAAAAAgH4/3vSYETmIrIQ/s1600/PO_SupremeCrtReview-BreivikJudgement_370x395.PNG"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Pu92GlOrVsg/UNuDGug6gOI/AAAAAAAAgH4/3vSYETmIrIQ/s1600/PO_SupremeCrtReview-BreivikJudgement_370x395.PNG" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 370px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 395px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote><span style="font-size: 95%;">On 27 August 2012, I filed an Application (<a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/0/7/13072327/12-08-27_no-breivik_supremecrt_review_fs-nom-affid-pos.pdf">PDF</a>) to Norway Supreme Court for Review of Oslo District Court: Breivik Judgement Ruling; to Set Aside the Judgements (1) ‘Necessity (Nodrett) Ruling’ and (2) Defendant’s Conviction (Finding of Guilt) and Remit to Oslo District Court for hearing of Further Evidence to conclude Objective and Subjective Necessity Test Evidentiary Enquiry.<br />
<br />
The Supreme Court Registrar refused to respond to my application, so i filed a complaint of Slow Processing (<a href="http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/120902_po-scr?mode=window&viewMode=singlePage">PDF</a>) to the Parliamentary Ombudsman on 02 September 2012. On 10 September 2012, Supreme Court Secretary General: Gunnar Bergby responded - (<i><a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/1/post/2012/09/120910_nsc-gbergby.html">Application for review of Oslo District Court Judgement of 24 August 2012 (2011-188627-24)</a></i>. He implied my application was an 'appeal', and that I lacked legal standing (locus standi), because only the 'parties to the case' can appeal. <br />
<br />
</span></blockquote><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-XaXCsNZXGdc/UNuE14gGJmI/AAAAAAAAgKE/2hAuByDwBTU/s1600/12-11-15_2012-1943_Supreme%2BCourt%2Bof%2BNorway_600x821.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-dqVq7tJnbNM/UNuEpmMAhWI/AAAAAAAAgJ4/-ghin86ajbk/s1600/12-11-15_2012-1943_Supreme%2BCourt%2Bof%2BNorway_350x479.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 479px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 350px;" /></a><br />
<blockquote><span style="font-size: 95%;">On 11 September 2012, I responded (<a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/0/7/13072327/12-09-11_resp_nsc_secgen_gunnarbergby_decision-dated-09-09-12_encl.pdf">PDF</a>) that my application was not an appeal, but a Review, and furthermore, that matters of locus standi are investigated by courts, after hearing evidence on the matter, not by Registrars. I requested him to provide me with a statute that granted him the authority to make a ruling on legal standing (locus standi); thereby denyiing me access to the court. <br />
<br />
On 08 October 2012, I sent a reminder request to Sec. Gen. Bergby, but received no response. On 03 November I filed another complaint to the Parliamentary Ombudsman: <i>Complaint of Supreme Crt Registrar Slow Case Processing</i> (<a href="http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/121103_po-nsc">PDF</a>), requesting the Parliamentary Ombudsman order Sec. Gen. Bergby to either (a) provide me with the relevant statute granting him the authority to make a ruling on legal standing, or (b) process my application for review of the Breivik judgement.<br />
<br />
On 15 November, the Parliamentary Ombudsman ruled that Sec. Gen. Bergby's 'administrative decision' was not an 'administrative decision', but a 'Decision (Judgement) by a court of law'; and that the Parliamentary Ombudsman has no authority to investigate 'decisions by a court of law', only administrative decisions of slow case processing. <br />
<br />
So, the Parliamentary Ombudsman is saying that if you file an application with a court, and the registrar makes some administrative decision about your application, that is a 'judgement by a court of law'. Very strange, cause 'judgements/decisions by a court of law', only occur after a court has heard all the relevant evidence in the matter, from all parties. <br />
<br />
So, it appears that the Parliamentary Ombudsman is not willing to rock the boat, and do their job by ordering the Supreme Court Secretary General, to either provide the relevant statute granting him the authority to make a decision on locus standi, or to process my application.<br />
<br />
This means however, that an Application can be filed with the European Court of Human Rights, since the highest Norwegian court (Supreme Court) has issued a judgement (without general due process procedures), on my Application for Review.</span></blockquote><a name='more'></a><div align="center"><a href="http://armigideon-knights.co.nr/"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-R0qzzurjUP4/T9WzLw5xK_I/AAAAAAAAacg/hZa3QwWxDds/s1600/NorwayVBreivik_FleurdeLis_MargaretHagen_556x119.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 119px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 556px;" /></a></div><br />
<blockquote><br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">27 August 2012: Application to Norway Supreme Court, for Review of Oslo District Court: Breivik Judgement ruling of 24 August:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
A. On 27 August 2012, an Application (<a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/0/7/13072327/12-08-27_no-breivik_supremecrt_review_fs-nom-affid-pos.pdf">PDF</a>) was submitted to Norway Supreme Court for Review of Oslo District Court: Breivik Judgement Ruling; to Set Aside the Judgements (1) ‘Necessity (Nodrett) Ruling’ and (2) Defendant’s Conviction (Finding of Guilt) and Remit to Oslo District Court for hearing of Further Evidence to conclude Objective and Subjective Necessity Test Evidentiary Enquiry.<br />
<br />
B. <i>Review Orders Requested</i>: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>a. Set Aside the Judgements <a href="http://www.lovdata.no/nyhet/dok/toslo-2011-188627-24e.pdf">‘Necessity (Nødrett) Ruling’</a> (<a href="http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/120824_nvb-judmnt">pg.67</a>) <br />
<br />
b. Set Aside Defendant’s Conviction (Finding of Guilt) and Remit to Oslo District Court for hearing of Further Evidence to conclude Objective and Subjective Necessity Test Evidentiary Enquiry.</blockquote><br />
C. <i>Grounds for Review</i>: <br />
<br />
<blockquote>a. The application for review is based on the grounds of (A) Irregularities & Illegalities in the Proceedings before the Oslo District Court: in terms of (1) A Failure of Justice and Failure of a True and Correct Interpretation of the Facts; (2) Judicially Un-Investigated Facts; (3) Failure of Application of Mind and (4) Rejection of Admissible or Competent Evidence: (i) Prosecutor & Judges failure to examine objective and subjective necessity test; and (ii) Courts denial of due process to applicants Habeus Mentem and Amicus Curiae applications .<br />
<br />
b. [A.1.a] Necessity Judgement fails to provide any necessity criminal provisions that prohibit killing of Government Officials in case of Necessity <br />
<br />
c. [A.1.b] Necessity Judgement Ignores that Criminal Necessity provisions do not prohibit the killing of Government Officials in case of objective and subjective Necessity.<br />
<br />
d. [A.1.c] Necessity Judgement’s Erroneous interpretation of Necessity related criminal law provisions and international necessity related human rights law.<br />
<br />
e. [A.1.d] Necessity and Guilt Judgement’s Failure to conduct required Objective and Subjective Tests for Defendant’s Necessity Defence<br />
<br />
f. [A.1.e] Necessity and Guilt Judgement’s Absence of Objective and Subjective Test Enquiry and Conclusions Renders it Inadequate<br />
<br />
g. [A.1.f] Necessity and Guilt Judgement’s Absence of Clarification Upon which party the Onus of Proof lies in a Case of Necessity; and how or why their evidence was insufficient renders the Judgements Conclusions inadequate.<br />
<br />
h. [A.1.g] Necessity and Guilt Judgement’s Absence of Objective and Subjective Test Enquiry and Conclusions Renders it Discriminatory Precedent<br />
<br />
i. [A.1.h] Necessity Judgements ‘Extreme Political Objectives’ conclusion is unsupported in the Absence of Objective and Subjective Necessity Test<br />
<br />
j. [A.1.i] Necessity Judgements ‘Extreme Political Objectives’ conclusion is unsupported in the Absence of Objective and Subjective Necessity Test</blockquote><br />
D. <i>Failure of Justice: Judicially Un-Investigated Facts: Necessity and Guilt</i>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>a. No reference was made during court proceedings by any party alleging that any Norwegian or International specific necessity criminal statute specifically prohibits the killing of government or politically active young people, in the event of objective and subjective reasonably determined necessity.<br />
<br />
b. No International or Norwegian specific necessity criminal statute specifically prohibits the killing of government or politically active young people, in the event of objective and subjective reasonably determined necessity.<br />
<br />
c. Necessity criminal statutes do not specifically allow or disallow the killing of government or politically active young people, but provide for an objective and subjective test that examines each alleged criminal act to objectively and subjectively determine whether necessity existed, or the defendant honestly believed it existed, within the particular criminal act‘s relevant circumstances.<br />
<br />
d. The court, prosecution and defence counsel failed to conduct the required subjective and objective tests to examine the evidence for the Defendant‘s necessity motivations to determine (I) objectively whether the defendant‘s claims – simplistically rephrased as – “Titanic Europe is on a demographic/immigration collision course with Islam Iceberg”; and (II) secondly whether the defendant subjectively perceived the Titanic Europe/Islam Iceberg circumstances this way.<br />
<br />
e. The Judgement fails to disclose Norwegian law‘s Onus of Proof requirements in a case of necessity: i.e. upon which party – Defendant or State - does the Onus of Proof lie in case of Necessity? In South Africa, the proof in a defense of necessity, ruling out the reasonable possibility of an act of necessity, lies on the State. In the absence of the State ruling out the reasonable possibility of an act of necessity, the accused claim of necessity stands.<br />
<br />
f. It is clear that the Court's statement of reasons does not show the results of the courts objective and subjective enquiry into the Defendant‘s claim of necessity. Thus, it is also clear that the Court's statement of reasons for its “necessity finding of guilt”, are inadequate. Hence the finding of guilt needs to be set aside for further evidence to objectively and subjective evaluate the defendants necessity defence.<br />
<br />
g. Finally if the Courts statement of reasons remain uncorrected, they would set a bad precedent, encouraging other courts to deny necessity defendants their rights to an objective and subjective test of their necessity defence, including denying the defendant information clarifying upon whom the Onus of Proof in a defence of necessity lies.</blockquote><br />
E. <i>Oslo Court: Breivik Defence of Necessity</i>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>a. On 17 April 2012, the Oslo Court <a href="https://twitter.com/#!/Oslotingrett/status/192198581803945984">tweeted</a> to Journalists attending the Breivik trial: “Wrong translation in the 22-7 trial yesterday: Breivik said "nodrett", Correct translation: "Principle of Necessity", not "self defence".”<br />
<br />
b. The principle of Necessity is enshrined in Norwegian Law in Section 47 of the <a href="http://www.ub.uio.no/ujur/ulovdata/lov-19020522-010-eng.pdf">Penal Code</a>: "No person may be punished for any act that he has committed in order to save someone's person or property from an otherwise unavoidable danger when the circumstances justified him in regarding this danger as particularly significant in relation to the damage that might be caused by his act."</blockquote><br />
F. <i>Prosecutor Engh and Holden “Refuse to touch Breivik’s Principle of Necessity”</i>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>a. According to <a href="http://www.document.no/2012/06/inga-bejer-engh-prosedyre-del-i/">Document.NO</a>, <a href="http://nrk.no/227/dag-for-dag/rettssaken---dag-42-1.8216159">NRK</a>, <a href="http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/22-juli/rettssaken/artikkel.php?artid=10066042">VG</a>, <a href="http://nrk.no/227/dag-for-dag/rettssaken---dag-43-1.8218343">NRK</a>, the transcripts Prosecutor Engh and Holden violated their duty of objectivity in terms of (a) impartially enquiring into and/or responding to the Accuseds‘ Defence; and (b) providing the court with the Prosecution‘s evaluation and conclusion of the evidence for and against Breivik‘s invocation of his Necessity Defence.<br />
<br />
