13-04-27: FBI: Charges of Fraud, Corruption & Discrimination by Templetion Foundation by Tygae Aex

Radical Honoursty Culture Yshmael Guerrylla Law Party CommonSism: Common Sense Guerrylla Laws for a Sustainable Commons AEquilibriaex: balanced Eco/Anthropocentric law www.guerrylla -law.co.nr

27 April 2013 Complaint to FBI: Pennsylvania: Special Agent in Charge: Edward Hanko William J. Green, Jr. Building, 600 Arch Street, 8th Floor, Philadelphia, PA 19106 Phone: (215) 418-4000 E-mail: Philadelphia.complaints@ic.fbi.gov

National Fraud Intelligence Bureau City of London Police PO Box 36451 London EC2M 4WN Tel: 020 7601 2222 Email: postmaster@cityoflondon.police.uk Prince Phillip, c/o UKIP Mr. Farage Ref: 2013 Templeton Prize Ceremony, Guildhall, London on May 21, 2013.

FRAUD, CORRUPTION AND DISCRIMINATON COMPLAINT: Charges of Fraud, Corruption and Discrimination against (a) Templeton Foundation President & Chairman: Dr. John M Templeton Jnr & VP‘s, (b) 2013 Nominator: Archbishop Tutu‘s biographer: Steven Gish; (c) 2013 Templeton Prize Winner: Archbishop Desmond Tutu, and (d) Templeton Prize Judges, Templeton Trustees and Templeton Board of Advisors. Fraud: ‗Templeton Prize‘ is a fraudulent misrepresentation. Templeton Prize Chairman, Judges, Trustees & Advisors refuse to amend ‗Templeton Prize‘ to ‗Templeton Prize for Taker – Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric – Spirituality‘; to accurately reflect the forms of spirituality Templeton endorses & rewards. Discrimination: Templeton Prize practices Gender and Ideological Discrimination against Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist religions. All of the recipients for the Templeton Prize, for the past 40 years have been to individuals who are members of, or who endorse, Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric religions/spirituality. Fraud, Corruption & Discrimination: The nomination of the 2013 Templeton Prize was corrupt and fraudulent. Archbishop Desmond Tutu was nominated for the prize by his own biographer, who censored information from the Judges about Tutu‘s involvement in, and endorsement of, South Africa‘s TRC Fraud, and discrimination against non-patriarchal Ecocentric Primitivist cultures. Tutu‘s biographer refused to withdraw the nomination. Templeton Prize Judges also refused to withdraw the award, endorsing Tutu‘s TRC Fraud and discrimination against Ecocentric, non-Patriarchal, Primitivist Leaver cultures. PO Box 5042 * George East, 6539 * Tel: (044) 870 7239 * Cel: (071) 170 1954

ACCUSED: [TJ = Judge, TT = Trustee, TBA = Board of Adv] FBI Pennsylvania: Dr. John M Templeton Jnr John Templeton Foundation 300 Conshohocken State Road, Ste 500, West Conshohocken, PA 19428 USA Tel: (610) 941-2828 Fax: (610) 825-1730

Templeton Foundation Management: Douglas W. Scott, Exec. VP & CEO Dawn Bryant, Esq, Exec VP & Gen. Counsel Barnaby Marsh, Exec VP & Mng Dir. Michael Murray, Exec VP & Programs West Conshohocken, PA 19428 USA

Heather Templeton Dill (TT) Malvern, Pennsylvania

Josephine (Pina) Templeton (TT) Harvey M. Templeton, III (TT)

Andy Crouch, Harvard (TBA) Home: Swathmore, Pennsylvania Work: Christianity Today, 465 Gundersen Dr., Carol Stream, IL 60188 FBI Alabama: Professor Steven Gish Auburn University 342 Liberal Arts Auburn, Alabama 36849 Tel: 334-244-3958 | Fax: 334-244-3740 E (sgish@aum.edu)

FBI Connecticut: Miroslav Volf (TJ) Yale Center for Faith & Culture Yale Divinity School, 409 Prospect Street, New Haven, Connecticut, 06511 Phone:(203) 432-5332 miroslav.volf@yale.edu

FBI: Wyoming: Gail Zimmerman (TT) Wyoming Financial (WERCS) 400 E 1st Street # 105 Casper, WY, 82601-2559 Tel: (307) 473-3000

FBI: Indiana: Celia Deane-Drummond (TBA) University of Notre Dame 130 Malloy Hall, Notre Dame, IN 46556 Phone 574-631-7811

FBI Arizona: Esther Sternberg (TJ) Arizona Center for Integrative Medicine P.O. Box 245153 Tucson, AZ 85724-5153 Email: (imclinic@list.arizona.edu)

FBI Delaware: Prof. Stephen Barr (TJ) University of Delaware Office: 209 Sharp Lab Tel: (302) 831-6883 Email: smbarr@bartol.udel.edu

FBI: North Carolina Pranab Das (TBA) Elon University, McMichael Science, 2625 Campus Box, Elon, NC 27244 T: (336) 278-6272 E: (daspra@elon.edu)

FBI: Virginia/DC Thomas F. Farr (TBA) Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University, Washington, DC Tel: 202-687-5185

E: (theo@nd.edu)

FBI: Texas Byron Johnson (TBA) Institute for Studies of Religion Baylor University One Bear Place #97236, Waco, TX 76798 Tel: 254/710-7555 E (BRJ@baylor.edu)

FBI: Miami Michael E. McCullough (TBA) Professor, Department of Psychology University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL 33124-0751 Tel: 305.284.8057 E (mikem@miami.edu)

E (tff8@georgetown.edu)

FBI: Wisconsin Jeff Hardin (TBA) UW-Madison: Zoology 327 Zoology Research, 250 N. Mills Street, Madison, WI 53706 Office: (608)262-9634 | Lab: (608)265-2520 E (jdhardin@wisc.edu)

FBI: Pennsylvania Martin Seligman (TBA) University of Pennsylvania Positive Psychology Center, 3701 Market St. Room 205, Philadelphia, PA, 19104-6241 Phone: 215-898-7173 E (seligman@psych.upenn.edu)

FBI: Ohio: Neil Tennant (TBA) Department of Philosophy The Ohio State University 230 North Oval Mall, Columbus, OH 43210 Tel: (614) 292 1591 E (tennant.9@osu.edu)

FBI: New Jersey Hans Halvorson (TBA) Princeton University Dep. of Philosophy, 1879 Hall, Room 220 Princeton, New Jersey 08544 USA Tel: 609-258-4289 Chair: M.Smith (msmith@princeton.edu)

Edward Nelson (TBA) Fine Hall No 1208, Princeton Univ, Washington Road, Princeton, NJ 08544-1000 Tel: (609) 258 4206 E (nelson@math.princeton.edu)

FBI New York: Stephen G. Post (TT) Prof. Center for Medical Humanities Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY 11794, Tel: (631) 632-6000

Mark C. Berner (TBA) Telos, Center for Law and Religion St. John's University School of Law 8000 Utopia Parkway, Queens, NY, 11439 T: (888) 9STJOHNS or (718) 990-2000

David Lahti (TBA) The Graduate Center, CUNY 365 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10016 Tel: (718) 997-3422 E (david.lahti@qc.cuny.edu)

Alan Mittleman (TBA) Jewish Theological Seminary 3080 Broadway, New York, NY 10027 Tel: (212) 678 8000 (almittleman@jtsa.edu)

Victor Nee (TBA) 312 / 330 Uris Hall Cornell University Ithaca, New York, 14853 Tel: (607) 255-1415 E (vgn1@cornell.edu)

Ian Tattersall (TBA) American Museum of Natural History Central Park West, 79th Street, New York, NY 10024 Tel: (212) 769 5877 E (iant@amnh.org)

Merold Westphal (TBA) Fordham University 30 Pacific Avenue, Nanuet, NY 10954 Tel: (845) 624-5732 E (westphal@fordham.edu)

David Sloan Wilson (TBA) Binghamton University Binghamton, NY, USA 13902 Tel: 607-777-4393 E (dwilson@binghamton.edu)

FBI: California Jeffrey Schloss (TT) Westmont College, 955 La Paz Road, Santa Barbara, CA 93108 Tel: (805) 565 6118 E: (schloss@westmont.edu)

Francisco Ayala (TBA) University of California, Irvine Dept of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology 321 Steinhaus Hall, Irvine, CA 92697 T: (949) 824-8293 | F: (949) 824-2474 Email: (fjayala@uci.edu)

John Martin Fischer (TBA) University of California, Riverside 900 University Ave. Riverside, CA 92521 Tel: (951) 827-1012 E: (john.fischer@ucr.edu)

Ian Hodder (TBA) Stanford Archaeology Center Building 500, 488 Escondido Mall Stanford Uni, Stanford CA 94305-2145 E (archaeology@stanford.edu)

Luc Jaeger (TBA) UC Santa Barbara Office: 4649A PSB North Santa Barbara, CA 93106 Tel: 893-3628 E (jaeger@chem.ucsb.edu)

Steven R. Quartz (TBA) CA Inst of Technology Humanities and Social Sciences MC 228-77 1200 E. California Blvd., Pasadena, CA 91125 Tel: (626) 395-4065 E (steve@hss.caltech.edu)

FBI: Massachusetts: John W. Schott (TT) Harvard Longwood Psychiatry 330 Brookline Avenue Boston, MA 02215 Tel: 617.667.4630 | Fax: 617.667.5575 E: (hlprp@bidmc.harvard.edu)

Robert Martensen (TBA) Harvard Medical School 641 Huntington Ave, Boston, MA 02155 Tel: (301) 496-3118 E (Robert_Martensen@hms.harvard.edu)

Robert Cummings Neville (TBA) Boston University School of Theology 745 Commonwealth Avenue Boston, MA. 02215 Tel: 617-353-3050 E (rneville@bu.edu)

Robert M. Townsend (TBA) Massachusetts Institute of Technology 50 Memorial Drive; Room E52-252c Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142 (617) 452-3722 E (rtownsen@mit.edu)

Andreas Widmer (TBA) SEVEN Fund 1770 Massachusetts Avenue, 247 Cambridge, MA 02140 E (awidmer@sevenfund.org)

FBI: Illinois: William T. Cavanaugh (TBA) Center for World Catholicism and Intercultural Theology (CWCIT) 2320 N. Kenmore Ave, 570 Schmitt Academic Center, Chicago, IL 60614 T: (773) 325-4158 | F: (773) 325-1865 E: (wcavana1@depaul.edu); (cwcit@depaul.edu)

Jean Bethke Elshtain (TBA) Univ of Chicago: Divinity School Swift Hall 202, 1025 E. 58th St. Chicago, IL 60637 Tel: (773) 702-7252 | Fax: (773) 702-8223 E (jbelshta@uchicago.edu)

Michael Fishbane (TBA) University of Chicago Swift Hall 205 1025 E. 58th St. Chicago, IL 60637 Tel: (773) 702-8234 | Fax: (773) 702-8223 E (mfishban@uchicago.edu)

Howard C. Nusbaum (TBA) The University of Chicago 5848 South University Avenue Chicago, IL, 60637 Tel: (773) 702-6468 E (h-nusbaum@uchicago.edu)

Kenneth A. Olliff (TBA) Univ of Chicago 5848 S. University Ave. Chicago, IL 60637 Tel: 773.834.9870 E (kolliff@uchicago.edu)

David J Wood (TBA) Glencoe Union Church 263 Park Avenue Glencoe, IL, 60022 Tel: 847-835-1111 E (david@glencoeunionchurch.org)

South African Police: Archbishop Desmond Tutu Tutu Peace Center 2nd Floor Redefine Building 42 Hans Strijdom Ave, Cape Town, 8001 T: (021) 443 6760 | F: (021) 443 3678 Email: info@tutu.org

UK: National Fraud Intelligence Bureau1 Prof Faraneh Vargha-Khadem (TJ) University College London 30 Guilford Street. London. WC1N 1EH. Tel: 020 7905 2154

Professor Russell Cowburn (TJ) Room 431 Mott Building, Cavendish Laboratory, JJ Thomson Avenue Cambridge CB3 0HE.

National Fraud Intelligence Bureau, City of London Police, PO Box 36451 London EC2M 4WN, Tel: 020 7601 2222, Email: postmaster@cityoflondon.police.uk 1

E (f.vargha-khadem@ucl.ac.uk)

Tel: +44 (0)1223 337436 Email: (jk525@cam.ac.uk)

Denis R. Alexander (TT) Dir: Faraday Inst for Science and Religion The Faraday Institute, St Edmund's College, Cambridge, CB3 0BN, UK Tel: 01223 741281 | Fax: 01223 741285 (dra24@hermes.cam.ac.uk)

Eric Priest (TT) School of Mathematics and Statistics, St Andrews University, St. Andrews, KY16 9SS, Scotland Tel: 01334 463 709 | Fax: 01334 463 748 E: (eric@mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk)

James Arthur (TBA) School of Education University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, United Kingdom T +44 (0)121 414 5596 E: (j.arthur@bham.ac.uk)

John Barrow (TBA) Gresham College Barnard's Inn Hall, Holborn, London EC1N 2HH, United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0)20 7831 0575 E (enquiries@gresham.ac.uk)

Andrew Briggs (TBA) University of Oxford 16 Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PH, UK Tel: 1865 273700 | Fax: 1865 273730 E: (andrew.briggs@materials.ox.ac.uk)

S. Barry Cooper (TBA) School of Mathematics University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, U.K. Tel: 0113 343 5165 | Fax: 0113 343 5090 E: (s.b.cooper@leeds.ac.uk)

Roger Trigg (TBA) Theology Faculty University of Oxford 34 St Giles, Oxford, OX1 3LD Tel: 01789 204699 E (roger.trigg@theology.ox.ac.uk)

Ian Walmsley (TBA) Professor of Experimental Physics Clarendon Laboratory Room 022 University of Oxford Tel: +44 (0) 1865 272205 E (walmsley@physics.ox.ac.uk)

Harvey Whitehouse (TBA) University of Oxford Inst of Social and Cultural Anthropology, 51/53 Banbury Road, Oxford, OX2 6PE Tel: 1 865 274 705 E (harvey.whitehouse@anthro.ox.ac.uk)

Nepal Police: Matthieu Ricard (TJ) Shechen Tennyi Dargyeling Monastery, PO Box 136, Kathmandu, Nepal Tel: 9771 447 0721 monastery.nepal@shechen.org

Jordanian Police H.R.H. Princess Areej Ghazi (TJ) Founder/Director: School of Life Amman, Jordan Tel. +962 6 5535585 | Fax. + 962 5530034 E: (admin@theschooloflife.edu.jo) 2

India Police: Gurcharan Das2 (TJ)(TBA) Agent: The 9.9 Media - London Speaker Bureau, Bindu Malik Krishna New Dehli, India bindu.krishna@9dot9.in

United Arab Emirates Police: Nidhal Guessoum (TT) Ass Prof of Physics, American University of Sharjah, University City, Sharjah, UAE Tel +971 6515 5555 | Fax +971 6515 2200 E (nguessoum@aus.edu)

http://gurcharandas.org/ and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gurcharan_Das

Dubai Police: Aref Ali Nayed (TBA) Kalam Research & Media Block 3, 1st Floor, Knowledge Village P.O. Box 502221, Dubai, UAE Tel: +971-(0)4-4342379 E (aref@kalamresearch.com)

France Police: Bruno Guiderdoni (TBA) Centre de Recherche Astrophysique de Lyon Université Lyon 1, Observatoire de Lyon 9 ave Charles André, 69561 Saint Genis Laval Cedex, France Tel: +33 4 78 86 83 87 E (brunoguiderdoni@obs.univ-lyon1.fr)

Spain Police Heinrich Liechtenstein (TBA) Professor of Financial Management IESE Business School in Barcelona IESE Business School - Universidad de Navarra, Barcelona, Spain Tel: (+34) 93 253 42 00 E (hl@iese.edu)

Bahamas Police Jane M. Siebels (TT) CIO: Green Cay Asset Management Lyford Cay Drive, P.O. Box N-7776, Nassau, The Bahamas Tel: 242-362-6400 E (info@greencay.com.bs)

Russia Police: Vladimir Shmaliy (TJ) Moscow Orthodox Theological Academy T: (496) 541 5601 | F: (496) 541-56-02 Office (mpda@yandex.ru) Reception (rektor.pr@gmail.com)

Germany Police: Thomas Schmidt (TBA) Goethe University, Frankfurt Am Main 1.512, Campus Westend, IG-FarbenGebäude, Frankfurt Tel: 069 / 798-33270 E (t.schmidt@em.uni-frankfurt.de)

Canada Police: Arvind Sharma (TBA) Faculty of Religious Studies McGill University, 3520 University St., Montreal, QC, H3A 2A7, Canada Tel: 1 (514) 398-4123 E (arvind.sharma@mcgill.ca)

Pakistan Police Durre S. Ahmed (TBA) Center for Study of Gender & Culture (CSGC), 25-E Main Market, Gulberg II, Lahore, Pakistan T: (92)-42- 3574-3797 | F: (92)-42-3575-9226 E: (info@csgcpk.org), (durresahmed@csgcpk.org), (durresahmed@gmail.com)

Table of Contents: 

Statement of Facts: o Templeton Foundation: President & Chairman: o Templeton Foundation: Managerial Staff o Templeton Foundation: Board of Trustees o Templeton Foundation: Board of Advisors o Templeton Foundation‘s Signature Program: Templeton Prize o Critics of the Templeton Prize o 2013 Templeton Prize Judges o Professor Steven D. Gish: Desmond Tutu‘s Biographer o Nomination of Desmond Tutu by Steven D. Gish o TRC Fraud Correspondence to Templeton  Affidavit of Complainant: Lara Johnstone & Annexures: o A: 04 April 2013: Questions for Archbishop Tutu o B: 05 April 2013: Zuma urges Tutu to continue TRC Fraud o C: 11 April 2013: Request to S. Gish: Withdraw Tutu Nomination o D: 22 April 2013: Earth Day Spiritual Test for Templeton Foundation

STATEMENT OF FACTS: [1]

Templeton Foundation: President & Chairman:

[1.1] Dr. Jack Templeton3 is the President and Chairman of the John Templeton Foundation4. John M. Templeton, Jr. (Jack) has been actively involved in the Foundation since its inception in 1987. He retired from his medical practice in 1995. He directs all of the Foundation's activities and works closely with the Foundation's staff, Trustees, and Board of Advisors. [2]

Templeton Foundation: Managerial Staff:

[2.1] Douglas W. Scott: Executive Vice President, Chief Administrative Officer: Douglas W. Scott5, Executive Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer, oversees the Accounting, Finance, Grants Administration, Human Resources, and Information Technology departments of the John Templeton Foundation.

http://www.templeton.org/who-we-are/our-team/board-of-trustees/dr-jack-templeton http://www.templeton.org/who-we-are/about-the-foundation/dr-jack-templeton 5 http://www.templeton.org/who-we-are/our-team/staff/douglas-w-scott 3 4

[2.2] Dawn Bryant, Esq.: Executive Vice President, General Counsel: Dawn Bryant6 manages the legal affairs of the Foundation. She worked previously in the private client group at Dechert, LLP, an international law firm in Philadelphia, where she focused on U.S. and international estate and tax planning and on tax-exempt and other nonprofit organizations in the U.S. and abroad. Ms. Bryant worked closely with the late Sir John Templeton in developing the structure and operations of the John Templeton Foundation. [2.3] Barnaby Marsh, D.Phil.: Executive Vice President, Strategic Initiatives and Managing Director, Philanthropic Leadership Network: Barnaby Marsh7 oversees strategic initiatives, philanthropic outreach, strategic program initiatives and the communications department of the John Templeton Foundation. He also works to develop innovative practices in philanthropy. At the request of the late Sir John Templeton, Dr. Marsh created the Templeton Philanthropic Leadership Network, a group of international leaders in business and philanthropy who are seeking novel ways to address philanthropic challenges. [2.4] Michael J. Murray, Ph.D.: Executive Vice President, Programs: Michael J. Murray8 oversees the programs and evaluation departments of the John Templeton Foundation. Before joining the Foundation, he was the Arthur and Katherine Shadek Humanities Professor of Philosophy at Franklin and Marshall College. [3]

Templeton Foundation: Board of Trustees9: ―The Foundation is governed by a twelve-member Board of Trustees, several of whom are members of the Templeton family. The Trustees are guided by the charter and bylaws written by Sir John Templeton.‖

[3.1] Denis R. Alexander: Director of the Faraday Institute for Science and Religion and Fellow of St. Edmund's College, Cambridge. He was previously Chair of the Molecular Immunology Programme and Head of the Laboratory of Lymphocyte Signalling and Development at The Babraham Institute, Cambridge. He is the editor of the journal, Science & Christian Belief, serves on the committee of Christians in Science. He is the author of Rebuilding the Matrix - Science and Faith in the 21st Century (Oxford: Lion, 2001) which provides a general overview of the science-religion debate. More recently he has edited Can We Know Anything? Science, Faith and Postmodernity (Leicester: Apollos, 2005), co-authored (with Bob White FRS) Beyond Belief – Science, Faith and Ethical Challenges (Oxford: Lion,

http://www.templeton.org/who-we-are/our-team/staff/dawn-bryant http://www.templeton.org/who-we-are/our-team/staff/barnaby-marsh-dphil 8 http://www.templeton.org/who-we-are/our-team/staff/michael-j-murray-phd 9 http://www.templeton.org/who-we-are/our-team/board-of-trustees 6 7

2004), and published Creation or Evolution – Do We Have to Choose? (Oxford: Monarch, 2008; 3rd printing March 2009). [3.2] Heather Templeton Dill: A graduate of the University of Notre Dame in Indiana with a bachelor's degree in history and a concentration in public policy. She holds a master's degree in American History from Villanova University. Dill currently resides in Malvern, Pennsylvania, with her husband Jeff and their four children. [3.3] Nidhal Guessoum: Associate Professor of Physics (specialty: Theoretical Astrophysics) at American University of Sharjah, United Arab Emirates. In addition to dozens of technical papers, he has published many articles on general science issues, edited a conference proceedings volume on ―Islamic Astronomy‖ (in English and Arabic), co-authored two general-public books The Determination of Lunar Crescent Months and the Islamic Calendar and The Story of the Universe as well as a book entitled Reconciling Islam and Modern Science. Guessoum has been active in the area of the Islam-Science interface, focusing on the issue of biological and human evolution - how to integrate it with the Islamic worldview. [3.4] Stephen G. Post: Professor of preventive medicine and director/founder of the Center for Medical Humanities, Compassionate Care, and Bioethics at Stony Brook University. Post is a senior fellow in the Center for the Study of Law and Religion at Emory University, a senior scholar for the Positive Psychology Center at the University of Pennsylvania. He completed his Ph.D. on the relationship between self-giving love/altruism and happiness at the University of Chicago, where he was an elected university fellow, a preceptor in the Pritzker School of Medicine, and a fellow in the Martin E. Marty Center for the Advanced Study of Religion. He is founder and president of The Institute for Research on Unlimited Love, which was founded with a generous grant from the Templeton Foundation in 2001. [3.5] Eric Priest: James Gregory and Bishop Wardlaw Professor of Theoretical Solar Physics at the University of St. Andrews. He has served on numerous national and international committees in astronomy, solar physics, and applied mathematics, and currently serves on the Scottish Episcopal Church‘s Doctrine Committee and the Scottish Presbyterian Church‘s Society, Religion, and Technology Committee. Priest is the author of over 450 peer-reviewed research publications and has written or edited 18 books, including Solar Magnetohydrodynamics (1982) and Magnetic Reconnection: MHD Theory and Applications (with T.G. Forbes, 2000). [3.6] Jeffrey P. Schloss: Distinguished professor of biology and T. B. Walker Chair of Natural and Behavioral Sciences at Westmont College, where he directs the Center for Faith, Ethics, and the Life Sciences. Collaborative projects include 10

Altruism & Altruistic Love (with Stephen Post, et al, 2002, Oxford), Evolution and Ethics (with Philip Clayton, 2004, Eerdmans), and The Believing Primate: Scientific, Philosophical, and Theological Reflections on the Origin of Religion (with Michael Murray, 2009, Oxford). [3.7] John W. Schott: Serves on the faculty at Harvard Medical School. His major area of research is in behavioral finance with special interest in the relationship between personality and investment decisions. Schott is the author of two books and numerous articles and papers. He is an associate editor of the Journal of Behavioral Finance. Currently, he is a portfolio manager and director of Steinberg Global Asset Management based in Boston, MA and Boca Raton, FL and the publisher of The Schott Letter, a newsletter about psychology and the stock market. [3.8] Jane M. Siebels: Founder, chairwoman, and CIO of Green Cay Asset Management; director of the late Sir John Templeton's First Trust Bank; and cofounder of iGivingWorld, a social network for philanthropists. From 1990-1996, she was senior vice president and portfolio manager at Templeton, Galbraith, & Hansberger, one of the world's leading investment advisory firms. [3.9] Josephine (Pina) Templeton: Born in Capri, Italy, Templeton attended Fordham University and the University of Rome Medical School. She presently serves as a trustee of the Scholarship Committee of the Union League of Philadelphia. She also serves on the Ladiesâ&#x20AC;&#x2DC; Committee of the Union League and of The Salvation Army, and is active in her church, Proclamation Presbyterian Church. [3.10] Harvey M. Templeton, III: Born in Sewanee, Tennessee, Templeton graduated from the University of the South and the University of Tennessee Law School. During his professional career, he served as a staff attorney in the legal department of the Tennessee Department of Transportation, as assistant secretary and then secretary of Hiwassee Land Company and East Highlands Company (wholly owned subsidiaries of Bowater Incorporated), and as assistant secretary of Bowater Incorporated. Since 1995, Templeton has been in the private practice of law. He has served as secretary of the Foundation since its inception. [3.11] Gail Zimmerman: Chairman of the board of directors of Wyoming Financial (WERCS) in Casper, