RH Liberal admits 'I never had, don't want, brutally honest relationship with black, muslim..'

RH Liberal admits 'I never had, don't want, brutally honest relationship with black, muslim..'



Lara | Radical Honoursty | 07 March 2013

I appreciate you for your response. I particularly – very much – appreciate you for saying: You do not want a brutally honest relationship with a Muslim, Mexican or black! I was fucking blown away by that.

I imagine many white guilt liberals and conservatives feel the same way, but are not nearly as honest as you are about that, hence they are white guilt liberals and conservatives, whereas you are not. I don’t have a problem with you not wanting a brutally honest relationship with a Muslim, Mexican or black. I simply wish more people who share your perspective, would also be honest about their lack of interest in such brutally honest relationships with blacks, muslims, Mexicans, etc.. and also – like you – not object or find objectionable, other europeans, like myself, who actually do want brutally honest relationships with other races, religions, etc.

**********

Seriously, I have never had a brutally honest relationship with a muslim, mexican, or black. Is that what you want? Though, I am not against it. Are you in hot water somehow because of this?

You do not want a brutally honest relationship with a muslim, mexcican or black???? Wow!! Holy fuck! That’s honest! Thanks for saying so.

My husband is black, and yes, I do want brutally honest relationships with all people’s of all colours and all races, and all religions, who are interested in brutally honest cultural, racial relationships.

I was deported from America for being radically honest with an Immigration officer.
I was imprisoned in South Africa, for a year, for being radically honest with a Prosecutor and a Magistrate in a court of law.
I was imprisoned in South Africa, for a month, for being radically honest with a Coloured Politician, in a telephone conversation.

SAHRC, CRL Rights, FVP & ANC AnthroCorpocentric Definitions of 'Racism' & 'Hatespeech' not endorsed by RH & YGL

SAHRC, CRL Rights, FVP & ANC AnthroCorpocentric Definitions of 'Racism' & 'Hatespeech' not endorsed by RH & YGL

Any past or future SAHRC ruling of ‘hate speech’, ‘racism’ etc, which does not recognize or incorporate Radical Honoursty cultural definitions of ‘hate speech’, ‘racism’ and ‘reconciliation’ in its rulings, consequently do not represent the views of the Radical Honoursty culture and the Yshmael Guerrylla Law Party.

Andrea Muhrrteyn | Radical Honoursty Culture | 07 March 2013

[3] AnthroCorpocentric Multiculturalism: Cultural Definitions:

[3.1] The ANC and other Political Parties and African and European South African cultures adhere to AnthroCorpocentric dominant common law cultural jurisprudence, including its endorsement of AnthroCorpocentric Multiculturalism , or MultiCorpCultural Colonialism, in accordance to the dictates of Multinational Corporations.

[3.2] As dictated by Multinational Corporations, and their addiction to ‘Public Relations Image management’ and cultural colonialism hegemony, these parties assert that there is one and one only definition for ‘hate speech’, their corporate colonial masters definition. Similarly there is one and only one definition for ‘racism’; their corporate colonial masters definition. No culture is allowed its own cultural historical definitions for abstract concepts of ‘racism’, or ‘hate speech’ or ‘love’ or ‘hate’ or ‘reconciliation’; because everyone must be blindly obedient to the Corporate Colonial Masters and their Cultural Colonization of all cultures into Zombie Consumers, obedient to the Corporate Masters AnthroCorpocentric Legal Tyranny.

[3.3] A Legal Tyranny occurs in any society when its (a) jurisprudence has vague and abstract legal definitions, denying its citizens clear and concise simple language definitions for clear understanding of those particular terms, such as for example ‘terrorism’ or ‘exterminate’, or ‘communist’, etc; and/or (b) multicultural jurisprudence which adopts the dominant culture’s legal terminology of any legal concept, such as for example ‘hate speech’ or ‘racism’, as being the one and only legal definition relevant to all cultures; when in fact it is the dominant culture’s legal definition and is in conflict with minority cultures legal definitions; and does not recognize that minority cultures have different legal definitions for the particular concept.

CRL Rights Comm says 'Rules of Court' are Supreme Law of Land, above Constitution

CRL Rights Comm says 'Rules of Court' are Supreme Law of Land, above Constitution



19 February 2013 | SQSwans | Andrea Muhrrteyn

Correspondence to Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch: Request Amnesty & HRW Take Notice & Provide Independent Observation and monitoring of CRL Rights Commission Complaint & Appeal: Ref: 9/1/1/1/49: Lara Johnstone, Radical Honesty culture v. SA Concourt Registrar:

Appeal of Mrs. K. Makgoba’s Ruling endorsing the Constitutional Court Registrar’s position that: South African AnthroCorpocentric Dominant Cultures ‘Rules of Court’ are the Supreme Law of the Land; If or when the AnthroCorpocentric Dominant Cultures ‘Rules of Court’ violate a Minority cultures right to practice their Ecocentric cultural practices, as enshrined in the Constitution Bill of Rights clauses granting citizens from minority cultures, access to courts (S 34), and rights to practice their culture (S. 15(3), 30, 31, and 18).

Issues: | Overview: Facts Not in Dispute? | Chronology of Events | CRL Rights Comm Ruling | Fake v Authentic | Multiculturalism | Invocation of Cultural Law | Relief Requested

Zuma's 'decolonising minds' reference to Radical Honesty or Frantz Fanon definition of Reconciliation, in Review 'Kill Boere' Judgement in Concourt

Zuma's 'decolonising minds' reference to violent Frantz Fanon, or non-violent Radical Honesty 'decolonizing minds' definition of Reconciliation, in Review 'Kill Boere' Judgement in Concourt?