b. In her closing statement, Prosecutor Engh acknowledges that: (A) Norwegian prosecutors have a duty to conduct their investigation with objectivity; (B) Norwegian law allows for an accused to plead to necessity and/or self defence, (C) Where an accused does invoke necessity, it is the court and prosecutor‘s duty to investigate the accused‘s necessity defence arguments and evidence; (D) If an accused successfully invokes a necessity defence, this can and must result in either mitigation of sentence and/or a verdict of innocence; (E) Breivik invoked the defence of necessity; (F) Despite the fact that Breivik invoked the necessity defence, both Prosecutor Engh and Holden “refuse to touch the principle of necessity”.</blockquote><br />
G. <i>Necessity in Norwegian Law</i>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>a. LAW-2005-05-20-28: <a href="http://www.lovdata.no/all/hl-20050520-028.html">Lov om straff (straffeloven)</a>. | <a href="http://www.lovdata.no/cgi-wift/wiftldles?doc=/app/gratis/www/docroot/ltavd1/filer/nl-20050520-028.html&emne=n%F8drett*&#17">Act on Punishment (Penal Code)</a> says: § 17 Necessity: “An action that would otherwise be criminal, is legal when a) it is being undertaken to save lives, health, property or any interest from the danger of injury that can not be averted in any other reasonable manner, and b) the risk of injury is far greater than the risk of injury by the action.”<br />
<br />
b. LAW-1998-03-20-10-§ 5: <a href="http://www.lovdata.no/cgi-wift/wiftldles?doc=/app/gratis/www/docroot/ltavd1/filer/nl-20050520-028.html&emne=n%F8drett*&#17">Forskrift om sikkerhetsadministrasjon</a> | Regulations relating to security management allows for “security breaches without criminal liability if the terms of the principle of necessity or self defence in criminal law law § 47 or § 48 is met.”</blockquote><br />
H. <i>Norwegian Law Necessity Judgement: Subjective and Objective Test</i>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>a. In <a href="https://www.udiregelverk.no/en/documents/court-decisions/le-2012-76983/">LE-2012-76983 Eidsivating Appeal – Judgment</a> of 29 May 2012, an Eritrean man was accused of several Perjury related Immigration offences to help his sister to come to Norway. He admitted the facts, but claimed necessity. In court he was found guilty on all counts and sentenced to 90 days' imprisonment. The Court of Appeal suspended the appeal to test his conviction on one point (whether the court a quo had seriously enquired into his necessity defence).<br />
<br />
b. The court agreed with the Defendant‘s argument that asserted that the court a quo had not considered the circumstances that were invoked as the basis for the existence of a principle of necessity situation. The judgement stated that it is clear that “the courts statement of reasons does not show that the court has considered this argument. Thus it is also clear that the Court‘s statement of reasons in so far are inadequate.”</blockquote><br />
I. <i>Necessity Defence: International and Foreign Law</i>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>a. The rationale of the necessity defense is not that a person, when faced with the pressure of circumstances of nature, lacks the mental element which the crime in question requires. Rather, it is this reason of public policy: the law ought to promote the achievement of higher values at the expense of lesser values, and sometimes the greater good for society will be accomplished by violating the literal language of the criminal law. <br />
<br />
b. The principle of the necessity defence is rooted in common law and any accused pleading to necessity argues that their actions were justified or an exculpation for breaking the law. Defendants who plead to necessity – whether common law necessity, political necessity (civil disobedience) or military necessity - argue that they should not be held liable for their actions as being criminal, because their conduct was necessary to prevent some greater harm.</blockquote><br />
J. As argued in <i><a href="https://litigation-essentials.lexisnexis.com/webcd/app?action=DocumentDisplay&crawlid=1&doctype=cite&docid=38+New+Eng.+L.+Rev.+3&srctype=smi&srcid=3B15&key=3d9c645ad04b894b23683eae1c915c96">The Necessity Defense in Civil Disobedience Cases: Bring in the Jury</a></i>, by William P. Quigley:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>a. [..] The doctrine of necessity, with its inevitable weighing of choices of evil, holds that certain conduct, though it violates the law and produces harm, is justified because it averts a greater evil and hence produces a net social gain or benefit to society. <br />
<br />
b. Glanville Williams expressed the necessity doctrine this way: “[S]ome acts that would otherwise be wrong are rendered rightful by a good purpose, or by the necessity of choosing the lesser of two evils.” He offers this example: “Suppose that a dike threatens to give way, and the actor is faced with the choice of either making a breach in the dike, which he knows will result in one or two people being drowned, or doing nothing, in which case he knows that the dike will burst at another point involving a whole town in sudden destruction. In such a situation, where there is an unhappy choice between the destruction of one life and the destruction of many, utilitarian philosophy would certainly justify the actor in preferring the lesser evil.” </blockquote><br />
K. In <i><a href="http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1887&context=lawreview">Nuclear War, Citizen Intervention, and the Necessity Defense</a></i> , Robert Aldridge and Virginia Stark, document numerous cases of Common Law and Civil Disobedience Necessity Defence Cases which resulted in Innocence verdicts or severe Mitigation of Sentencing.<br />
<br />
L. <i>Common Law Necessity Defence Cases Resulting in Innocence Verdicts or Severe Mitigation of Sentencing</i>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>a. In <i>Regina v Dudley and Stephens</i> (1884) 14 QBD 273, three crew members and a cabin boy escaped a shipwreck to spend eighteen days on a boat, over 1,000 miles from land, with no water and only two one pound tins of turnips. After four days, they caught and ate a small turtle. That was the only food that they had eaten prior to the twentieth day of being lost at sea. Ultimately, two of the crew members killed the ailing cabin boy and “fed upon the body and blood of the boy for four days.” Four days later, they were rescued. Two of the men were charged with murder. The court found that the cabin boy would likely have died by the time they were rescued and that the crew members, but for their conduct, would probably have died as well. The Queen's Bench Division Judges held that the defendants were guilty of murder in killing the cabin boy and stated that their obvious necessity was no defence. The defendants were sentenced to death, but this was subsequently commuted to six months' imprisonment.<br />
<br />
b. In <i>Spakes v. State</i>, 913 S.W.2d 597 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996), the Texas Criminal Appeals Court allowed the jury to be instructed on the necessity defense before deliberating the verdict for an inmate whose three cellmates had planned an escape and threatened to slit his throat if he did not accompany them. The defendant inmate argued that because of the terribly violent crimes of which his cellmates had been convicted (one had bragged about chopping his girlfriend up with an ax), it was a necessity that he break the law, by accompanying them in their escape.<br />
<br />
c. In <i>United States v. Ashton</i>, 24 F. Cas. 873, 873-74 (C.C.D. Mass 1834) (No. 14,470), sailors prosecuted for mutiny were found not guilty, after arguing the necessity for their mutiny based upon the dangerously leaky ship and that this danger had been concealed from them until after they left port. Circuit Justice Story found them not guilty of mutiny.<br />
<br />
d. In <i>United States v. Holmes</i>, 26 F. Cas. 360 (E.D. Pa. 1842) (No. 15,383), Holmes was involved in a shipwreck, where the crew were charged with manslaughter for throwing sixteen passengers overboard in a frantic attempt to lighten a sinking lifeboat. The Prosecutor argued the passengers should be protected at all costs, whereas the Defence placed the jurors in the sinking lifeboat with the defendant. The Defendant was found guilty, but the jurors requested leniency, to which the court complied by sentencing the defendant to six months in prison and a fine of twenty dollars.<br />
<br />
e. In the 1919 Arizona decision of <i>State v. Wooten</i>, commonly referred to as the Bisbee Deportation case, Professor Morris describes the acquittal of a Sherrif based upon the “necessity” for committing Kidnapping.<br />
<br />
f. In <i>Surocco v. Geary</i>, 3 Cal. 69 (1853), a large fire threatened the unburned half of the then small town of San Francisco. A public officer ordered the destruction of houses to create a firebreak and was subsequently sued by one of the owners. On appeal, the California Supreme Court held that the action was proper because: “The right to destroy property, to prevent the spread of a conflagration, has been traced to the highest law of necessity, and the natural rights of man, independent of society and the civil government. "It is referred by moralists and jurists as the same great principle which justifies the exclusive appropriation of a plank in a shipwreck, though the life of another be sacrificed; with the throwing overboard goods in a tempest, for the safety of the vessel; with the trespassing upon the lands of another, to escape death by an enemy. It rests upon the maxim, Necessitas inducit privilegium quod jura private." [Necessity leads to privileges because of private justice].”</blockquote><br />
M. <i>Civil Disobedience Political Necessity Defence Cases Resulting in Innocence Verdicts or Severe Mitigation of Sentencing</i>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>a. In the United States, 23 cases of left wing/liberal political protestors necessity defence cases have resulted in innocence or severe mitigation of sentencing, whereas only 1 case of right wing/conservative political protestors cases have resulted in innocence or severe mitigation of sentencing. <br />
<br />
b. Left Wing/Liberal: Anti Nuclear (10): <i>State v. Mouer</i> (Columbia Co. Dist. Ct., Dec. 12-16, 1977), <i>People v. Brown</i> (Lake County, Jan. 1979); <i>People v. Block</i> (Galt Judicial Dist., Sacramento Co. Mun. Ct., Aug. 14, 1979); <i>California v. Lemnitzer</i>, No. 27106E (Pleasanton-Livermore Mun. Ct. Feb. 1, 1982); <i>State v. McMillan</i>, No. D 00518 (San Luis Obispo Jud. Dist. Mun. Ct., Cal. Oct. 13, 1987); <i>Massachusetts v. Schaeffer-Duffy</i> (Worcester Dist. Ct. 1989); West Valley City v. Hirshi, No. 891003031-3 MC (Salt Lake County, Ut. Cir. Ct., W. Valley Dept. 1990); <i>Washington v. Brown</i>, No. 85-1295N (Kitsap County Dist. Ct. N. 1985); <i>California v. Jerome</i>, Nos. 5450895, 5451038, 5516177, 5516159 (Livermore-Pleasanton Mun. Ct., Alameda County, Traffic Div. 1987); <i>Washington v. Karon</i>, No. J85-1136-39 (Benton County Dist. Ct. 1985)<br />
<br />
c. Left Wing/Liberal: Anti US Central American Foreign Policy (3); <i>Vermont v. Keller</i>, No. 1372-4-84-CNCR (Vt. Dist. Ct. Nov. 17, 1984); <i>People v. Jarka</i>, Nos. 002170, 002196-002212, 00214, 00236, 00238 (Ill. Cir. Ct. Apr. 15, 1985); <i>Colorado v. Bock</i> (Denver County Ct. June 12, 1985)<br />
<br />
d. Left Wing/Liberal: Anti-Military Industrial Complex (4): <i>Michigan v. Jones</i> et al., Nos. 83-101194-101228 (Oakland County Dist. Ct. 1984); <i>Michigan v. Largrou</i>, Nos. 85-000098, 99, 100, 102 (Oakland County Dist. Ct. 1985); <i>Massachusetts v. Carter</i>, No. 86-45 CR 7475 (Hampshire Dist. Ct. 1987); <i>Illinois v. Fish</i> (Skokie Cir. Ct. Aug. 1987)<br />
<br />
e. Left Wing/Liberal: Anti-Apartheid (3): <i>Chicago v. Streeter</i>, Nos. 85-108644, 48, 49, 51, 52, 120323, 26, 27 (Cir. Ct., Cook County Ill. May 1985); <i>Washington v. Heller</i> (Seattle Mun. Ct. 1985); <i>Washington v. Bass</i>, Nos. 4750-038, -395 to -400 (Thurston County Dist. Ct. April 8, 1987)<br />
<br />
f. Left Wing/Liberal: Pro-Environment/Cycling (1): <i>People v. Gray</i>, 571 N.Y.S.2d 851, 861-62 (N.Y. Crim. Ct.1991)<br />
<br />
g. Left Wing/Liberal: AIDS: Clean Needles Campaign (2) <i>California v. Halem</i>, No. 135842 (Berkeley Mun. Ct. 1991); In 1993, a jury acquitted a Chicago AIDS activist charged with illegally supplying clean needles because of the necessity defense. <br />
<br />
h. Right Wing/Conservative: Anti-Abortion (1): In 1990, in Omaha, Nebraska, a jury acquitted seventeen anti-abortion protestors because of the necessity defense. The trial judge relied on the defense to overturn the trespassing convictions of an additional eighteen defendants. <br />
<br />
i. Neutral: Anti-Corruption (1): In 1988, a North Carolina court acquitted two Tuscarora Indians of charges in connection with their taking of twenty hostages at the office of a local newspaper to protest the alleged corruption of county officials. <br />
<br />
j. Neutral: Anti-Alcohol Advertising (1): In 1991, a Chicago jury acquitted a Catholic priest of criminal charges for damage to the inner-city neighborhood where he was pastor after he admitted painting over three tobacco- and alcohol-related billboards. The defendant argued he should not be convicted because of the necessity defense. The jury deliberated ninety minutes before acquitting the defendant. </blockquote><br />
N. <i>Military Necessity and International Humanitarian Law</i>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>a. <a href="http://www.crimesofwar.org/a-z-guide/military-necessity/">Crimes of War</a> and <a href="http://www.diakonia.se/sa/node.asp?node=888">Diakona</a> define military necessity as: “a legal concept used in international humanitarian law (IHL) as part of the legal justification for attacks on legitimate military targets that may have adverse, even terrible, consequences for civilians and civilian objects. It means that military forces in planning military actions are permitted to take into account the practical requirements of a military situation at any given moment and the imperatives of winning. The concept of military necessity acknowledges that even under the laws of war, winning the war or battle is a legitimate consideration, though it must be put alongside other considerations of IHL.”<br />
<br />
b. Luis Moreno-Ocampo, Chief Prosecutor at the International Criminal Court, investigated allegations of War Crimes during the 2003 invasion of Iraq and published an <a href="http://www2.icc-cpi.int/NR/rdonlyres/F596D08D-D810-43A2-99BB-B899B9C5BCD2/277422/OTP_letter_to_senders_re_Iraq_9_February_2006.pdf">open letter</a> containing his findings. In a section titled "Allegations concerning War Crimes" he did not call it military necessity but summed up the term: “Under international humanitarian law and the Rome Statute, the death of civilians during an armed conflict, no matter how grave and regrettable, does not in itself constitute a war crime. International humanitarian law and the Rome Statute permit belligerents to carry out proportionate attacks against military objectives, even when it is known that some civilian deaths or injuries will occur. A crime occurs if there is an intentional attack directed against civilians (principle of distinction) (Article 8(2)(b)(i)) or an attack is launched on a military objective in the knowledge that the incidental civilian injuries would be clearly excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage (principle of proportionality) (Article 8(2)(b)(iv).”</blockquote><br />
O. <i>Military Necessity Justifies use of Nuclear Weapons for Self-Preservation</i>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>a. In the International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion of 8 July 1996, on <a href="http://www.un.org/law/icjsum/9623.htm">The legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons</a>, the final paragraph states “that such threat or use would generally be contrary to international humanitarian law. The opinion went on to state, however, that the court “cannot lose sight of the fundamental right of every State to survival, and thus its right to resort to self-defence . . . when its survival is at stake.” The court held, by seven votes to seven, with its president‘s casting vote, that it “cannot conclude definitively whether the threat or use of nuclear weapons would be lawful or unlawful in an extreme circumstance of self defence in which the very survival of a State would be at stake.”</blockquote><br />
P. <i>Military Necessity in Nuremberg German High Command Trial</i>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>a. In the <a href="http://www.worldcourts.com/imt/eng/decisions/1948.10.28_United_States_v_von_Leeb.pdf">Trial of Wilhelm von Leeb and Thirteen Others: United States Military Tribunal</a>, Nuremberg, 30th December, 1947 – 28 the October, 1948 <br />
<br />
b. Wilhelm von Leeb and the other thirteen accused in this case were former high-ranking officers in the German Army and Navy, and officers holding high positions in the German High Command (OKW) were charged with Crimes against Peace, War Crimes, Crimes against Humanity and with Conspiracy to commit such crimes. The War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity charged against them included murder and ill-treatment of prisoners of war and of the civilian population in the occupied territories and their use in prohibited work; discrimination against and persecution and execution of Jews and other sections of the population by the Wehrmacht in co-operation with the Einsatzgruppen and Sonderkommandos of the SD, SIPO and the Secret Field Police; plunder and spoliation and the enforcement of the slave labour programme of the Reich.<br />
<br />
c. They were acquitted of some of the charges, where it was ascertained that military necessity existed objectively and/or subjectively in the particular circumstances.<br />
<br />
d. The Tribunal argued that “The devastation prohibited by the Hague Rules and the usages of war is that not warranted by military necessity. This rule is clear enough but the factual determination as to what constitutes military necessity is difficult. Defendants in this case were in many instances in retreat under arduous conditions wherein their commands were in serious danger of being cut off. Under such circumstances, a commander must necessarily make quick decisions to meet the particular situation of his command. A great deal of latitude must be accorded to him under such circumstances. What constitutes devastation beyond military necessity in these situations requires detailed proof of an operational and tactical nature. We do not feel that in this case the proof is ample to establish the guilt of any defendant herein on this charge.”<br />
<br />
e. Thus, in dealing with Reinhardt's alleged responsibility for plunder and spoliation, the Tribunal said: “The evidence on the matter of plunder and spoliation shows great ruthlessness, but we are not satisfied that it shows beyond a reasonable doubt, acts that were not justified by military necessity.”</blockquote><br />
Q. <i>Military Necessity: The Rendulic Rule: Importance of the Subjective Test</i>:<br />
</blockquote><a href="http://books.google.co.za/books/about/The_Law_of_Armed_Conflict.html?id=6FKf0ocxEPAC&redir_esc=y"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5602561562199580802" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mJMLcvYknXc/UNuILJaKl1I/AAAAAAAAgMQ/FTZ50tzD9Ks/s1600/LawArmedConflict_GarySolis.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; float: right; height: 285px; margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px; width: 200px;" /></a><blockquote><blockquote>a. In <i><a href="http://books.google.co.za/books/about/The_Law_of_Armed_Conflict.html?id=6FKf0ocxEPAC&redir_esc=y">The Law of Armed Conflict: International Humanitarian Law in War</a></i>, Gary D Solis provides an overview of the Rendulic Rule in evaluation of the subjective test in evaluating a defence of Military Necessity: <br />
<br />
b. “In October 1944, Generaloberst Lothar Rendulic was Armed Forces Commander North, which included command of Nazi Forces in Norway. (Between World Wars I and II, Rendulic had practiced law in his native Austria.) Following World War II, he was prosecuted for, among other charges, issuing an order “for the complete destruction of all shelter and means of existence in, and the total evacuation of the entire civilian population of the northern Norwegian province of Finmark...” Entire villages were destroyed, bridges and highways bombed, and port installations wrecked. Tried by an American military commission, Rendulic's defence was military necessity. He presented evidence that the Norwegian population would not voluntarily evacuate and that rapidly approaching Russian forces would use existing housing as shelter and exploit the local population's knowledge of the area to the detriment of retreating German forces. The Tribunal acquitted Rendulic of the charge, finding reasonable his belief that military necessity mandated his orders. His case offers one of the few adjudicated views of what constitutes military necessity.<br />
<br />
c. <i>From the Tribunals opinion</i>:<br />
<br />
d. “Military necessity has been invoked by the defendant's as justifying.. the destruction of villages and towns in an occupied territory... The destruction of property to be lawful must be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war... There must be some reasonable connection between the destruction of property and the overcoming of the enemy forces. It is lawful to destroy railways, lines of communication, or any other property that might be utilized by the enemy. Private homes and churches even may be destroyed if necessary for military operations. It does not admit the wanton devastation of a district or the wilful infliction of suffering upon its inhabitants for the sake of suffering alone...<br />
<br />
e. “The evidence shows that the Russians had very excellent troops in pursuit of the Germans. Two or three land routes were open to them as well as landings by sea behind German lines... The information obtained concerning the intentions of the Russians was limited.. It was with this situation confronting him that he carried out the "scorched earth" policy in the Norwegian province of Finmark.. The destruction was as complete as an efficient army could do it...<br />
<br />
f. “There is evidence in the record that there was no military necessity for this destruction and devastation. An examination of the facts in retrospect can well sustain this conclusion. But we are obliged to judge the situation as it appeared to the defendant at the time. If the facts were such as would justify the action by the exercise of judgement, after giving consideration to all the factors and existing possibilities, even though the conclusion reached may have been faulty, it cannot be said to be criminal. After giving careful consideration to all the evidence on the subject, we are convinced that the defendant cannot be held criminally responsible although when viewed in retrospect, the danger did not actually exist....<br />
<br />
g. “..... We are not called upon to determine whether urgent military necessity for the devastation and destruction in the province of Finmark actually existed. We are concerned with the question whether the defendant at the time of its occurrence acted within the limits of honest judgement on the basis of the conditions prevailing at the time. The course of a military operation by the enemy is loaded with uncertainties... It is our considered opinion that the conditions, as they appeared to the defendant at the time, were sufficient upon which he could honestly conclude that urgent military necessity warranted the decision made. This being true, the defendant may have erred in the exercise of his judgement but he was guilty of no criminal act. We find the defendant not guilty of the charge. <br />
<br />
h. The Rendulic standard remains unchanged. Fifty-four years later, <a href="http://www.icty.org/x/file/Legal%20Library/jud_supplement/supp46-e/galic.htm">in 2003, the ICTY wrote</a>: “In determining whether an attack was proportionate it is necessary to examine whether a reasonably well-informed person in the circumstances of the actual perpetrator, making reasonable use of the information available to him or her, could have expected excessive civilian casualties to result from the attack.” </blockquote><br />
R. <i>Military Necessity: Rendulic Rule: Subjective Honesty in current Military Doctrine</i>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>a. In <i><a href="http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1208&context=auilr">Unexpected Consequences From Knock-On Effects: A Different Standard for Computer Network Operations?</a></i>, Eric Talbot Jensen writes:<br />
<br />
b. “The standard the Court held General Rendulic to was the requirement to give "consideration to all factors and existing possibilities" as they "appeared to the defendant at the time."”<br />
<br />
c. “Note that the requirement to give consideration to all factors and existing possibilities is balanced with the overarching constraint of taking facts as they appear at the time of the decision. Must the commander remain in inaction until he feels he has turned over every stone in search of that last shred of information concerning all factors and possibilities that might affect his decision? The answer must be "no." Instead, he must act in good faith and, in accordance with GPI, do everything feasible to get this information.”</blockquote><br />
S. <i>Onus of Proof: Norwegian State or Breivik to Prove Necessity?</i>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>a. In South African law the Onus of Proof lies on the State in a defence of necessity, to rule out the reasonable possibility of an act of necessity.<br />
<br />
b. In <i>S v Pretorius</i> 1975 (2) SA 85 (SWA) Judge AJ Le Grange found that “The onus of proof in a defence of necessity as in self-defence rests on the State to rule out the reasonable possibility of an act of necessity. It is not for the accused to satisfy the court that she acted from necessity (p 293). .. (proceed) by gathering an objective view of the circumstances from the evidence itself, and the magistrate‘s finding whether the prevailing circumstances were “alarming” if viewed objectively…. Viewed objectively… was the accused confronted with a situation that …… lives were in danger….<br />
<br />
c. “[90] [If the evidence gives a picture of threatening danger and fear, which gave rise to necessity and which would have justified the accused‘s conduct, provided the accused did not exceed the limits of necessity…. Proceed to consider whether the proven circumstances satisfy the tests for necessity set out by B & Hunt at p. 285 of their work: (a) the threatening disaster endangered the accused‘s legal interests. This in fact gave rise to a duty to act. (b) the danger was threatening and imminent. The fact that symptoms relating to the danger may only appear later does not detract from the situation… if it cannot immediately be ascertained whether or not the symptoms are dangerous, necessity arises… (d) the chances that harm would have resulted and it would have been of a serious nature.. the greater the harm, the greater the necessity…”<br />
<br />
d. If Norwegian law also places the Onus of Proof to lie on the State in a defence of necessity, to rule out the reasonable possibility of an act of necessity; it would appear that the Prosecutor‘s decision to “refuse to touch the principle of necessity” should weigh heavily in the Defendant‘s favour.</blockquote><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">28 August – 06 September 2012: No Response from the Norwegian Supreme Court:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
A. On 28 August 2012, I contacted the Supreme Court Registrar with a request for a Case Number for my application for Review of the Oslo District Court’s Brievik Judgement.<br />
<br />
B. On 31 August 2012, I again contacted the Supreme Court Registrar with a request for a Case Number for my application for Review of the Oslo District Court’s Brievik Judgement.<br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">02 September 2012: Complaint to Parliamentary Ombudsman: Slow Case Processing by Supreme Court Registrar:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
A. On 02 September 2012, I submitted a complaint (<a href="http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/120902_po-scr?mode=window&viewMode=singlePage">PDF</a>) to the Parliamentary Ombudsman: <i>Slow Case Processing / Failure to Provide Case Processing by Supreme Court Registrar; to Application for Review of ‘Breivik Judgement’</i>. <br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">10 September 2012: Response from Supreme Court Secretary General: Gunnar Bergby: No Legal Standing:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
A. On 11 September 2012, I was informed of the decision by Supreme Court of Norway: Secretary General: Gunnar Bergby in: <i><a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/1/post/2012/09/120910_nsc-gbergby.html" target="_blank">Application for review of Oslo District Court Judgement of 24 August 2012 (2011-188627-24)</a></i>.<br />
<br />
B. Secretary General Bergby implied that my application was an ‘Appeal’, and stated that I lacked legal standing, because I was not a ‘party to the case’. Mr. Anders Behring Breivik and the prosecution authority “are the only parties in the specific case mentioned above, and the right of appeal is constricted to these”. <br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">11 Sep 2012: Response to Supreme Court: Secretary General:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
A. On 11 September 2012, applicant responded (<a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/0/7/13072327/12-09-11_resp_nsc_secgen_gunnarbergby_decision-dated-09-09-12_encl.pdf" target="_blank">PDF</a>) to Secretary General Gunnar Bergby. Applicant requested the Secretary General to provide her with the relevant statute in Norway that provides the Secretary General the authority to refuse to process a case, citing lack of locus standi/legal standing; thereby denying such applicant due process access to be heard by an impartial court? <br />
<br />
B. Applicant argued that it was for the court to decide the matter of locus standi, not the Secretary General; citing <i><a href="http://www.eftacourt.int/images/uploads/E-2-94_Judgment.pdf">Scottish Salmon Growers Association Limited v. EFTA Surveillance Authority</a></i> (Case E-2/94); <i><a href="http://www.eftacourt.int/images/uploads/E-5_07_Report_for_the_Hearing_FINAL_revised.pdf">Private Barnehagers Landsforbund v EFTA Surveillance Authority, supported by Kingdom of Norway</a></i> (Case E-5/07) ; and Hans Chr. Bugge, Professor of Environmental Law at the Department of Public and International Law, University of Oslo, in his article: <i><a href="http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~avosetta/buggeaccessnorw02.pdf">General background: Legal remedies and locus standi in Norwegian law</a></i> : “There is no clear definition or delimitation of the concept. Whether a person has "legal interest" is decided discretionary in each case, and depends on individual circumstances.”<br />
<br />
C. Applicant clarified her application was not an ‘Appeal’, which ‘locus standi’ was restricted to the ‘parties in the specific case’, but one of Certiorari/Review, where her locus standi/legal standing was based upon her being a member of a group of activists: known as political necessity activists, who have ‘legal interest’ in the judgement, due to its violations of ECHR Article 13 and 14, and its necessity ruling was not sufficiently precise, as required in <i><a href="http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/publisher,ECHR,,GBR,3ae6b7230,0.html">Lithgow & others v. United Kingdom</a></i>, in order to allow Political Necessity Activists to regulate their activism in accordance with the law. <br />
<br />
D. The Oslo District Courts ‘Breivik Judgement’, discriminated against Breivik, by denying him a Free and Fair Subjective and Objective Test Enquiry into his Necessity evidence; and set a discriminatory legal precedent against future Norwegian Political Necessity activists, and furthermore due to the international prominence of the trial on the world stage, the Judgement sent a publicity message that a Court could deny an Accused pleading to Necessity, a Free and Fair Subjective and Objective Test Enquiry into their Necessity evidence, on the world stage. <br />
<br />
E. Denying Mr. Breivik his right to an objective and subjective test of his necessity evidence, set a legal precedent where environmental, immigrant, religious or other necessity activists are also denied their right to an objective and subjective examination of their necessity evidence (or can due to ignorance from the Breivik trial’s publicity, deny themselves, by lacking the knowledge to assert their right thereto).<br />
<br />
F. Applicants was consequently demanding her Article 13 Right to an Effective Remedy, and in terms of Article 14: to Prohibit this Discriminatory Erroneous Necessity Ruling against Breivik, herself and other Necessity Activists.<br />
<br />
G. The applicant confirmed that the principle of an Application for Review existed in Norwegian courts, as documented by (1) Former President of Norwegian Supreme Court Justice Carsten Smith, (2) Chief Justice of the Norway Supreme Court: Tore Schei ; and (3) Supreme Court Justice: Karen Bruzelius .<br />
<br />
H. Applicant requested that her Application be interpreted in terms of Article 13 ECHR read in conjunction with Protocol 7 ECHR and the <a href="http://www.eftacourt.int/images/uploads/15_10_JUDGMENT.pdf">EFTA Courts Judicial Review Posten Norge Judgement</a>; effectively interpreted as the Right to Judicial Review of an Administrative Decision or a Court Order.<br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">08 October 2012, 2nd Request to Secretary General Gunnar Bergby:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
A. Applicant sent a reminded request for a response to her response sent Tuesday, September 11, 2012 12:04 AM.<br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">03 November 2012: Parliamentary Ombudsman: Complaint of Supreme Crt Registrar Slow Case Processing:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
A. On 03 November 2012, applicant filed a complaint (<a href="http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/121103_po-nsc">PDF</a>) of Slow Case Processing by Supreme Court: Secretary General: Gunnar Bergby.<br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">15 November 2012: Parliamentary Ombudsman Rules that Norway Supreme Court: Secretary General: Gunnar Bergby’s ‘Administrative Decision’ is a “Decision of a Court of Law’:</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
A. On 15 November 2012, the Parliamentary Ombudsman responded to Complaint on Supreme Court of Norway (<a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/0/7/13072327/12-11-15_2012-1943_supreme_court_of_norway.pdf">PDF</a>), declining to investigate it, because “the Storting's Ombudsman for Public Administration, section 4, first paragraph, litra c), decisions of the courts of law can not be handled by the Ombudsman”. <br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 105%;"><span style="color: #660000;">Contradictions between Parliamentary Ombudsman’s “Slow Case Processing” by Courts Administrative Officials of (a) 11 July 2012 Supervisory Committee for Judges: Secretariat: Espen Eiken, and (b) 15 November 2012: Supreme Court: Secretary General: Gunnar Bergby.</span></span></strong><br />
<br />
A. In the 11 July 2012 Parliamentary Ombudsman ruling: <i>Lack of Response from the Supervisory Committee for Judges</i> (<a href="http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/120711_som_2012-1943?mode=window&viewMode=singlePage">PDF</a>); in response to a complaint of <i>Slow case processing from the Supervisory Committee for Judges</i>, the Ombudsman’s directions were to “submit "a written request to Tilsynsutvalget for dommere, where you call for answers to your applications. If you do not receive a response to this request within a reasonable time, you can contact the Ombudsman, with an enclosed copy of the last request to Tilsynsutvalget for dommere."”<br />
<br />
B. The Parliamentary Ombudsman clearly believed they had the authority to require the Supreme Court Administration: Supervisory Committee for Judges: Secretariat, to provide the applicant with due process, processing of her complaints against Judges Opsahl, Arntzen and Schei. <br />
<br />
C. In the 15 November 2012 the Parliamentary Ombudsman responded to <i>Complaint on Supreme Court of Norway</i> (<a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/0/7/13072327/12-11-15_2012-1943_supreme_court_of_norway.pdf">PDF</a>); in response to a complaint of “<i>Slow Case Processing by Supreme Court: Secretary General: Gunnar Bergby: Re: Request for Statute Granting Sec Gen Authority to make ruling on Legal Standing”; the Ombudsman’s directions are that “decisions of the courts of law can not be handled by the Ombudsman</i>.”<br />
<br />
D. Here the Parliamentary Ombudsman, chose to interpret the erroneous ‘locus standi’ administrative decision by Secretary General Gunnar Bergby, as a “decision of a court of law”, and hence to deny themselves the authority to require Secretary General Gunnar Bergby to provide Applicant with a response to her question requesting the Statute granting a Secretary General the authority to make a ruling on legal standing. <br />
<br />
</blockquote></div><div align="center"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-bYreYAsMAqI/UNuFDzLhGMI/AAAAAAAAgKQ/rHOtQUrRRPY/s1600/12-11-15_2012-1943_Supreme%2BCourt%2Bof%2BNorway.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621010682726559122" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-XaXCsNZXGdc/UNuE14gGJmI/AAAAAAAAgKE/2hAuByDwBTU/s1600/12-11-15_2012-1943_Supreme%2BCourt%2Bof%2BNorway_600x821.png" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 821px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 600px;" /></a></div><blockquote><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: 90%;"> » » » » [<a href="http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/12-1943-court-admin.html">Ecofeminists v Breivik: Parl Ombudsman</a>]</span></strong></blockquote><br />
<br />
<br />
<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327922598170048610" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JSpbgoKp8LA/SfCVX96zuGI/AAAAAAAAEIs/qqvoPLfHrLA/s400/400_BlackLine.jpg" style="cursor: hand; cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 7px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px; text-align: center; width: 620px;" />Andrea Muhrrteynhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13455575591213217060noreply@blogger.com0