Further support in the establishment for ethical human rights.

Further support in the establishment for ethical human rights. Shulamith Koenig is the founder of PDHR, People’s Movement for Human Rights Learning. She was a recipient of the 2003 UN prize in the field of human rights. Previous recipients of the award include Eleanor Roosevelt, Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela and Jimmy Carter. Shulamith Koenig described my recent article as ‘awesome’ (see ‘People were told to follow the money but I followed the truth’, Ireland Indymedia, 3 Nov. http://www.indymedia.ie/article/107261). The following is my most recent discussion with her on linkedin (16 Nov 2019).
anthony ravlich 2:22 AM Thanks, sorry you have not been well but I did not expect a further response. I myself am still recovering after my last book published in early 2017. I very strongly believe I found the human rights truth- it is many human rights omissions at the UN which sets humanity on a self-destructive course but it was met with an overwhelming silence. I now realize I am dealing with a death cult. I believe saving civilization to be of profound importance at the level of the soul and God and still hope it can be saved. All the best
Shulamith Koenig 3:23 AM Will write back soon .I agree with every word you say!!
In conclusion: in my opinion there are those in the establishment who are not transparent and realize they are deceiving the people. If people do not stand up to them, in my view, they will not respect you – they will walk all over you.

The Death Cult and Fake Human Rights, Meetings.

The Death Cult and Fake Human Rights. Meetings: I am a human rights author (two books), activist and outsider (27 years) from Auckland, New Zealand. I will be holding my next meeting on Thursday 28 November at 4.30pm (see below) and all are welcome.

The Human Rights Council (New Zealand) which was created in 2001 has held regular meetings since so when you feel able to face this human rights truth you can come to any meeting. Membership is not required.

On the 28 Nov I will discuss why I liken the left so-called liberals to a death cult and how the prohibition of social class discrimination will greatly diminish their influence.

My recent book (see below) shows that many of the problems being faced can be described by human rights e.g. human rights violations and the cause of the problems are nearly always human rights omissions while the solution is to include the omitted human rights.

The left so-called liberals are a social class within the NZ Labour Party which I show discriminates on the grounds of social class. The NZ Human Rights Commission has considered recommending the prohibition of social class discrimination.

The left so-called liberals also promote the fake human rights of the United Nations commonly understood as neoliberalism and globalization which strongly favours the establishment and oppresses the rest. They are fake because many human rights in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are omitted in the interests of global leaderships who I show want backward populations unable to hold leadership to account.

In my view, New Zealanders need to understand that the fake liberals pose the major threat to New Zealand although right wing politics benefit considerably from their promotion of neoliberalism and globalization. In my opinion, because of the class loyalty of the fake liberals they are prepared to sacrifice western culture and even sacrifice civilization itself.

In my book I describe truly momentous decisions made by the UN but not reported by the fake global media. I describe the creation of an ‘evil’ globally dominant ideology, neoliberal absolutism, ostensibly for a one world government. Neoliberal absolutism determines the decline of western civilization as well as creating the Global Financial Crisis 2008 with the EU by far the worst affected. In my view, the GFC is ongoing so another recession in the EU certainly seems likely. I show how the UN contrary to the purpose of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) have determined the rise in totalitarianism, repressive States and tribalism.

That global academia refuses to discuss my research findings e.g. that the UN created the GFC, shows they are subjected to ideological capture.

I have had unbelievable difficulty in promoting my recent book (see below) because it is obviously regarded as very dangerous by the left so-called liberals who seem to have an enormous grip on New Zealand society as well as globally because similar classes exist in numerous countries. In my view, my book is considered very dangerous because after 26 years of research I strongly believe I found the human rights truth and it is not on the side of the left so-called liberals.

I consider that consequently they will oppose the seeking of truth and freedom of speech at every turn. And that they are now banning many guns is not surprising because the truth will surely become far better known.

A much better NZ and world is far more possible than nearly all people realize. In my view, it requires a human rights focus which my recent book shows is virtually all that is necessary to understand the worse that is happening. My book shows that it is human rights which controls the money. And my book released in 2017 has not been challenged and I very much doubt it could be successfully.

At present people’s minds are distracted by numerous explanations for our problems. For example, you tube provides numerous causes such as the one per cent, the corporations, the banks, religions, right or left-wing politics, communism, socialism, fascism, white supremacists, totalitarianism, tribalism, the illuminati, even climate change and alien beings etc etc.

Since I began promoting human rights in 1991, unlike the establishment, I have exercised a duty to inform people of important human truths which reflects the duty to the community in the UDHR (Article 29(1)). In my view, all should have duties to the community according to their capacity. For example, nearly all have computers so can spread ideas to enable people to see through the left so-called liberals and vote accordingly.

I devised ethical human rights which is a more realistic dream than the UDHR and can be ensured by nearly all States. Ethical human rights simply require that all States ensure their population with, at least, all the core minimums of the human rights in the UDHR (the UN Committee on Economic, social and cultural rights have devised many of the core minimums for economic social and cultural rights).

While ethical human rights are universal i.e. applies to all countries, within countries political parties can offer higher levels of human rights according to the country’s capacity e.g. if they can be afforded. But what is so very important about ethical human rights is that it includes all the omitted human rights required to create neoliberalism and globalization so would replace the latter and eliminate the unfairness that presently exists i.e. the establishment’s oppression of the rest of the country.

If you can understand my recent article you should have no trouble understanding what I have to say, see ‘People were told to follow the money but I followed the truth’, Ireland Indymedia, 3 Nov. http://www.indymedia.ie/article/107261

The article was described by Shulamith Koenig as ‘awesome’ (10 Nov). Shulamith Koenig is the Founder of PDHR, People’s Movement for Human Rights Learning and recipient of the 2003 UN Prize in the field of human rights.

My major support (virtually my only support) in the establishment is Kevin McCormack, the Secretary of New Zealand Civil Liberties, and formerly Assistant Secretary of Commercial Affairs. He read the article and subsequent posts describing the UN agenda followed by States to eliminate genius. He stated:

“I think that, fortunately, genius will always find a way to flourish, although the downside js that there will be far fewer occasions when that occurs” (7 Nov).

I responded: “I think the fake liberals are a death cult. I choose life and I think they are not self-honest” (9 Nov).

Other articles/posts can be found on my blog, https://outsiderethicalhumanrights.home.blog/.

Meetings will be held at my address, 10D, 15 City Rd., Auckland City, dial 0103 then push alarm. I will  wait downstairs at 4.30pm in case the intercom system does not work.

My home phone is (09) 9409658, mobile 022 6986063.

It took 2 ½ years but my book has finally been accepted by NZ libraries. ‘Ethical Human Rights: Freedom’s Great Hope’ (American Academic Press, 2017), is sold by Google Books and Amazon, https://www.amazon.com/Ethical-Human-Rights-ANTHONY-RAVLICH/dp/B01N0Y3TAN .

UN demands obedience and eliminates genius.

Because of the decisions made at the UN (and reflected in national constitutions, in New Zealand, the bill of rights act 1990) you and your children will not be able to follow your passions, your dreams or doing what you love leaving largely only the money to follow i.e. no genius will be permitted. What distinguishes Western culture from other cultures and led to the dominance of western civilization will be removed. All populations will be kept backward. Read my previous post, ‘People were told to follow the money but I followed the truth’. I describe how the UN plan is to eliminate the independence of thought i.e.only obedience will be required under a one-world government.The following is what people are being advised on one page of the internet:
Follow the Money (And Not Your Passion) – Factor This!
For most people, telling them to “follow their passion” is neither useful nor …
A Brutal Truth About Following Your Passion and Doing What …
Aug 3, 2017 – A Brutal Truth About Following Your Passion and Doing What You Love That …
‘Following Your Passion’ Is Dead – Here’s What To Replace It …
Jul 5, 2018 – question – have you ever told them “Just follow your passion”? … Why You Should Follow The Money (And Not Your Passion)https://www.thebalance.com › Personal Finance › Budgeting › Finance Tips
We are often told to follow our dreams but what if our passions don’t pay the bills or … says the suggestion that money doesn’t
Jun 22, 2018 – Mantras like these can cause people to give up and miss out on new interests. … If your college graduation speaker told you to “follow your passion,” …
Billionaire Mark Cuban says don’t follow your passionhttps://www.cnbc.com › 2017/09/20 › billionaire-mark-cuban-says-dont-f…
Why “Follow Your Passion” is Pretty Bad Advice – The Musehttps://www.themuse.com › advice › why-follow-your-passion-is-pretty-ba…
The Problem with “Follow Your Dreams” | Psychology Todayhttps://www.psychologytoday.com › blog › test-case › the-problem-follow…

Evil has take over the World.