War is Peace Whores consider ‘reconciliation’ to be a tool of pretend problem solving manipulation, which can be used as a great PR publicity stunt to colonize ignorant minds into blind subservient belief in the ‘reconciliation’ moral supremacy narrative. Reconciliation is achieved for as long as the subservient followers are in a state of moral supremacy cognitive dissonance, where objective or subjective enquiry is suspended, but if applied would reveal their belief in their state of moral supremacy reconciliation to be false, but lack the integrity and courage to admit they are addicted to being ‘morally superior’, due to censoring all evidence exposing their two faced hypocrisy.

Andrea Muhrrteyn | SQSwans | 28 December 2012

Complaint to Int Bar Assoc to Confirm SA Courts & lawyers Discriminate Against – Tourette Syndrome like -- Radical Honesty Culture

Complaint to Int Bar Assoc to Confirm SA Courts & lawyers Discriminate Against – Tourette Syndrome like -- Radical Honesty Culture

Request IBA provide Independent Observation and Written Confirmation that (I) the SA Concourt refuses to process -- or provide written reasons for their refusal -- a Pro Se application, from a member of the Radical Honesty culture, (II) who is unable to find a lawyer in South Africa, to represent her, as a member of the Radical Honesty culture; (III) South African media believe it is ‘not news’ that a member of the Radical Honesty culture is unable to find a lawyer in South Africa; for Radical Honesty Pro Se communication to UNHRC: Human Rights Committee, ITO violations of International Covenant on Civil & Political Rights (ICCPR).

Andrea Muhrrteyn | SQSwans | 12 December 2012

On 27 November 2012, I filed a Pro Se application for Review of the Supreme Court of Appeal ‘Kill Boere Hate Speech’ Mediation Agreement entered into by and between: ANC, Mr. Malema, Afriforum and TAU-SA. The Respondents are: Afriforum, Transvaal Agricultural Union, Julius Malema, African National Congress, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Former Presidents Nelson Mandela and FW de Klerk, CRL Rights Commission, Norwegian Nobel Committee: Chair, Central Intelligence Agency: Director, and David Petraeus.

1: Agreement is Unconstitutional due to being culturally vague: My Review argument was that the Agreement is unconstitutionally vague and ambiguous, in that South Africa has many different cultures, with many perspectives on the ‘Kill Boere’ issue, and the Mediation Agreement pretends South Africa is one happy monoculture family. The Mediation Agreement does not specify which cultures it is referring to.

2: Agreement ignores SA’s TRC Fraud Failure to Clearly Define ‘Reconciliation’ and address Ecocentric Scarcity as Cause of Violent Conflict Issues: Additionally, the Mediation Agreement had totally censored and ignored the evidence submitted to the Equality Court and the Supreme Court of Appeal, exposing South Africa’s fraudulent Truth and Reconciliation Commission process and a country’s legal establishment who refuse to clarify what their legal definition is for ‘Reconciliation’ , and the TRC’s “failure to investigate demographic youth bulge and ‘population production’ breeding war acts of war as contributory factors to Apartheid violence, to be a failure of the requirements of the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act, 34 of 1995.”

3. Any ‘Peace’ Agreement that Ignores Scarcity as Cause of Violent Conflict is not a Credible Peace Agreement: Declaring that in our Post Peak NNR world, Sustainable Security requires seriously confronting Scarcity as a Cause of Violent Conflict, and to recommend that if the South African Government and its ‘Peace Leaders’ are sincerely committed to implementing peaceful coexistent relations between races, cultures and religions; the SAG should include consideration of the role of overpopulation and overconsumption as root cause factors of resource scarcity pushing society to conflict and war.

TRC Fraud: (I) ANC’s Black Power Cannon Fodder Breeding War & (II) Black Liberation Theology ‘Forgiveness’: liberation on rotting corpses of settlers

TRC Fraud: (I) ANC’s Black Power Slave & Cannon Fodder Breeding War & (II) Black Liberation Theology ‘Forgiveness’ Definition: Violent Liberation on the Rotting Corpses of White Settlers

Andrea Muhrrteyn | Radical Honoursty | 17 February 2012

From: Lara Johnstone
Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 2:41 PM
To: 'NGK: Franchk: Rev Bossie Minnaar'; 'NGK: Franchk: Sec Karen Minnaar'; 'Wendy Jasondacosta'
Cc: Desmond Tutu (**@mweb.co.za); Tutu Pce Ctr: Dan (**@tutu.org.za); Tutu - Assist: Vivian (**@tutu.org.za); Tutu Peace Ctr (**@tutu.org); Twinkie Moche - SACC (**@sacc.org.za); Joyce Mokoena - SACC (**@sacc.org.za); Mothomang D - NMF (**@nelsonmandela.org); Verne Harris - NMF (**@nelsonmandela.org); Sello Hatang - NMF (**@nelsonmandela.org); Nelson Mandela Foundation (**@nelsonmandela.org); Adv. Nikki de Havilland (**@cfcr.org.za); Dave Steward - FWF (**@fwdeklerk.org); Shan Wolksky (**@fwdeklerk.org); Patricia Brand-Adams - FWF (**@fwdeklerk.org); Coptic Orth. Ch (**@icon.co.za); Dr Clement Fugh (**@ame-church.com); NG Kerk (**@ngkerk.org.za); NG Kerk (**@bmedia.co.za); Methodist Ch in SA (**c@methchurch.org.za); Mariane Simpson - Angus Bucham (**@shalomtrust.co.za); Anglican Ch of SA (**@anglicanchurchsa.org.za); Padraig Smyth - Catholic Bishops (**@icon.co.za); Fr. Mike Deeb - Cath Bishops Conf. (**@sacbc.org.za); LeadSA: Adriaan Groenewald (**@towerstone.co.za); J - SA Zionist Federation (**@ctjc.co.za); J - SA Zionist Federation (**@djc.co.za); J - SA Zionist Federation (**@beyachad.co.za); 'IOL: Wendy Jasondacosta' (**@inl.co.za)
Subject: Franschoek Transformation Charter: Mandela, Tutu & De Klerk's TRC FRAUD

Rev Bossie Minnaar
Sec Karen Minnaar
Franschhoek Valley Transformation Charter


Radical Honoursty submission to the Board of Directors and Members of the Franschhoek Valley Transformation Charter; c/o & via: Rev Bossie Minnaar and Secretary: Karen Minnaar

Honourable CC: Tutu Fnd, Nelson Mandela Fnd, FW de Klerk Fnd.

