Showing posts with label lateral violence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lateral violence. Show all posts

Who are you angry at?

Political Grooming Gangsters study bias and vulnerability across a population in order to locate targets, to exacerbate their fears and biases over time, in order to nudge their behaviour in ways that the groomers can exploit. 

THIS IS INDUSTRIAL SCALE PSYCHOLOGICAL ABUSE.



The image above is The Telegraph front page March 16th, in which the editing contrast some black people stocking up with loo roll against the idea of punishing people who refuse to go into quarantine, when there was no such policy - this is quite deliberate, it is intentional mass scapegoating in classic style.

https://www.thepaperboy.com/uk/the-daily-telegraph/front-pages-today.cfm?frontpage=5956

So I wish to place in on record, for all my friends, and for all the ordinary folk across Britain, an honest analysis.

1. The British government have not done what the Singapore, KoreanHong KongTaiwanese and Chinese governments did.

What did these East Asian States do? They alerted their citizens, as soon as they were aware they were dealing with a new infectious virus that we have no immunity for and had confirmed that by sequencing the genome.

The treated their citizens as adults, and the told them EXACTLY what was at stake, and they provided the resources for programs designed to limit the spread of infection and bring it to halt, and treat those who were ill, and protect the more vulnerable and they trusted the citizens to engage with that.

They provided economic and financial support to the citizens as they went through that process. And that is what the citizens of those four states did. They did not have to be ordered and forced - China did introduce Laws to shut down and that was less about force than about marshalling the resources to protect the people.

 2. The British media have played the narratives that have scapegoated the citizens who were frightened, confused, mislead and acted in panic and confusion in order to protect the governments neglect of their duty of care

https://dwylcorneilius.blogspot.com/2020/04/uk-take-it-on-chin-historical.html 

The British Governments had 11 weeks in which to prepare, and they did nothing, nada,

Watch Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet, lay it out in the most poignant manner, on BBC Question Time, March 23rd.

https://twitter.com/bbcquestiontime/status/1243277467445604352?s=20&fbclid=IwAR3kbF_xvTEbUIAiBh6yAOa6wsg5kAfkLgGY4LZOFQRvTpgDpqfpXR8E1fY

When the first surge of deaths emerged around 10th-14th March, they proposed locking all the elders and other vulnerable people in their homes, to protect them, and let the fit population handle getting infected.

That was official policy.

The medical and epidemiology community pushed back, and that policy lasted less than 24 hours...

3. Since then confusing messaging and piecemeal policy adjustments has meant that a degree of  confusion amongst the citizens remains - then we can factor in the UK Column Brexit community and the Con Theory community spreading profoundly damaging content far and wide - and we get idiots everywhere taking a parties, having a day out at the beach, etc...

Whilst the vast majority of citizens get on with the shut down and stay at home protocol because they want to protect the NHS, who as it happens are, even today 4th of April, still working without correct protective kit for handling a surge of patients presenting with a viral lung infection that is life threatening for tens of thousands of vulnerable people.

And the media hype the behaviour of the minority, and allow that misrepresentation to roll, which makes more people angry at each other - and the government will exploit that as an excuse to introduce 'draconian measures'... watch and see.

The total vulnerable population in UK is just over 5 million people, out of 65 million.

That's disabled folk, chronically ill folk, people living in temporary accommodation, the homeless, the people in prisons and detention centers, on remand, in psychiatric hospital and in day to day hospitals, the people in need of care assistance at home, people in hostels and refuges, large families sharing small houses and apartments.

 If 1% of those people are infected and the infection causes them to die an horrific death, that is 50,000 people.

That is 50,000 avoidable horrible deaths in a few weeks, or a month.

4.  So, having explained my position, please let us not blame the our fellow citizens - focus all ire on the people who put us all in this position to protect the 'economy' the Wealth, and the few who spout con theory and fear of totalitarian European or Global overlords, etc to a vulnerable, gullible audience.

 5. Beware Lateral Violence, and those who would stimulate it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lateral_violence

6. Ten ways the UK Government is making things worse in this COVID19 crisis.

https://keepournhspublic.com/coronavirus-pandemic-ten-ways-the-government-is-making-it-worse/?fbclid=IwAR39DGKTuun05bZs0Qzy7uU8viw3jOy26bsOmIShtW_2J4fpD6QyAt90LdA

Kindest regards

Corneilius

"Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe"

Thank you for reading this blog.