My book proves that evil has taken over the world i.e. a new ideology, I call neoliberal absolutism, for a one-world government was created at the UN. I discovered it more by accident than design on 10 Dec 2008. The fake global media failed to report it. My work is verifiable with sources. If it was not for human rights I consider those responsible do not deserve a life on the planet. But it can be reversed by including all the omitted human rights but I need the support of people otherwise those responsible will take no notice. However people do not seem to want to know. I am more than willing to give a public talk but I doubt very many would turn up.

People were told to follow the money but I followed the truth.

People were told to follow the money but I followed the truth. I am a human rights author (two books), activist and outsider (27 years) from Auckland, New Zealand. In my view, we are in a period of transition from domination by collectives, with many women including feminists and radical Maori aligned with left so-called liberals (fake liberals) to the more independently-minded chosen according to merit.

This requires some detachment from the United Nations which my recent book (see below) shows has supported the collectives globally to greater sovereignty among nations.

In my view, in today’s world independence of mind is truly hated. Societies are invariably dominated by collectives while the more independent people are oppressed. My recent book shows New Zealand is no different and, in my view, perhaps worse.

My book was written as an outsider so I had an independence of mind which is very rare in New Zealand and I was very much hated by the dominant elite, left so-called liberals, and collectives generally. It meant I have been persona non grata virtually since the time I began promoting human rights in 1991. Also I believe I have been subjected to financial sanctions throughout. In my view, the collectives as individuals invariably lack the courage of their convictions and avoid the more independently minded outside the establishment like the plague.

Although chapter one of my book contains UN decisions of truly momentous global importance which the global mainstream media refused to report the following is a general description of what the chapter on New Zealand is about (I exclude significant sections in the chapter on Maori tribalism perhaps requiring another article and the rebuilding of Christchurch following major earthquakes).

The human rights omissions at the UN (generally reflected in national constitutions – in NZ, the bill of rights act 1990) which I list in my book aim to rid the world of independent minds – all people are to be ideologically controlled under a one-world government. For a far more detailed account people will just have to read the book which after 2 ½ years has finally been accepted by New Zealand libraries.

I consider the dominant elite are a left social class of so-called liberals (fake liberals) who took over from the classical liberals in 1984 who promoted the independence of thought which, in my view, forged new paths into the future leading to the dominance of western civilization. The fake liberals were very different from a traditional NZ labor party but few New Zealanders realized how different. They can be likened to the social classes that exist in Britain where they are openly acknowledged but in the Anglo countries (New Zealand, America, Canada, Australia) social class is not talked about. Invariably people just thought the 1984 Labour Party was a continuation of traditional labor parties.

It is obvious from my book that the fake liberals in all countries are following a UN agenda which seeks the decline of western civilization and global freedom allowing for the rise of totalitarian, oppressive states and tribalism.

I was working in the NZ Justice Department in the early nineteen eighties and witnessed the selection of bureaucrats for the ‘deep state’ who would eventually play a very important role in crushing the potential of New Zealanders primarily by the purging of the ‘best and brightest’ and therefore any independence of thought.

The left so-called liberals are a social class who act as a collective so hate independence of thought. They also discriminate on the grounds of social class and, in my view, are utterly obsessed with control over all aspects of society to rid society of independent minds. I found that for the fake liberals truth was virtually irrelevant – all that really mattered was image i.e. looking good.

Apart from the very rare exception academics as well as the rest of the establishment are virtually all captured by neoliberalism and globalization (created by the UN human rights omissions). They are extremely restricted in the seeking of truth. On certain matters, they all have to think the same. While the bottom-line of the fake liberals is class loyalty they managed to gain the support of the great majority of States at the UN seemingly eager to see the decline of western culture by eliminating the independence of thought which totalitarian, repressive States and tribalism hate. The decline of the west would also result in a decline in global freedom allowing for the rise of totalitarian and repressive States.

While at the individual level these fake liberals generally got by with people but as a collective their effect on NZ was devastating. They permeate virtually all aspects of NZ society promoting the UN agenda. Illustrating New Zealand’s abject obedience to the UN agenda former NZ PM Helen Clark was third in charge of the UN for about eight years (2009 to 2017) in her position as head of the United Nations Development Program.

I show how the UN agenda was reflected in virtually all national constitutions – in NZ the bill of rights act 1990. In chapter one of my book I show how the UN wrongfully replaced individual self-determination with collective self-determination under international human rights law which led to societies dominated by collectives while the more independent people were oppressed.

Globally the money seems to have become a god for people but this is not new in history. Simon and Garfunkel sang The Sound of Silence – ‘And the people bowed and prayed to the neon god they made’ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAEppFUWLfc . It was first written by Paul Simon in 1964 in the aftermath of  1963 assassination of John F. Kennedy. Where did Paul Simon’s vision come from? Without independence of mind surely no such genius would be possible.

I consider people, including New Zealanders, have been thoroughly indoctrinated (for example, I describe the divide and rule of the fake liberals in my book) into attributing their oppression to the one percent, the corporations and the banks, in fact, my book shows, in my view, conclusively that the huge gap between rich and poor can be explained by human rights which determine the ‘rules of the game’ i.e. neoliberalism and globalization. Although behind the scenes wealth would almost certainly enable particularly right-wing politics to exert enormous influence this is very difficult to prove. But what can be proved i.e. what can be seen, is the considerable majority of States at the UN voting to omit human rights creating neoliberalism and globalization to eradicate independence of thought globally. And, in my view, the latter is all that one really needs to know to explain the enormous gap between rich and poor.

In my book I stated that I considered it virtually indisputable that the bill of rights was hijacked ‘by and for’ a left minority of Members of Parliament (all labor MPs) and passed by only 36% of MPs.

The bill of rights was then driven by the bureaucrats i.e. those specially selected (see above), behind closed doors so if your human rights were omitted you were overlooked. Two most obvious examples were children’s rights and family rights which were excluded in the bill of rights so their rights were overlooked resulting in high levels of child poverty and domestic violence.

Individual self-determination was omitted so small entrepreneurs could not challenge bureaucratic red tape which suppressed small business (I describe the latter in three countries, New Zealand, America and Bangladesh) while the bill of rights permitted affirmative action (Section 19(2)) for those perceived as victims such as women and Maori who generally replaced the most intelligent. And following the UN agenda seeking the decline of western culture, the collectives targeted intelligent white males to be overlooked. I consider the latter severely dumbed down the population creating a less than mediocre professional class seemingly incapable of challenging their leadership. By contrast, the classical liberals prior to 1984 had ensured a meritocracy which enabled independence of mind and upward mobility. I see the next step of the fake liberals is to eliminate meritocracy from the independent sector to enable their complete control and completely eliminating independence of thought throughout New Zealand.

Social class discrimination was omitted in the bill of rights which permitted discrimination against the working class and also helped create the underclass while with the fake liberals taking over the mainstream media those perceived as a threat to their dominance were excluded from having a voice nullifying the right to freedom of expression (Section 14) in the bill of rights for many of those outside the establishment often the more independently minded. I describe in considerable detail the low cunning and gross deceit involved in the crushing of New Zealand’s potential.

Because someone has to be held to account for the gross human rights abuses involved (see below) I hold Sir Geoffrey Palmer (the PM and architect of the bill of rights) and Helen Clark (the deputy PM at the time) to account.

In June 2010 I appeared in the Auckland High Court after making a stand on principle. I described to the High Court Judge Lyn Stevens a New Zealand tragedy with a larger underclass created a consequence of social class discrimination. The Judge agreed with my account asking me why I had not informed New Zealand earlier although he was aware I was amongst those who had been so brutally oppressed and it took time for me to be able to properly articulate what had happened and how. I was convinced that no one was meant to be able to survive the ordeal with their sanity intact and able to articulate what had happened (I thank God I manage to survive to tell the story). In my view, apart from the underclass many ended up in the mental health and criminal justice systems. I spent years trying to tell New Zealanders what was happening ringing talkback up to five times a week writing numerous articles, writing a book, helping to start a new political party (the Human Rights Party, unregistered), but the fake media ensured I got no publicity in the mainstream media. The latter was also the case in 1991 when I made a stand on principle and threw a brick through the employment service in Christchurch protesting against the severe benefit cuts which I considered violated international human rights law (I was supported by the NZ Human Rights Commission and a lecturer in Constitutional Law at Canterbury University). In both my court appearances the fake media refused to explain the reasons for my actions. I was a voice in the wilderness and despite having two books published by reputable American publishers, I still am. By and large, people are only interested in money not human rights but by understanding the language of the elites I have shown how fraudulent they are and how problems such as neoliberalism and globalization can be corrected by including the omitted human rights in international and domestic human rights law i.e. the NZ bill of rights. In my book, I promote an ethical bill of rights which would include all the omitted human rights.

New Zealanders were severely dumbed down ensuring that there would be very little challenge to government policies. Enormous numbers of New Zealanders (brains and brawn) left the country. That many included our ‘best and brightest’ is clearly shown by the statistics of Kea New Zealand.

Kea New Zealand is a global network, which is largely government-funded, with a membership of half a million expat New Zealanders.

Kea Global Chief Executive, Craig Donaldson, said it was estimated that there are one million Kiwis [brains and brawn] living overseas. He added that ‘New Zealand has the highest proportion of highly skilled workers based offshore of any country in the OECD…’ (p153 of my book, see below).

That the ‘best and the brightest’ seemed to be the major target in New Zealand can be seen from the survey findings of Kea New Zealand ‘Every Kiwi Counts 2011’ and other authoritative surveys.

Kea New Zealand’s on-line survey of over 15,000 New Zealanders living offshore states: ‘Only 1% of overseas Kiwis say they have no formal qualifications, compared with nearly one quarter (24%) of New Zealand residents who say the same’ (p154).

Ethical Human Rights: Freedom’s Great Hope (American Academic Press, 2017), Ethical Human Rights My home phone is (0064) (09) 9409658; my mobile is 0226986063.

Why have nuclear war when we are all the same?

Why have nuclear war when we are all the same?

At present the nuclear and nuclear umbrella States have refused to sign the Nuclear Non-proliferation treaty of the United Nations however they could engage in discussions on ethical human rights which recognizes that all people are the same whereas ideology and religion often accentuate the differences making war more likely.

On April 23, 2018 ICAN (International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons) reported that 35 states are sabotaging the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. These include the nuclear States and nuclear umbrella States i.e. NATO countries, https://www.icanw.org/campaign-news/new-research-35-states-are-sabotaging-the-npt/.

Ethical human rights are firmly based on universal human rights truth as in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which recognizes that all people are the same. Ethical human rights If adopted by the United Nations would include the many human rights omissions determined by the great majority of States which create ideology including globalization.

That States which failed to ratify the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty could find common agreement on universal human rights truth is not implausible as the UN regards the UDHR as its authority and the UN Charter requires all States to uphold the UDHR.

Ethical human rights ensure sovereignty which seems to be a major interest of those States which have refused to sign the treaty. Ethical human rights simply require that all people should have, at least, all the core minimums of the human rights in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which nearly all countries should be able to ensure for their people. The latter is the primary duty of the State although, where possible, there are global duties e.g. to help those countries unable to ensure ethical human rights for their people.

In the chapter on Bangladesh in my recent book (see below) I show how universal human rights truth equates with the Golden Rule (do unto others as you would have them do unto you) which all the major religions agree with so agreement with universal truth should be able to help them transcend their self-interests. In my personal view, the universal is the nature of the soul while universal human rights truth reflects God’s absolute universal truth.

If religions such as exists in India (Hindu) and Pakistan (Muslim) can agree on universal human rights truth and therefore that all people are the same there would seem little reason to engage in any war including nuclear war.

Pakistan’s PM Imran Khan speaking at the UN on the 17th Sept 2019 warns of the possibility of nuclear war over the disputed Kashmir territory. He states: ‘When a nuclear country fights to the end it will have consequences far beyond its borders. This it is not a threat it is a fair worry’, ‘Analysis: Imran Khan: What will Modi [Narendra Modi is the Indian PM] do when Kashmir curfew is lifted?’  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GaMG7vhrxM.

While Modi expressed his concern over Islamic terrorism Khan expressed his concern that India is refusing to engage in dialogue. In my chapter on Bangladesh, I show how a violent jihad can be replaced by a peaceful jihad by permitting religions a greater voice in the mainstream which could, for example, greatly alleviate tensions between India and Pakistan which both suffer high levels of terrorism. If agreement can be found on universal human rights truth both could engage in a rational, secular discussion.

As with religious differences, where there are ideological differences. If nuclear States can agree on universal human rights truth it would enable them to rise above self-interest and so decrease the likelihood of war.

For example, China can continue to emphasize economic, social and cultural rights (social justice) while America can continue to emphasize civil and political rights (freedom and democracy) as long as both agree to ensure the core minimum of both sets of rights (the UN Committee on Economic, social and cultural rights has determined what constitutes the core minimums of most economic, social and cultural rights).

Another reason why ethical human rights should be discussed as an alternative to nuclear war is because it seems unlikely that nuclear and nuclear umbrella States will ratify the UN’s Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

In my recent book I describe how on 10 December 2008 the United Nations created a new globally dominant ideology which I call neoliberal absolutism (an extreme totalitarianism). The existence of neoliberal absolutism, which certainly appears to be the ideology of a One World Government, was not reported by the global mainstream media.

Throughout the discussions at the UN from 2004 to 2008 neoliberal absolutism was opposed by America with some assistance from the America camp e.g. Canada, Britain, Australia and Japan. I show how neoliberal absolutism was created by the great majority of States in the UN General Assembly by omitting many human rights. I show how it resulted in a major rebalance of global ideological and economic power from the West to the Rest. Furthermore, the failure of neoliberal absolutism to prohibit exploitation meant that Corporations could relocate to counties with cheap labour without fear of exploitation being prohibited.

I show how the latter was the real cause of the global financial crisis of 2008. By far the major casualty of the GFC 2008 was the European Union i.e. the nuclear umbrella States of NATO. It also certainly seems that the GFC is very likely ongoing leading to the prospect of a further recession. Consequently, neoliberal absolutism targets the West for decline. The latter may be a reason why NATO States will not ratify the UN’s Nuclear Proliferation Treaty.

Similarly, reflecting its isolation at the UN America is facing global hostility and because the UN is promoting the rise of totalitarian and repressive States it seems unlikely America will ratify the UN’s Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty.

In my book I recommend that the West boycott the UN until the many human rights omissions are included. However, a major reason why this has not happened is likely because Western States America, Britain and France are permanent members of the UN Security Council and would not want to relinquish their power of veto.

However, Article 24(1) of the UN Charter gives the Security Council the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. Given the enormity of the consequences of any nuclear war the Security Council should be able to encourage the discussion of ethical human rights amongst nuclear and nuclear umbrella States.  

The failure of the global mainstream media to report the creation of neoliberal absolutism or the existence of ethical human rights has, in my view, meant that there is exceedingly little interest amongst the global community to discuss ethical human rights despite the remarkable support it received on the internet by the US State Department, the Open Democracy Initiative of the White House, even the United Nations itself as well as many others such as Save the Children (US) (see my article for a full list, ‘New idea for a Better World’, Scoop New Zealand).

My concern is that ideological control is so overwhelming that there may not be sufficient independence of mind to avert a nuclear war.

After 2 ½ years New Zealand libraries have finally accepted my book. Ethical human rights: Freedom’s Great Hope (American Academic Press, 2017), https://www.amazon.com/Ethical-Human-Rights-ANTHONY-RAVLICH/dp/B01N0Y3TAN