Dear Sirs/Ladies,

The Dutch Reformer Church Franschoek website states:

Archbishop Desmond Tutu to speak at launch
of the Franschhoek Valley Transformation Charter.
Thursday 16 February 2012 at 17:30
in the Dutch Reformed Church Franschhoek

All the inhabitants of the Franschhoek Valley are invited to the official launch of the Franschhoek Valley Transformation Charter on February 16th at 17.30 in the Dutch Reformed Church in Franschhoek. Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu, who, on getting to know about the Charter process has offered to be the patron of the Charter, will speak at the launch.

I doubt Archbishop Desmond Tutu has practiced transparency to inform you of this information; honourable transparency is -- unfortunately -- not high on his list of priorities or value system.

'No Thanks We like Nudity Dominating Headlines' - DA Youth to Garden Route 11 Jan Invite for Serious Sincere Race Relations Problem Solving Discussion

DA Youth to Garden Route 11 Jan Invite for Serious Sincere Race Relations Problem Solving Discussion: No Thanks We like Nudity Dominating Headlines

Andrea Muhrrteyn | White Refugee | 25 January 2012

On 11 January 2012, Garden Route Survivalists Support Group sent out an invitation to dozens of Garden Route Companies, Organisations and National Political Parties, inviting them to participate in a Radical Honesty Race Relations Discussion Group.

Join our brutally honest discussions: we cannot solve problems by pretending they dont exist. If you don't like white, black or coloured people, thats okay. Come and meet some and speak to them honestly and tell them your reasons, and your experiences. Maybe you have never met an honest, honourable and sincere white/black/coloured person; you have only met two-faced lying deceiving fake white/black/coloured people. If so, then it is quite understandable that you would think that all black/white/coloured people are lying two faced deceivers.

TRC Fraud:

In communities still suffering from South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Fraud, which denied both white, coloured and black individuals and communities the opportunities to engage each other in sincere and serious honest race discussions, future economic collapse shall further strain the current toxic TRC 'lets all pretend to like each other' and 'lets all pretend to be nice to each other' and 'lets all pretend we are not 'racists' race relations paradigm.

Time for Radical Honesty Race Relations:

If our national, regional and local political leaders are too afraid to hold sincere serious brutally honest conversations about our race relations, then it is time for citizens to lead themselves to beginning to engage in Radical Honesty Race Relations discussions about our mutual past, present and future.

Invitations were sent to:

[ Helen Zille ] [ Democratic Alliance ] [ Democratic Alliance Youth ] [ Cape Party - Return the Cape to Independence ] [ Vryheidsfront Plus/Freedomfront Plus ] [ Dr. Pieter Mulder (VRYHEIDSFRONTplus) ] [ Inkatha Freedom Party Youth Brigade ] [ ANC YOUTH LEAGUE ] [ MyANC ] [ The Congress of the People (COPE) ]

SCA: Malema v. Afriforum: Could ANC have won Anti-Apartheid struggle non-violently if Afrikaners were Honourable?

SCA: Malema v. Afriforum: Could ANC have won Anti-Apartheid struggle non-violently if Afrikaners were Honourable?

30 December 2011 | Andrea Muhrrteyn | White Refugees

From: Lara Johnstone
Sent: Friday, December 30, 2011 2:23 PM
To: 'Byron Morris'; 'Adv. Maleka'
Subject: [SCA 815/11] Malema v. Afriforum: Amicus Applic: Notice of Motion, FAffidavit & Heads of Argument

JULIUS MALEMA & AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS

(1st & 2nd Applicants Attorneys)
Mr. Mkhabela Huntley
Adekeye Inc.
Tel: (011) 786 7303
Ref: Mr. Makebela or Byron Morris

(1st & 2nd Applicants Advocate)
Vincent Maleka SC
Doma Nokwe Group
Tel: (011) 282 3700 / 3772 | Fax: (011) 884 6453
Cell: (083) 260 0790

Dear Sirs,

Please find attached PDF’s:

* Notice of Motion: Application of Lara Johnstone, Radical Honesty Culture & Religion, to Proceed as an Amicus Curiae
* Founding Affidavit of Lara Johnstone
* Heads of Argument: Written Submissions of Lara Johnstone (Radical Honesty – SA)

Kindly Notice the following 'Possible Error' Argument to the Submission made to Judge Colin Lamont:

Possible Error in Argument: Could the ANC have won their struggle against Apartheid non-violently, by demonstrating their honourable Just War Just Cause Population Policy Intentions to end their Breeding War?

KINDLY TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that –- Applicants observations of the lack of honour and ethical legal conduct from Afriforum and TAU-SA’s towards the Radical Honesty SA Application -- it is possible Applicant’s presumptions in the Heads of Argument, detailed in the Affidavit as: Could the ANC have won their struggle against Apartheid non-violently, by demonstrating their honourable Just War Just Cause Population Policy Intentions to end their Breeding War? (Affidavit paragraphs 44-48) may be incorrect. Put differently, if Afrikaner males from Afriforum and TAU-SA endorse the denial of due process and legal procedures to a white Boer woman, from the Radical Honesty culture, who chooses to live in accordance to ecological carrying capacity principles by refraining from participating in violent breeding war and ecological resource war consumption behaviours; the chances that these self same Afrikaners Apartheid predecessors, with the similar lack of honour and integrity, would honourably recognize the due process and legal procedural rights of black Africans, who choose to abide by ecological carrying capacity laws, would be almost zero. If Afriforum and TAU-SA Afrikaners refuse to recognize the due process and legal procedural rights of a white Boer woman refusing to participate in the violence of breeding wars and corporate resource consumption wars; then they also wouldn’t recognize black Africans who chose to refuse to participate in the violence of breeding wars and corporate resource consumption wars.

It accordingly remains to be seen whether Afriforum and TAU-SA, and/or any other ‘human rights’ groups in South Africa, do in fact consider it important to recognize the due process and legal procedural rights of any man or woman refusing to participate in the violence of breeding wars and corporate resource consumption wars.

Afrikaners (Afriforum & Christian Democratic Party) Oppose Malema's ‘Kaffir’ ‘Kill Boer’ Apartheid Free Speech Volkstaat Application to Concourt

Afrikaners (Afriforum & Christian Democratic Party) Oppose Malema's ‘Kaffir’ ‘Kill Boer’ Apartheid Free Speech Volkstaat Application to Concourt

EU-NL-FR-DE-UK-CH 'Boer/Settler' doc's filed in 'Kill Boers Hate Speech' Trial: Boer Volkstaat; & Jus Sanguinis Repatriation of Settlers?

15 December 2011 | Andrea Muhrrteyn | White Refugee

Consequently the Applicants In Forma Pauperis Amicus Curiae submission shall argue among others that:

1. ANC’s ‘liberation struggle’ violated Just War (Military Honour) Theory Principles of International Law
   
2. The TRC negligently or intentionally avoided enquiring into evidence showing the ANC’s liberation struggle to have violated Just War Principles
   
3. The ANC’s TRC was a falsification of history, and is the source of SA’s political and ecological systemic collapse braintumour; of which ‘Kill the Boer Hate Speech’ is simply one of many symptoms.
   
4. The ANC’s actions of poverty pimping population production breeding-war acts of war; speak far louder than their verbal diarrhoea platitudes of ‘commitment to non-violence and peace’.
   
5. Their psychological admiration for ‘liberation struggle violence’ is found in their masculine insecurity breeding war poverty pimping, and the psychological theories of Frantz Fanon (the native’s colonized mind can only be liberated through violence, he can only regain his self respect, on the rotting corpse of the settler) and Black Liberation Theology (Black Power advocacy of violent Marxist Elimination of Whiteness as the road to Salvation/Reconciliation)
   
6. Because Fundamentalist Black Liberation Theology ‘Anti-Whiteness’ Marxist Revolutionaries shall not rest until they achieve their Violent Marxist Cleansing Liberation / Reconciliation / Salvation on the Rotting Corpses of Boer/Settlers; the only way to enable Boer/Settlers to protect themselves is to:
   

   1. Implement 23 April 1994 Accord on Afrikaner Self-Determination, by endorsing and supporting the work of the Volksraad Verkiesing Kommissie to establish a Boer Volkstaat; and/or
      

   2. Initiate a Program of Jus Sanguinis Voluntary Repatriation of ‘Settlers’ to European Progenitor Nations, for Persecuted Settlers/African White Refugees who prefer to return to their Settler motherlands.

Ethno-Cultural ‘Nine Worthies’ Lessons to Learn from Toxic Totalitarian vs. Pure Organic New Eco-Agriculture

31 Dec 2017: Original [archive.is/eDwEn] transferred to: EoP Leg Sub Correspondence: 06 Oct: Ethno-Cultural ‘Nine Worthies’ Lessons to Learn from Toxic Totalitarian vs. Pure Organic New Eco-Agriculture.

[RHS777INT:003]: Radical Honesty Overview and DARwin Plays with his Favourite Runaway Generals in Jarhead Jargon

[RHS777INT][002][003][004][005]

Runway Generals Jarhead Jargon :: Radical Honesty About Anger & Forgiveness Jargon

'How'd I get screwed into going to this dinner?" demands Gen. Stanley McChrystal. It's a Thursday night in mid-April, and the commander of all U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan is sitting in a four-star suite at the Hôtel Westminster in Paris. He's in France to sell his new war strategy to our NATO allies – to keep up the fiction, in essence, that we actually have allies. Since McChrystal took over a year ago, the Afghan war has become the exclusive property of the United States. Opposition to the war has already toppled the Dutch government, forced the resignation of Germany's president and sparked both Canada and the Netherlands to announce the withdrawal of their 4,500 troops. McChrystal is in Paris to keep the French, who have lost more than 40 soldiers in Afghanistan, from going all wobbly on him.

"The dinner comes with the position, sir," says his chief of staff, Col. Charlie Flynn.

McChrystal turns sharply in his chair.

"Hey, Charlie," he asks, "does this come with the position?"

McChrystal gives him the middle finger.

The general hates fancy restaurants, rejecting any place with candles on the tables as too "Gucci."

"I'd rather have my ass kicked by a roomful of people than go out to this dinner," McChrystal says.

He pauses a beat.

"Unfortunately," he adds, "no one in this room could do it."

With that, he's out the door.

"Who's he going to dinner with?" I ask one of his aides.

"Some French minister," the aide tells me. "It's fucking gay."

The general's staff is a handpicked collection of killers, spies, geniuses, patriots, political operators and outright maniacs. There's a former head of British Special Forces, two Navy Seals, an Afghan Special Forces commando, a lawyer, two fighter pilots and at least two dozen combat veterans and counterinsurgency experts. They jokingly refer to themselves as Team America, taking the name from the South Park-esque sendup of military cluelessness, and they pride themselves on their can-do attitude and their disdain for authority.

After arriving in Kabul last summer, Team America set about changing the culture of the International Security Assistance Force, as the NATO-led mission is known. (U.S. soldiers had taken to deriding ISAF as short for "I Suck at Fighting" or "In Sandals and Flip-Flops.") McChrystal banned alcohol on base, kicked out Burger King and other symbols of American excess, expanded the morning briefing to include thousands of officers and refashioned the command center into a Situational Awareness Room, a free-flowing information hub modeled after Mayor Mike Bloomberg's offices in New York.

When it comes to Afghanistan, history is not on McChrystal's side. The only foreign invader to have any success here was Genghis Khan – and he wasn't hampered by things like human rights, economic development and press scrutiny.

So far, counterinsurgency has succeeded only in creating a never-ending demand for the primary product supplied by the military: perpetual war. There is a reason that President Obama studiously avoids using the word "victory" when he talks about Afghanistan. Winning, it would seem, is not really possible. Not even with Stanley McChrystal in charge.

Freedom Phoenix: .. A friend and long-time political observer predicts that the Republican establishment, .... plans to introduce the armed neocon Gen. Petraeus into the presidential race. He has the qualifications, after all. He’s a lifelong federal employee, he’s killed plenty of people, he has a smear of medals; he’s devoted to the empire; he’s believes in permanent, global war; and he pledges allegiance to the merchants of death. What’s not to like?

High Probability Selling: Get Real

Get real

by Bill Kelley | Entrepreneur / June, 1999

Ditch the tricks and put puffery aside. According to sales expert Jacques Werth, honesty really is the best policy.

In his 40-plus years of selling everything from forklifts and cars to machines used in making silicon chips, Jacques Werth has accomplished at least two things: He's made a lot of money and learned a lot about sales - enough, in fact, to write a book entitled High Probability Selling (Abba Publishing). But it's not just Werth's experience that makes him noteworthy; it's his revolutionary view of selling, which downplays aggressiveness, has little use for motivation and disdains even the modest use of puffery.

Following is an interview with Werth, who, for the past nine years, has run High Probability Selling, a sales and marketing consulting firm in Dresher, Pennsylvania.

BILL KELLEY: What is the biggest misconception concerning sales?

JACQUES WERTH: Most people think it's important to be aggressive in sales, but the opposite is true. Aggressive salespeople don't deal with the world the way it is; they try to force their way on the world. These salespeople try to convince others they want their product, and that whole proposition is flawed.

KELLEY: Why? Most salespeople feel convincing prospects is crucial.

WERTH: It's flawed because the vast majority of people resist being persuaded or manipulated. In fact, they resent it. It's far more effective to find consumers who want to buy what you're selling and do business on the basis of mutual agreement.

Radical Honesty Correspondence & Additional Psychotronic Reference Info

02 September 2011

TO: Health Provisions Council of SA
TO: Professional Board for Psychology
TO: Institute of Christian Psychology
TO: Psychological Soc. Of South Africa
CC: Karin Osler, Center for Conscious Leadership
CC: Office of the Surgeon General, Department of Defence
CC: Cheryl Welsh, Cahra,
CC: Dr. Nick Begich, Earthpulse Press Incorporated
CC: Institute of Social Psychology
CC: Vladimir Bukovsky
CC: John Scull & Dennis Fox, Intnl Comm for Eco Psych & Fox Professing
CC: Thomas Szaszz, MD & Prof. JA. Schaler
CC: Brad Blanton, Ph.D, Center for Radical Honesty
CC: Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, Warrior Science Group

Sirs & Ladies,

Request for Info: Contact Details for SA Psychologist with theoretical and kinaesthetic experience in: Radical Honesty, Gestalt, Psychodrama, Psychotronics, Political and Legal Activism against the Edward Bernaysian Psychological Tyranny as depicted in ‘Century of the Self’, ‘Marketing of Madness’, ‘Psychiatry: An Industry of Death’.

[Radical Honesty Debate] Norway v. Breivik/Berwick: Application to Chief Justice Tore Schei ITO Article 85: Treason

From: Lara Johnstone
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2011 3:56 PM
To: Chief Justice Tore Schei; Norway Embassy; Mark Laity SHAPE; Geir Lippestad; Tord Jordet, Odd Ivar Gron, Bente Svendsen
Cc: Lt. Gen. André Blattmann; Fursten Gloria von Thurn & Taxis; Deputy Judge Advocate General, JAG; Norwegian Intelligence Service; Swedish Security Service; Lt. Col. Dave. Grossman; NGA-Pathfinder; Kremlin News Sender Service; Dept. of Defence: Media; XE/Blackwater; The Dossier; Bundesnachrichtendienst; Peggy Noonan; Brad Blanton
Subject: Norway v. Breivik/Berwick: Application to Chief Justice Tore Schei ITO Article 85: Treason





TO: Chief Justice Tore Schei

TO: King Harald V, PM Stoltenberg & Pres Andersen,
c/o: HE Mr Tor Christian Hildan, Ambassador, Royal Norwegian Embassy

TO: General Harald Sunde
NATO: Military Committee: Chief of Staff
Chief of Defence, Norway
c/o: Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Secretary General, North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO)
via: Mark Laity, Chief of Strategic Communications, Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE)

TO: Geir Lippestad
Advokatfirmaet Lippestad AS

IN THE OSLO - Alt for Norge – SUPREME COURT

OF THE KINGDOM OF NORWAY

“There never was an idea stated that woke men out of their stupid indifference but its originator was spoken of as a crank.”
~ US Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes ~

In the matter between:

KINGDOM OF NORWAY And ANDERS BEIHRING BREVICK (AKA ANDREW BERWICK, SIGURD JORSALFAR) LARA JOHNSTONE (AKA ANDREA MUHRRTEYN, FRANCIS MARION BRAIDFUTE)

Plaintiff 1st Defendant 2nd Defendant

Application in terms of Article 85 of Norwegian Constitution, as laid down on 17 May 1814 by the Constituent Assembly at Eidsvoll and subsequently amended, most recently on 20 February 2007: Any person who obeys an order the purpose of which is to disturb the liberty and security of the Storting is thereby guilty of treason.

Please find attached aforementioned application and its annexures:

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT, THE HAGUE: COMPLAINT ITO ART.15 OF ROME STATUTE: RE: Communication and Complaint under Art.15 of the Rome Statute: Charges of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity, in terms of Art 5(1)(a) & (b), 6(c) and 7(1)(h) of the Rome Statute. (PDF)

Affidavit of Brad Blanton, Ph.D, evidencing the legal, psychological, and socio-political ‘citizens privilege’, Nuremberg Principles skills and competencies of Individual Responsibility, required for acts of civil disobedience to perceived illegitimate authority; and their application to the common law ‘reasonableness test’; in terms of Criminal Procedure Act 51, of 1977: § 213: Proof of Written Statement by Consent; & § 171 & 172: Evidence on Commission (www.1984-2-1776.co.nr)

Response to BNP: Newcastle Upon Tyne: Mr. Keith McFarlane: “Just found out your a red. and you were married to a n*gg*r. bye you filthy race traitor.”

Sent: Sunday, July 03, 2011 1:22 AM
To: BNP Scotland; BNP North East; BNP Head Office
Subject: Please Forward to BNP: Newcastle Upon Tyne: Mr. Keith McFarlane

Please forward to Mr. Keith McFarlane; believed to be BNP Member: Newcastle Upon Tyne. Many thanks. Commendations to BNP for having such an honest honourable member as Mr. McFarlane who share their constructive criticism to a persons face, not behind your back. A salute to Mr. McFarlane for his honourable act of criticism.

Mr. Keith McFarlane
Newcastle Upon Tyne
British National Party

Dear Mr. McFarlane,

I write in response to your Facebook message: “Just found out your a red. and you were married to a n*gg*r. bye you filthy race traitor...”

Many thanks for what I interpret as your brutally honest angry statement. If your intention was to insult me; you are going to have to try a little harder! ;-)

It is almost impossible to insult me. I imagine the reason why it is so difficult to insult me, is because I know that whenever I give someone an honest blunt criticism piece of my mind, I share it sincerely as constructive criticism. I may be angry with them, but my intentions are not dishonourable. I want to share my anger with them, and get over it, and understand the source of our misunderstanding.

I assume, I know my intentions for sharing my anger are not malicious; hence I always give others the benefit of the doubt that their sharing of their anger is also with honourable constructive criticism intention. In Radical Honesty, to share constructive criticism is the highest form of respect and love. I know other cultures don’t share this perspective to constructive criticism, but I prefer to give everyone the benefit of the doubt. So, I appreciate your courage to confront me to my face with your honest blunt opinion about me – whether founded in fact or not – so that we can resolve our misunderstanding, and I can learn from your constructive criticism (if proven to be worthy).

Please herewith find my response to your statement as follows: (1) Married to an Honourable Nigger; (2) Correction: Member of Radical Honesty Culture; not a ‘Red/Communist’; (3) Correction: Only Social Contract I swore allegiance to (and can be a traitor to) is the Radical Honesty Social Contract.

Continued in attached PDF

Respectfully,

Lara Johnstone
Radical Honesty SA

Mr. Collins Chabane: Evidence of SANEF Media Mafia Bias and Censorship Behaviour

Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 5:45 PM
Subject: Prof. A. Harber, Min. C. Chabane & Mr. J. Manyi: Req. Response from SANEF to Media Mafia Bias Evidence

TO: Prof. Anton Harber, Media Critic (sic)
TO: Minister Collins Chabane
TO: Mr. Jimmy Manyi, c/o Black Management Forum
TO: Mr. Mondli Makhanya, SANEF

Req. SA Media Critics (sic) provide Mr. Collins Chabane an official response in Meeting with Mr. Manyi, to Radical Honesty SA Evidence of SANEF Media Mafia Bias and Censorship Behaviour.

CC: SANEF, Mr. Manyi, Min. Collins Chabane

Dear Prof. Harber,

I was most surprised to read your statement to Mr. Manyi, the CEO of GCSI to “Stop being a media critic, because that is no way to build working relationships with journalists.”


Working Relationships with Psychological Infant Journalists and Editors:

It is my understanding that any individual who considers themselves psychologically mature; is aware of the importance of constructive criticism to a professional working relationship. Any relationship founded on the parties being capable of sharing and hearing each other’s constructive criticism, and seriously enquiring into its evidentiary arguments; is a working relationship that can only grow stronger and stronger, as each party is provided the opportunity to receive information about its blindspots, and to fix those blindspots.

Active Listening and Constructive Criticism: Blogger’s Professional Response

I write a blog: Why We Are White Refugees.

In early 2010 I was contacted by another blogger, who shared with me some photos of farm murders, he said had been provided to him by a policeman friend of his. He asked that we publish the photos. I published the photos and also sent them to numerous politicians etc; including to Mr. Malema at the ANC. A few days later, I got an anonymous tip that one of the photos was fake. I investigated and found out that the tip was correct, and in fact four of the thirteen alleged farm murder photos were not South African crime scene photos, but foreign. I published a retraction and wrote an individual letter of apology to every single person and politician to whom I had sent the original photos.

Nobody had to go to an Ombudsman to file a complaint against me. All it required was for them to inform me of the error, and evidence where I could prove I had erred. Once it was clear to me I had made an error; I considered it my honour and duty and responsibility to publish a retraction and apology. I did not require someone to force me to do the right thing. I do not publish erroneous facts. If I am informed any alleged fact I have published is false, I consider it my duty as an honourable human being to correct such error.

I wrote letters of apology and retraction, and published these letters of apology and retraction to:

1. SA Students Congress, Mandela Rhodes Foundation, ANC Youth League; RE: Reitz 4 & Black Culture...;
   
2. Irish Embassy, Jefferson Family & Independent Newspapers; RE: Boycott 2010 World Cup;
   
3. Austrian Embassy, Burgstaller & Symcox Families; RE: Boycott 2010 World Cup;
   
4. PC Canada vs. IRB & Huntley: How many SA Black on White Crimes are Racially Motivated?;
   
5. Cape Bar & Intn'l Bar Assoc: Pro Bono Comm's: RE: Freedom of Speech Political and Cultural Rights, or Secession?; Constitutional, & Intn'l Law Issues.

Excerpts from PDF letter.

Respectfully,

Lara Johnstone
Radical Honesty SA

Encl. Excerpts from Founding Affidavit of Lara Johnstone, Member of Radical Honesty culture; in Application for Direct Access for a Writ of Habeus Mentem (CCT 06-11).

Max du Preez the Ubermensch Racist & Political Retard?

Sent: Thu 6/23/2011 1:06 AM
TO: Mr. du Preez
CC: Mr. Athol Trollip
CC: Andries Treurnicht, HNP
CC: Dr. Pieter Mulder, FF+

Mr. du Preez,

I refer to your tweet:

@MaxduPreez: “Athol Trollip did not insult Afrikaners, only the racists and political retards among them. Go Athol!”



Request Your Definition for ‘Racists’ and ‘Political Retards’

According to my definition of ‘racists’ and ‘political retards’; my current working hypothesis, based upon my experience over the past few years attempting to engage the South African TRC Fraud elite is that you, Max du Preez and many of your colleague editors and journalists are South Africa’s prime racists! You are also South Africa’s primary political retards. I am more than happy to amend my working hypothesis; would you be willing to reconsider your racist political retarded beliefs?

Radical Honesty: Max du Preez the Übermensch Racist?

Radical Honesty’s definition of ‘Racist/Racism’ is in accordance to the work of Dr. Gedaliah Braun: What is Racism; and How Philosophy can be Practical?: which summarized can be stated as: Neither an idea, nor a fact can be racist, only a belief. A belief cannot be racist; if it is sincerely believed to be true; and if the holder of the belief is willing to consider evidence to the contrary. A belief can only be racist; if the holder thereof refuses to hear any evidence to the contrary.

I shall not disagree that there are individuals in the ‘far right’ who hold beliefs which they refuse to discuss or to enquire into evidence to the contrary. In the past 10 years since my return to South Africa, I would say I’ve probably encountered about 20 of them. The vast majority of individuals in the far-right I have met, have proven themselves to me to be individuals who sincerely hold their racial beliefs, but who are totally willing to sit down and discuss and debate at length, to listen to evidence that contradicts their evidence, and to share their evidence. They are committed to remaining in the conversation and continuing the debate, and are happy to change their beliefs, when they are provided sufficient evidence therefore. They are consequently NOT RACISTS.

You on the other hand hold beliefs that it appears you refuse to discuss with anyone who holds beliefs or ideas to the contrary. You simply consider those who hold different beliefs to yours; to be racists, without being willing to engage them, and to consider their evidence. That would make YOU THE IDEOLOGICAL RACIST. You seem to think that you are some kind of Übermensch, to those you perceive of as ‘racist’ Üntermensch.

Continued in PDF.

Respectfully,

Lara Johnstone
Radical Honesty SA

Journo Ivo Vegter Endorses Persecution of SA citizen and Censorship of Media Corruption & Scientific Journalism Campaign?

Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 2:43 PM
To: Phillip de Wet - DMaverick; Branko Brkic - DMaverick; Ivo Veger - DMaverick;
Cc: Press Ombudsman; Murray Hunger - R2K Nat. Coord; Right2Know; Right2Know - FXI:Gauteng; Right2Know - KZN; LeadSA: Adriaan Groenewald
Subject: Mr. Brkic, CC: I. Vegter; RE: Vegter's Endorsement of Persecution and Media Corruption

TO: Branko Brkic
TO: Ivo Vegter
TO: Daily Maverick
CC: John Pilger, Wikileaks, SA Leads, Right2Know, Press Ombudsman

Radical Honesty SA to Daily Maverick: Editor: Branko Brkic

Daily Maverick Journalist: Ivo Vegter Endorses Persecution of SA citizen and Censorship of Media Corruption & Scientific Journalism Campaign

Dear Mr. Brkic,

Mr. Ivo Vegter writes: “Oh dear. Now I'm part of a "media mob", endorsing persecution and covering up corruption. http://bit.ly/kjbkAg @dailymaverick”; in response to my comments on Daily Maverick News Article: Open Letter to the Directors of Afriforum, by Xhanti Payi.

I am unaware whether Mr. Vegter wishes to be perceived as an ignorant moron imbecile; or an honourable scientific critical thinking problem solving investigative journalist. Perhaps he can clarify which he wishes to be perceived as.

SA Media and Mr. Vegter’s Endorsement of SA citizens Persecution:

Please could Mr. Vegter inform me where he or any other SA journalist or SA media publication disputed Dr. Brad Blanton's -- founder of Radical Honesty, former candidate for US congress in Virginia in 2004 and 2006 -- allegations filed in the High Court (WC: 19963-09) regarding South Africa’s legal and political persecution of myself (PDF).

Please could Mr. Vegter clarify which statements he or any other journalist in SA have disputed as being untrue; and if none; where he or any other journalist in SA have voiced their objections to the legal and political persecution of a member of the Radical Honesty culture. Or does Mr. Vegter believe that endorsing the ‘rule of law’ means you only endorse the rule of law for people in your own mob; not for those you dislike or whom you disagree with; they can be persecuted and denied the right to free and fair trials and their constitutional rights?

The 17 March 2010 Report: 140 SA Editors, Politicians, Academics et al confirm they are Deliberately Indifferent to the Rule-of-Law; have No Objections to SA Governments persecution of ‘Radical Honesty White Refugee’ (“RHWR”) (PDF) was provided to the Daily Maverick, on Wed 3/17/2010 4:31 PM (PDF).

Continued in PDF:

Respectfully,

Lara Johnstone
Radical Honesty SA

DA Youth: Christian Steyl's ‘lunatic’, ‘worm fondler’ and ‘domain of madness’ Tweets

Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 2:30 PM
To: Dian Cronje - DA; Melany Kuhn - DA; HQ - DA; Leader - DA; Angus Mackenzie - DA.Pub.Liaison; Jade Johnson - DA
Cc: Khume Ramulifho - DA Youth Gauteng; Skhumbule Mpitimpiti - DA - Youth EC ; Lead - DA Youth; M Pitimpitisk - DA Youth; Rodney Kritzinger - DA Youth; Lucky M - DA Youth
Subject: Ms. H. Zille; CC: C. Steyl; Re: DA Youth: Christian Steyl's 'lunatic' and 'domain of madness' remarks

TO: Helen Zille
TO: Christian Steyl
CC: Democratic Alliance

RE: Radical Honesty SA: DA Youth: Christian Steyl: Req. for Info: Is Mr. Steyl an Ignorant Moron Imbecile or Honourable Scientific Critical Thinking Problem Solver?

Dear Ms Zille,

DA Youth Member Mr. Christian Steyl made the following comments on Twitter: “Read Lara Johnstone’s lunatic comment..” and “Lara Johnstone does not like Afriforum, probably because they are encroaching into her domain of madness”; “Lara Johnstone.. worm fondler, and extremely delusional – approach with caution!”; among others; in response to my comments on Daily Maverick News Article: Open Letter to the Directors of Afriforum, by Xhanti Payi.

I am unaware whether Mr. Steyl is an ignorant moron imbecile; or an honourable scientific critical thinking problem solver. Perhaps he can clarify which he wishes to be perceived as.

Continued in attached PDF.

Respectfully,

Radical Honesty SA

Censored: The War You Don’t See: Root Cause Problem Solving: Scientific Journalism Campaign

Sent: Monday, June 13, 2011

TO: Mr. Pilger,
CC: Wikileaks, Lannan Fnd, Noam Chomsky, David Barsamian, Mark Crispin Miller

Re: Lannan Foundation Censorship of The War You Don’t See documentary: Root Cause Problem Solving: Scientific Journalism Campaign:

I read about the e-mail you received from Barbara Ventrello (the Lannon foundation's Cultural Freedom Special Projects director) saying that Patrick Lannan had called from California to instruct them to cancel your events.

I don’t know why your documentary is being censored by Mr. Lannan. I was curious whether your documentary negligently or consciously avoided including two fundamental root cause issues in the promotion of war (in which the media play a primary role); but which your documentary did not address at all.

In 2010 the Radical Honesty culture in South Africa, an offshoot of the Radical Honesty culture founded by Dr. Brad Blanton, former Green Independent candidate for US congress in 2004 and 2006, filed a ‘direct access’ writ of Habeus Mentem application to the SA Constitutional Court (Radical Honesty SA v. 88 SANEF Media Publications and their Editors (CCT 06-11)) which addresses both these censored issues ignored by your War You Don’t See media censorship documentary. The direct application to the SA Constitutional Court was dismissed within less than 8 hours by the entire bench of the Constitutional Court as being ‘not in the interests of justice’. It argued on behalf of a Scientific Journalism Campaign; establishing a Scientific Journalism Media Publication rating system, which could be monitored by anonymous Media Inspectors, similar to Restaurant and Hotel Inspectors.

“To issue an advisory ruling, with expert witness input from Wikileaks and/or OpenLeaks ‘scientific journalism’ experts, in support of a clear classification system of ‘media corporations’; similar to Hotel Star Ratings and Smoking Label warnings. For example: (a) Three Star Media Corporations practice unbiased and politically incorrect scientific journalism; (b) Two Star media corporations practice left or right ideological propaganda when it contradicts scientific journalism truths, and withhold from their readers access to the original documents they are reporting their bias upon; (c) One Star gutter yellow smear propaganda journalism, which has no interest whatsoever in scientific truthful reporting, only profiting from spreading gossip and malice. All media corporations are required to publish their ‘scientific journalism’ hierarchical star status, in a designated space on their front page, clarifying their Star Status, and what that start status means regarding the scientific journalism or not quality of factual information being sold to the reader.”

Respectfully,

Radical Honesty SA