 All we need to do is be really honest, responsive to the evidence we find,and ready to reassess when new evidence emerges. The rest is easy.

Trump, May, Climate Change and Sex.

Good questions

1. Whether warfare and violence are a necessary condition for humankind to progress - even if we don't like the idea - is the "authoritarian tendency" an evolutionary adaptation inherited from our primate ancestors?

2. Or is it a culturally defined mode of action which we can choose to reject?

3. What evolutionary advantage can be held by societies that reject warfare if their neighbours who don't accept it wipe them out?




My answers:

1. The evidence, biological, archaeological and psychological is clear that the bulk of human existence we have lived as egalitarian societies, ranging from small bands of nomads to large concentrations in villages, towns and small 'cities', built with natural materials and no monumental structures of any kind. Our evidence is that that healthy human behaviour is pro-social, nurturant, connected, sensitive and yet robust, We also know that most behaviours are learned.

2, http://www.violence.de/prescott/letters/Social-Behavioral_Characteristics.pdf - the research by Textor and others such as Sorensen, Ward, Prescott, Murdock and Demeo and many others since then suggests that hierarchy is a cultural dynamic, rather than a biological mandate.(more on this below)

3. Evolutionary advantage - what are the assumptions behind the phrase, would such a phrase emerge from within an egalitarian mindset, or is it a projection of the hierarchical mindset? Does the culture seek advantage over the habitat or do they 'co-operate' with the habitat and all that lives in it.

We, as individual human bodies, are comprised of a myriad of organisms which we cannot see, and without which we would not survive.

If one looks at it carefully, one can see that seeking advantage (over nature and other humans) is the core dynamic of the bully, or the parasite, whereas working together (with nature and other humans) is the core dynamic of a healthy individual within a healthy group.

Evolution is driven by health rather than dysfunction.

Violent Hierarchy inhibits natural evolutionary processes.

The damage caused by Violent Hierarchies runs directly against healthy evolution, and it is not logical to describe a dysfunctional behaviour as evolutionary - evolved to be diseased - as the terms are mutually exclusive..
An article that explores this in more detail, with references.



Cultural Social Behavioural Variables.

As mentioned above,  anthropologists in the 1920s - 70s were very busy indeed : Robert Textor surveyed 400 cultures, George Murdock looked at 117 cultures , and these were then meta-analysed by Demeo in the 80s, looking at  a number of social-behavioural variables and measuring their incidence, with geographical mapping as an output, to see the world wide distribution of data.

There is another vast written record of first contact with many, many more pre-conquest cultures, contained in the accounts of Christian missionaries during the initial expansions into un-conquered lands...

Patri- and Matri-lineal Cultures.

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Histograms-of-Regional-Behaviors-Textor-Data-400-Cultures-63-Variables_fig1_233954702

DeMeo’s work supports the assertion that there is a profound correlation between the way children are related to and the behaviour of a given society. It mirrors what is known about trauma when it afflicts entire communities, not least when his patterns of trans-generational post trauma behaviours can emerge as social behavioural characteristics...

" It is highly significant that strong positive correlations, with only a small minority of exceptions (related to confounding data codings, as mentioned above), exist between infant and childhood trauma, adolescent sex-repression, male dominance, social hierarchy, destructive aggression and warfare."
 
That said this narrative has it's critics.. 

Demeo wrote a book on this in 1998, after many decades of research...

Most seem to wilfully misinterpret what the narrative is saying, and thus their critique is not of that, but of what they think it is.. 

It did not help that his book, produced in the late 90's, had a rather incendiary title, Saharasia, the 4000bc Origins of Child Abuse, Sex-repression, Warfare, in the Deserts of the old world.

Some people have assumed that this evidence neatly explains the 'nature' of the existing North African, Arab, Persian cultures. They fail to see the tragic irony of their own Anglo-Saxon legacy with regard to egalitarian cultures world wide.. They miss the meaning, and seek to enunciate their own values.

DeMeo stated the case, clearly. 

The institutionalisation of violent hierarchies, as a social behavioural pattern, is the issue, not the 'nature' of a given 'people'.  It is learned. It started somewhere. There is nothing natural about power hierarchies, other than as un-resolved post trauma response that has environmental and experiential dynamics.

