HORRIFIC TREATMENT OF OUR FIRST NATIONS PEOPLE - ONE EXAMPLE OF MANY THOUSANDS OF MASSACRES

The history that needs to be told

WAS G-D ONLY EVER MEANT TO MEAN 'GOOD'

I have a theory that G-d was only ever the concept of good, and in order to own and franchise the concept of good the people over the thousands of years we've had human beings on the planet sought to build a franchise around the concept of good and to make money out of that concept by controlling it.

Worse still all the different 'good' groups that emerged over the ages put their spin on being good, and then told the human beings of the planet if you truly want to be good you need to do it our way and pay us lots of money so we can teach you our way of being good and we can control you. 

So the concept of good became it's own anathema ... and someone somewhere along the way turned good into G-d and then turned G-d into a supreme being rather than an ultimate state of being for all. 


Then some misogynistic franchise of good made G-d a male ... after that the whole concept of pure good (love) became so twisted and hurtful and generated so much money it's original intention became buried so deep under the control freak bullshit that was piled layer upon layer upon layer over the centuries that we ended up with things called religions that are so complex and contradictory that the simplicity of good was lost. 


BUT then how can anyone own good? 


How can you control others through fear if you are in fact the true definition of good? 


Answer is simple ... you can't.


 Hence my personal theory that G-d was always meant to be the word good, and my definition of good is unconditional love for every human being, animal and plant on Earth.

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE = PROPERTY LAW yet ASSAULT = CRIMINAL LAW ... WHY?

I hope I live long enough to see the tag of 'Domestic' removed from the descriptors of violence.

An assault is an assault. Who and where it is committed has no bearing. Yet as a society we continue to perpetuate the reason 'Domestic' was added to the nomenclature of 'assault offence provisions'.

The history of this nomenclature is this:

Women and children were considered the property of men in days past, therefore the men were allowed to treat their property in any manner they saw fit.

Sadly this attitude has carried over to 'same sex' relationships where assaults committed by people who purport to love, care and nurture each other are still viewed through the eyes of property law and not criminal law.

The same applies to the differentiation between child sexual assault offenders i.e. incest or child sexual assault - the difference in how the courts and police treat the two is staggering, and again it is all based on this archaic assumption that if you abuse your own children/step children then it is seen as a property law matter and not a criminal law matter. The offences may traverse the criminal justice system but the attitudes that surround its journey through that system are those of a property law matter and not a criminal law matter.

You need look no further than societies reactions to child sexual assault for confirmation of this differentiation.

If a person sexually assaults a child unrelated to, or completely unknown to them, society wants them hung drawn and quartered... and put on a Child Sex Offenders list for public shaming.

If a person sexually assaults their own child/step child/relative society retreats into the mindset of 'that's a family issue and we don't air our family dirty laundry in public' ....

We will never find a just solution to violence and sexual assault in our society while there's a differentiation in nomenclature within the offence provisions of our criminal law statutes, These differences serve no other purpose than to flag to the police and the courts the relationship between offender and victim and to steer the passage of the matters before courts down either the criminal law mindset or the property law mindset.

A perfect case example

Address this key flaw in the system first, then there's hope of addressing the core of the problem - VIOLENCE - and ultimately developing sound solutions and caring, safe outcomes to violence between human beings.

R.I.P. GOUGH WHITLAM

I remember meeting Gough Whitlam and Al Grasby at the Turkish Embassy on the 29th October 1997 for their 74th Anniversary of the Republic of Turkey.

The It's Time sticker is still inside my Globite School Bag that was my school bag from Kindregarten through to primary school. In 1972 I was 9 years old and stood all day at the polling booth with my parents handing out how to vote cards for the ALP. My reward was this sticker.

I walked through the doorway into the Turkish Embassy's formal lounge room on 27th October 1997 and there standing near the open fire place (which wasn't alight!) were Gough Whitlam and Al Grasby. My jaw dropped, he was only 15 feet away from me. I had no idea he would be attending.

The guy from DFAT that I was with asked if I would like to meet Gough as he saw my reaction to seeing him. This chap had been Gough's manager when Gough was an Ambassador in Rome.

So he led me over to Al and Gough, Al looked so much tinier standing next to Gough. I was awestruck! I only ever had two celebrity heroes in my child hood, Gough Whitlam and Sidney Poitier.

And that's when things went a little skew whiff.

Here's the poor DFAT chap introducing a 34 year old Federal Agent in her best suit, responsible for the Security Intelligence and Diplomatic Liaison function of the Middle East Desk at SIDL (I think Brett Jackson may have been by my side too ... my Sergeant at the time ... ) being introduced to two of the coolest Aussies ever, and this is what comes out of my mouth :

"Gough, you were bigger and more important that Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny in our house when I was growing up"...

Gough's eyebrows went up, and he glanced in the direction of the DFAT chap as if to say 'who the f*ck is this nutter'....

Al just chuckled ... oh well one of those occasions where you dearly wish to be cool and fail magnificently!

I was so excited I kept the invitation for the celebration with the notation as the bottom 'met Gough Whitlam at this function' ... I'm pretty sure his invitation didn't note 'Met Ursula Tunks (Wilkinson) at this function" 

I'm very sorry Al Grasby (RIP) you didn't rate a mention.

Lance Barndard's (Gough's Deputy PM during the heady days of his first Government) son Nicholas was in my AFP Recruit Class in 1989, so Lance attended our Graduation Ceremony, and he spoke with Zeek Unterrheiner, who was not quite 5 years old. Zeek had started to cheer and clap when our class walked into the auditorium, someone else in the audience told Zeek to shut up. That's when Lance spoke up and told Zeek to keep cheering for his Mum and to be proud of her.

Oh to have even a tenth of this ilk in our current governments.

Thank you Gough for your courage and your compassion and your STRENGTH OF CHARACTER.

None of us are perfect, but we're still perfect at some things.

You were an inspiring leader that gave a generation of Australians that much sought after state of mind: HOPE!

RIP Gough Whitlam.

VICTIMS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT IN AUSTRALIA APPEAR TO BE DEEMED UNFIT TO SERVE THEIR COUNTRY

Well I've reached almost complete burnout stage and need to take a day or two away from the onslaught ... hanging on by my fingernails ... but still here, so I guess that's a good thing 

For those of us who know our life journey and what the AFP did to my kids and I you'll be horrified to know that one of the things that SASR did to Zeek was conducted a Record of Conversation with Zeek where he was cautioned about having been charged by the AFP as a child with Perjury for disclosing Child Sexual Assaults he'd been the victim of. Assaults committed by a serving Federal Agent at the time. He was charged and convicted after he gave evidence against the then serving Federal Agent at two committal hearings, one in NSW and the other in the ACT. The ACT committal hearing was a fully heard committal hearing, and the NSW a paper committal. The then serving Federal Agent was committed to trial on 24 charges of Child Sexual Assault on a child under the age of 10.

The case proceeded to the ACT Supreme Court for trial, all the expert witnesses were dismissed on the morning of the trial by the Trial Judge who just happen to take over the trial that morning from the judge that had been allocated the trial originally.

These expert witness had already arrived in Canberra and had been flown in from various parts of Australia to give evidence, and were suddenly told the morning of the trial that their evidence was not required. Every single witness who could provide expert advice in relation to the Federal Agent facing trial was dismissed by this late comer Judge.

Then the Judge permitted 6 character witness to give evidence of the Federal Agents good character in lieu of the Expert Witnesses who were to give evidence supporting the charges against him.

No prizes for guessing the Federal Agent was acquitted at trial. That was 1998.

The Federal Agent had been dismissed from the AFP in June 1997 after the fully heard committal hearing, by the then AFP Commissioner Mick Palmer.

In April 2001 former Commissioner Keelty was sworn in as AFP Commissioner and that very week the Federal Agent was re-employed by Commissioner Keelty. They then went after Zeek and had him charged with and convicted of Perjury for the evidence he gave in relation to the sexual assaults he suffered as a child, They did this when Zeek was 15 years old. The outcome of this was that the Federal Agent was no longer required to repay the Criminal Injuries Compensation that Zeek had been awarded in both NSW and the ACT on the basis of the Expert Evidence, the same expert evidence that the Trial Judge had dismissed minutes before the ACT trial was to begin.

When Zeek applied to join the Army his enlistment process was halted because he was required to disclose any criminal convictions, as a child or otherwise.

They sent Zeek to see the Army Recruitment Psychologist, who then sent Zeek to seek an independent Psychiatrist report to establish his suitability for enlistment. Not because of the perjury charge, but because of his experience as a victim of Child Sexual Assault. Zeek did this and paid for the report out of his own money, which cost him $500 at the time, Zeek was 21.

The SASR OC became aware of Zeek's experience of Child Sexual Assault and his conviction and then ordered he be cautioned over failing to disclose this on his enlistment. The OC never checked.

There's an official typed record of conversation where all this is in black and white. They also asked him about being a victim of child sexual assault and what counselling he'd received during his lifetime. Yup ALL IN BLACK AND WHITE and signed off on.

MORAL OF THIS STORY - if you've ever been a victim of Sexual Assault as a Child or as an Adult DON'T APPLY TO SERVE YOUR COUNTRY .... according to these guys YOU ARE NOT A FIT PERSON TO DO SO.

Angry? Yes. Hurt? Yes. Heartbroken? Yes.