RH submission to ICASA: Re: Top TV/Cosatu Porn Channels Application

RH submission to ICASA: Re: Top TV/Cosatu Porn Channels Application



Andrea Muhrrteyn | Radical Honoursty | 18 March 2013

TO: The Independent Communications Authority of South Africa | Owners of Top TV: On Digital Media: B Jonker / Peter Meintjies. | Owners of On Digital Media: Kopano Ke Matla Invest. Co. (Pty) Ltd. | Owners of Kopano Ke Matla: COSATU: Congress of SA Trade Unions. | CC: Pastor Errol Naidoo: Family Policy Institute. | Dr. Albu van Eeden: Doctors for Life International. | Dr. Robert Jensen & Dr Gail Dines | CEO: Ms Keketso Maema: Commission for Gender Equality: Subject: RH submission to ICASA: Re: TopTV/COSATU Porn TV Channels Application (PDF)

RE: Radical Honoursty Culture and Yshmael Guerrylla Law Party Submission: Re: TopTV’s (owned by COSATU) application to broadcast three new porn channels.

The Radical Honoursty culture is a gender balanced culture which practices Æquilibriæx jurisprudence and authentic Multiculturalism; as opposed to all of South Africa’s other cultures, which are patriarchal, and practice AnthroCorpocentric Jurisprudence and fake Multiculturalism : the Egotist Consumptionism Ideology of Multinational Capitalism. The Yshmael Guerrylla law Party is an unregistered Æx party, currently drawing up its Constitution and related documents for registration.

The Radical Honoursty Culture submission covers the following issues/arguments:

• Radical Honoursty Culture and Yshmael Guerrylla Law Party values.

• Request TopTV/Cosatu to fund an investigation by the Gender Commission, to interview all South African individuals found guilty of rape and particularly gang-rape to determine whether they were exposed to pornography and whether their exposure to pornography had any psychological effect – change of personal, cultural or gender identity, or change of perception as to their entitlement to sex from women, or change to their perception of women’s sexuality – in motivating their criminal acts.

• Request that the Commission Officially request Pornography experts Dr. Robert Jensen and Dr. Gail Dines, to make submissions to ICASA, to provide the Commission with detailed research about the consequences and effects of pornography on gender and race relations in cultures based upon AnthroCorpocentric jurisprudence .

• Argument Examples detailing AnthroCorpocentric Jurisprudence’s total failure of credibility, as a system of Jurisprudence, in terms of its (a) failure to provide legal personhood to nature and animal and plant species; (b) disregard for the objective and scientific truth of the laws of nature/ecology, and (c) disregard for the laws of human nature, when it contradicts the objectives of the holders of subjective AnthroCorpocentric Truth.

• How and Why according to Æquilibriæx jurisprudence, ICASA not only has the legal constitutional right, but also the Æquilibriæx duty to refuse Top TV, permission to broadcast three subscription porn channels.

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

SA Demography and Euro Honour Code Questions to FW de Klerk, Swiss, US & Israel Chambers of Commerce

SA Demography and Euro Honour Code Questions to FW de Klerk, Swiss, US & Israel Chambers of Commerce

What do SwissCham SA Officials think Prime Minister Verwoerd and the National Party’s response would have been to the following hypothetical letter from ANCYL Nelson Mandela on 16 December 1961: ANCYL Just War Offer: Request Apartheid Government’s Political and Financial Support for ANCYL Cultural Campaign that Equal Rights be granted to Africans who adopt K-selected reproductive strategy.

Andrea Muhrrteyn | SQSwans | 25 January 2013

Correspondence PDF: ‘South Africa, Demography’ Questions sent to SwissChamber of Commerce, FW de Klerk, Israel Chamber of Commerce and American Chamber of Commerce.

Q1: What do SwissCham SA Officials think Prime Minister Verwoerd and the National Party’s response would have been to the following hypothetical letter from ANCYL Nelson Mandela on 16 December 1961

Questions for FW de Klerk:

Q2. Prove his optimism by clarifying the reasons for FW de Klerk Foundation’s endorsement of SA Constitutional Courts corruption in Alien v Afriforum’s application for Review of SCA’s ‘Kill Boere’ agreement & SA’s Truth and Reconciliation Fraud?

Q3. Once a European Indigenous Rights Code of Honour Tribunal is established, should it order the assassination of FW de Klerk, for his refusal to advocate that South Africa’s Flat Earth ‘War is Peace’ Whore legislation and treaties enacted by him and his dishonourable European predecessors, be resolved; in terms of their failure to address the overpopulation and overconsumption roles contributing to Scarcity, as an underlying cause of conflict?

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.

Supreme Court of Appeal Values: EcoFeminist Sustainable Democracy Transparency TruthSeeking, or Masculine Insecurity War/Conflict Economy Parasite Leeching Tyranny?

Supreme Court of Appeal Values: EcoFeminist Sustainable Democracy Transparency TruthSeeking, or Masculine Insecurity War/Conflict Economy Parasite Leeching Tyranny?

Primary Parties are all Patriarchal: Patriarchal cultures suffer from different degrees of Masculine Insecurity, which is a direct and indirect root cause and aggravating factor for most of the worlds problems, due to (A) obstructing Radical Transparency communication problem solving, (B) is the cognitive foundation of the anti-Meritocratic Parasite Leeching Leadership (sic) Paradigm; (C) hence propagandizes an exponential growth of Parasite Leeching -- ‘walking penis procreation’ overpopulation and ‘consume to demonstrate the size of my consumption penis’ overconsumption -- worldview.

Andrea Muhrrteyn | Radical Honoursty | 18 July 2012

On 22 May 2012, the Supreme Court of Appeal responded to my Application to Proceed as Amicus Curiae in the Afriforum v. Malema: Kill Boer matter. The SCA President refused my application to proceed as Amicus Curiae on the grounds that “it does not appear… that any value will be added to the arguments to be made by the parties legal representatives and thus will not be useful to the court.”

Today I filed an application for Permission to Appeal his decision to the Constitutional Court. Here follows excerpts of the application.

Radical Honesty culture herewith applies to the above Honourable Court, for the following orders:

[1] Permission to invoke cultural law in S. 15(3), 30, 31, and 18; to enable the Applicant to honour the duty and responsibility to uphold the principles upon which the Radical Honesty culture is based; and Psychological Integrity in Section 12 ; the former which may require the application of choice of law rules.

[2] Permission to file an application to the Constitutional Court to Review the Honourable Supreme Court of Appeal’s 22 May 2012 decision to Refuse the Applicants Application to Proceed as an Amicus Curiae.

Conclusion:

IF: Supreme Court of Appeals Values endorse EcoFeminist Sustainable Democracy Transparency TruthSeeking Problem Solving: Applicant Should be Approved as an Amicus Curiae

IF: Supreme Court of Appeal Values Endorse Masculine Insecurity War/Conflict Economy Tyranny Public Relations Deception Management Parasite Leeching Pretend Problem Solving; Applicant Should be Refused to Proceed as an Amicus Curiae.

National Review: Blacks too Inferior to Be Capable of Listening to Criticism; so NR Fires John Derbyshire

National Review: Practical Philosophy Conditions for Firing John Derbyshire

Lara Johnstone | Radical Honoursty | 08 April 2012

The following African Problem Solving Radical Honoursty Ecofeminist Email and letter were sent to National Review to challenge them to adopt Dr. Gedaliah Braun's definition of Racism: What is Racism; or How Philosophy can be Practical; as the pre-requisite for firing John Derbyshire. However National Review appears to have declined (perhaps due to Masculine Insecurity issues) and decided to fire Mr. Derbyshire.

Here follows the email and pdf letter to National Review.

From: Lara Johnstone
Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2012 1:09 AM (GMT+2)
To: John Derbyshire (**@nationalreview.com), (**@takimag.com)
Cc: The Observer (**@observer.com); Observer: Drew Grant (**@observer.com); NY Daily News: Alexander Nazaryan (**@edit.nydailynews.com); Atlanticwire: Elspeth Reeve (**@nationaljournal.com); Gawker: Maureen O’Connor (**@gawker.com); Daily Caller: Matt Lewis (**@dailycaller.com); Proteinwisdom: Jeff G (**@proteinwisdom.com)
Subject: National Review: Practical Philosophy Conditions for Firing John Derbyshire

Mr. John Derbyshire
National Review

CC: National Review: Rich Lowry; Ramesh Ponnuru; Jonah Goldberg; Jon Henke
The Observer: Mr. Drew Grant
NY Daily News: Mr. Alexander Nazaryan
Guardian: Paul Harris
Atlanticwire: Elspeth Reeve
Gawker: Maureen O’Connor
Forbes: Josh Barro
Think Progress: Faiz Shakir
Daily Caller: Matt Lewis
Little Green Footballs: Charles Johnson
Proteinwisdom: Jeff G

RE: Challenge NR & Critics: Practical Philosophy Conditions for Firing John Derbyshire

My Honourable Problem Solving suggestion on the matter is as follows: Challenge those who demand Derbyshire be fired for ‘racism’ with the following conditions.

1. They must provide their personal or publications definition of racism.
   
2. If their defintioin of racism is not the same as that of Dr. Gedaliah Braun’s philosophical definition, then the National Review can – if appropriate - publicly acknowledge that “According to ‘X’’s definition of ‘racism’, which is “XYZ’; Mr. Derbyshire is indeed a racist; however according to Dr. Gedaliah Braun’s definition of racism, as adopted by the National Review as its official ‘racism’ definition; it is the conclusion of the National Review that Mr. Derbyshire is not a racist’.
   
3. In the spirit of Dr. Gedaliah Brauns’ Practical Philosophy definition of ‘racism’, should any publication wish to challenge any of Mr. Derbyshire’s facts and unequivocally prove such facts to be in error; and additionally Mr. Derbyshire refuses to impartially enquire into, or engage in such enquiry into the true facts of the relevant ‘racial’ matter; then Dr. Gedaliah Braun shall be enquired to determine whether Mr. Derbyshire is indeed a racist; according to his definition and if so decided, then Mr. Derbyshire shall be fired, as a racist according to the National Review’s definition of racist.

Full letter attached in PDF

Respectfully,

Lara Johnstone
African Radical Honoursty Problem Solving EcoFeminist

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.