The dynamic of violent hierarchies also emerged in South America, in areas where desertification occurred, which gave rise to the Inca and Aztec Empires.. 

It also emerged in lessor forms, locally across the globe.. 

Others then attempt to debunk DeMeo, in order to maintain public order, to undermine the previous critique, which is seen as incendiary. They want to prove that the Arab, Persian, North African, peoples are just ordinary folk, like us. They are, of course.

The see no need, there is nothing but nastiness there, and I agree with them, to impugn any group or individual people with 'scientific evidence' in that fashion, and because the second set of debunkers misunderstand the misunderstanding of the previous critique, they fire ahead, that complicates matters...  they are debunking the wrong thing.

Then there's the adherents of Monotheism in all it's glory.

They hate this book. The Abrahamic Religions in particular.

Too bad.,

Climate change and Sex!

We now understand that intense climate change occurred in the Saharasian regions around 4000 bc, which co-incides with the emergence of patriarchy as a force majeur in human culture.

Where previously a lush land existed, rainfall vanished,  deserts emerged, and living conditions became very harsh. 

Traumatisingly harsh?

We see too, in the archeo-historical record, areas of desertification in South America and China correlated with aspects of emergent patriarchy. The Inca, The Aztec, etc…

However, the Australian history is different..... 

That group of humans (nearly 1 billion live lived, in total, so hardly insignificant) went through two or three massive climate changes, which involved desertification of previously lush ecosystems, and this has happened within a period of 60,000 years of continuous human culture, and we see that in this experience, somehow patri-linealism, violent hierarchies etc did not emerge.

Instead that group remained largely co-operative, egalitarian, connected to the land base, responsive to it, and developed traditions of respect for and knowledge of food resources available, providing a hugely variable diet, and it might have been that alone that allowed them to survive and indeed thrive.  

They were more at peace with each other, than at war, is I think a fair assumption. I’d call that healthy..

There were, across Australia, at least 250 language groups, with huge genetic variations across the population, when the first Europeans arrived.... and there was no war, clans had minimal hierarchy, men and women had equal standing, children were treated with utmost respect and empathy, although there was degrees of conflict and some violence, they were adept at de-escalation and their connection to the land base and food resource base was peerlesss.

This consciousness can be called pre-conquest consciousness. Before violent expansionary hierarchies emerged...

Thus the history of our species contains the resolution of the current Climate Change issue - co-operation rather than competition enables human societies to thrive in almost any circumstance.

Violent Hierarchy - the competing powers dynamic of the dominant industrial system undermines that ability, and the issue is less a matter of evolution, or revolution - it is a matter of healing.

This is not a question of winning, rather it is a question of balance and healing, and any aspect of that dynamic - winning - will undermine the pursuit of balance and healing, which is the very definition of natural justice.

Sex-economic Theory, Trump and May

Economic power mediated through sex and gender, with men as buyers, and women as sellers.

Reich. And many others, have looked at this.g 

Fuck it, we're all looking at this every ef

The woman as property, the woman placed in a state of dependence, the religious consecration of that dynamic, the woman as breeding ground for expansion, the children as the expansion medium, the shock troops of future cultural hegemony. Children as objects..

These are all still deeply rooted in our culture, in spite of it’s self declared Christian-Secular vision of progress.

There is so much pain in sexual and gender relationships world wide..... so much harm, and that is a symptom of the dominant social power systems, as much as the wounds and flaws of individual human beings under socialised pressure. We are looking at The Vatican, Rugby, Swimming, Schooling, Care systems and seeing widespread sexual assault still being ‘managed rather than directly and robustly confronted. In the 21st Century…

Hello!?

A lot of people may well have moved on, as many claim, and good for them - however  it has not yet altered the fundamentals of the existing social behavioural dynamics of power, economic or otherwise.

Can we see the toxins in the water we are swimming in?

How to meet as true equals, albeit uniquely different, in a culture deeply and historically rooted in this dynamic, when all our social behavioural conditioning has been influenced sub-liminaly as much as consciously by growing up in that environmental experiential dynamic and we are taught to see each other as stereotypes, rather than precise individuals that we are, where value is unmeasured and the price is irrelevant, because it is freely given.

Isn’t this what Feminism, for both men and women alike?

No more bullying.

The pleasure in fully meeting life - that sense of connection is intimate, it is our sensory acuity heightens that intimacy, that sense of connection; insecurity and competitive-ness undermines that, and it is no place for the exercise of power over another.

That, for me at least, ranges from sexuality to cooking, from child care to elder care, it is an acute sensitivity, a natural sensitivity, a natural tool kit… a responsive modality of living.

Men, women and children - we are all are born into this acculturation, and yet we are not of it, and our liberation can only emerge as we decolonise our minds and our bodies, and allow our natural sensitivity towards optimal health to emerge.

Thus the positions taken on either side of the Men vs Feminist mainstream discourse (if one can call it that, it's more like a competition debate) cannot, by definition, resolve the issue. 

Obviously neither Donald Trump nor Teresa May are Feminists They are bullies.

Bullies cannot, by my definition, be Feminists.

Men and Women alike must understand what they have been born into, as observers and as participants, and be given the option to disengage, by their own choice.... to assert their own most genuine sense of self within a cooperative social dynamic.

As nature intended.

That is my expression of what true liberty means.






Kindest regards

Corneilius

"Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe"

Thank you for reading this blog. All we need to do is be really honest, responsive to the evidence we find,and ready to reassess when new evidence emerges. The rest is easy.

Ambition, Indoctrination, Racism and History

My only ambition is to nurture healing and recovery and to become healthy compost for the future. The future beckons, the grand children of all of us are calling out.



That is it. All of it. For me.

Martin Luther King Jr. said, "Returning hate for hate multiplies hate, adding a deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that."

He was correct. That is why they killed him. He saw through it all. Accurately. Dangerous knowledge in a public figure willing to share that knowledge.

Systems of indoctrination are one of the dynamics that run counter to this ambition.

Language - "Mixed Race Marriages" or 'Mixed Race Children' implicitly affirms Racism. It is a term the system approves of.

We are instructed to use these words, as a mark of respect. Very clever, very manipulative.

There are no races, only language groups and environment adapted groups... think the people of the Andes and the Sherpa's who's blood systems are more efficient at holding oxygen. Inuits who's faces and body fat layers are better adapted to the deep cold of their environment. And so forth... all of us human. With slight differences. No difference in intelligence, ability, desire for love and empathy, no difference in our vulnerability to abuse.

Race is a social construct.


Race, as a biologically mandated reality, is disproved by the evidence, not least that which emerged from the study of the Human Genome. Race is a cultural construct, not a biological reality.

Racist Violence and it's counter part, Anti-Racist Violence, are examples of Lateral Violence, where a population that  is over powered by a potent political, religious or economic system of power, where the power disparity is immense between the powerful and everyone else, where people lash out at each other, rather than address the oppressive system, as a way to vent their anger and rage.
Topically, and typically, the violence prone within Antifa and NeoNazi's alike are fundamentally weak in their analysis, which is partly why they stoop to violence. 

This feeds into the oppressive system, as a distraction that can be mobilised and publicised, and this helps to perpetuate the lateral violence. It prevents a just resolution to the problem.

People talk about the violence, and not the real issue, which is how people learn to become racists.

People who are prone to violence tend to get a high from engaging in violence -  it is a self administered drug, Adrenaline...

Antifa's violence is carried out knowing that they can manipulate observers by claiming they are confronting unjustness and bigotry - and yet nothing they have ever done by violence has reduced racism.

The Racists violence is carried out in the belief that they form an erstatz family or community and are protecting it.

Here’s one man who has chosen his own direct way to confront racism.

58-year-old Blues musician Daryl Davis. An African American. Daryl goes right to the heart of the person, a humanistic process which gradually undermines indoctrination on a person to person basis. The oppressed seeks to liberate the oppressor from their dehumanised state.

Something violence can never achieve. Beautiful, robust, logical. Evidence based.

“It’s a wonderful thing when you see a light bulb pop on in their heads or they call you and tell you they are quitting. I never set out to convert anyone in the Klan. I just set out to get an answer to my question: “How can you hate me when you don’t even know me?” I simply gave them a chance to get to know me and treat them the way I want to be treated.


They come to their own conclusion that this ideology is no longer for them.

I am often the impetus for coming to that conclusion and I’m very happy that some positivity has come out of my meetings and friendships with them.“

This is true freedom of speech, with a sense of social responsibility, in action.

Here is another man,Tony McAleer. taking a different approach, because he was once a racist. What he has to say is interesting.


"what draws young people into these (Neo-Nazi) groups? Research and my personal experience show that it is a sense of identity, belonging, acceptance and purpose. The lack of these factors in a young person's life creates vulnerabilities that extremist groups exploit. The culprit undermining these critical pieces of our human experience is a deep subconscious belief that we are unlovable, powerless and invisible – we call this the feeling of "less than." I am often asked how had I lost my humanity. 

How does one become a skinhead? My reply is this: I didn't lose my humanity. I traded it for acceptance and approval until there was nothing left. I am not a victim here; I was a perpetrator who victimized others. 

Life After Hate, the non-profit I co-founded with other former members of the white-supremacist movement, recently received a letter from a concerned parent. Her 18-year-old son with Asperger syndrome is up to his eyeballs in the white-nationalist scene. What frightened the parent was the community had embraced and accepted her son in a way he had never experienced in his entire life.

Those are very deep psychological strings being pulled and that seduction is wrapped in racist ideology. This child could probably rationalize believing any ideology in exchange for that acceptance and belonging coming from such isolation.

To help this child and so many like him, we need to address the loneliness and isolation before the ideology. If shame and loneliness are the drivers here, how can shaming, isolation and violence be the answer? The antidote to shame is compassion."

I get where he is coming from.


I was part of a cult in the late 80s, and it is precisely this dynamic that drew me in. The technique is known as love bombing. I was part of the Catholic cult before than. 

I felt very alone in my life, estranged from my family and the culture I was born into, I had very low self esteem and I was seeking to answer that loneliness, without really understanding it. I felt very alienated from family and culture. I was alienated from my true self, though I did not know it or understand it.

I was vulnerable. I was needy. I was insecure. I was charming and outgoing. I had front.

The Cult played on that. . I became a dedicated member, they loved me for that, and we saw ourselves as separate from everybody else.  I felt strong for the first time in my life. And therew as genuine affection and care within the cult. It wasn't all bad.

It took me a few years to work through this and it was quite frightening at times, not because the cult was abusive, but because I was choosing to go out into the world totally alone, I was confronting myself.


Self alienation can happen without any overt abuse of a child.


And let me add this, by way of an insight, there is pattern of interaction that happens frequently in our society, where  an infant's behaviour can be misunderstood or misconstrued and responded to inaccurately, and that too can be the basis of a deep seated loneliness, a sense of abandonment and alienation for that child.

Feeling misunderstood, unable to articulate what is happening, to adults who do not understand what is happening, and who resort to 'management' rather than love and knowledge as a way of dealing with the child.

No one is at fault in this, it's not another stick to beat parents with. It is a bio-social dynamic, common in traumatised and traumatising societies.

It's an understanding of what can happen when parents are stressed, and not supported to learn about child care... to learn about the natural child.


A child that underwent a shared stress in utero (in the womb). where the mother was chronically stressed, and where the flood of hormones then altered the child's neural and endocrine development, might well present 'problem behaviours' that lead the adults to exert controlling behaviours over the child. because no one told them that in utero stress can alter the childs brain development and endocrine system, and that too can lead to loneliness..

There is always a number of interacting factors in any situation. biologically or socially.


Another angle I like to look at is this.


The cultural background of a bully is less important in confronting the bullying than the actual bullying behaviour.

Many people readily fall into this trap. They assume that the bullying has it's roots in a specific culture, and that it applies to all in that culture.

The international political power system, (be it Western, Eastern, European, African, Occidental etc) is built on hierarchies of power and violence, and it is a bully system, and it serves the system to indoctrinate their populations to conform to the narratives they provide. Yet not all people born into that culture are bullies. Indeed the majority are not.



We talk about misogyny, we talk about racism, we talk about homophobia, we talk about Islamaphobia, without sensing that these separate 'categorys' are being used to avoid talking about the core behaviour, by treating them as somehow separate. A distraction.


They are not. They are the same thing.

Bullies will always seek to justify their behaviour, they will always attempt to mask or mitigate it with some almost rational justifications. We must learn to see through those mitigations.

Focus instead on the behaviour
- it's bullying. 


No need to glorify or mythologise it. Keep it simple.

"You are not a Nazi, you are behaving like a bully,and you are using Nazism as a cover story."


Freedom of speech in the public domain has to be set in a environment of total honesty, in a setting of taking responsibility, as a shared action.

This, for me, means that when a racist speaks, that we deal with the points raised by presenting the evidence. We tell the racist why their 'logic' is an error. Not merely that racism is 'bad'.

Snowden is an example to us all. He spoke truth.

The Survivors of clerical abuse within Institutional settings across America, Ireland, Australia and elsewhere are an example to us all.

They spoke and they speak the truth. They confront the issue with evidence, rather than violence.

Just as the Governments response to Snowden, and the Church's response to Survivors are an example we should not permit, let alone follow.

These Power Institutions have consistently lied, prevaricated, obfuscated, intimidated, bullied, denigrated Snowden and the Survivors to protect their own status, rather than come clean, put their hands up and be mature honest adults seeking to resolve and heal.

Allow the extremists to speak, and deal with the issues raised with EVIDENCE, knock the opinion based world view back with EVIDENCE, not with hatred, fear or dismissiveness.

Start with an honest history in schools.

Tell the truth, to undermine the lies.

I repeat myself : History must taught in our schools in complete honesty, especially from the perspective of all those harmed by the actions of Kings, Barons, Popes, Generals and other leaders. Then 99% or of Racism and Fascism as a grass roots phenomenon would vanish within two generations.

That is a relatively easy process to set up and establish.

For example, a class of 20 ten year old students: Ask them “What era are you interested in?”

Let them decide what era or subject issue is relevant to who they are, at that moment, and thus let their self motivation emerge. They will want to study what they want to study.
Then let them loose to do their own research individually, and in small groups, and ask them to present what they have discovered to each other and to you.

Provide support during that process.

Then host a series of discussions and explorations on what they have found, on the sources, the reliability, methods of verification, and talk about the merits of critical analysis, and objectivity, and then ask them to write a paper on the issue they have chosen, a collective paper, with all students as co-Authors.

It can include what ever they decide is pertinent. You might well learn something. They will for sure.

Teach History Honestly.

Again, I repeat myself - because it is really important for all of us to understand this. Tell the stories of people’s lived experience from the point of view of the people who have been harmed, not the point of view of kings, barons, nation states, religious power.

Do that, and all this racist bull will fade away.

Keep screaming at them, meet them with more violence, without the honesty, and they will remain, as long as our hypocrisy remains.

"The Kings were robbers, the Knights were crooks, I don't believe your history books."

This is a song I wrote some years ago, addressing this matter directly.

The US and UK and EU all have problems with acknowledging, accounting for and resolving the crimes of their Empires. Serious problems.

Talking of which…

Indoctrination. 

Why is this practice still permitted?

I know that indoctrination is an abuse of the rights of the child.

Faith based schools : Saudi Madrassa's, Catholic Convent Schools, Yeshiva - Indoctrination. Why are these still permitted?

What ‘right’ does anyone have to tell a child what to think and feel and do so using a sanction/reward system of psychological dominance to ensure compliance?

To ban indoctrination, to make the indoctrination of defenceless children illegal, to define it as a breach of Human Rights, would be to undermine the entire facade and primary purpose of Compulsory State Education.

And that would undermine the status quo of power like no other single revolutionary action. Which is why it is permitted. The roots of Compulsory State Education are found in the Hindu Rote Learning System which preserved their caste system for 5 thousand years, a caste system that still exists in ‘modern India’.

If I had absorbed all I learned at school, I would be a conformist, compliant servant of the state, and I would reflexively attack any challenge to the Authority of The State and The Church.

Because that is the true function of Compulsory Education.

It's not called compulsory for nothing.

“No child left behind!”

For me, the feeling to resist came easier than the logic, and I had to examine the evidence and engage in a serious study of our shared histories of violence and oppression and in particular, I had to look at all those aspects of the institutionalised values system which I had internalised.

It was not easy.

It could be made much easier.

Parents have a  role in this.

A duty of care, more fundamental and profound than any duty ascribed to Government.

If only they knew what was being done to their own beloved children, if only they understood what had been done to themselves as children.















Kindest regards

Corneilius

"Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe"

Thank you for reading this blog. All we need to do is be really honest, responsive to the evidence we find,and ready to reassess when new evidence emerges. The rest is easy.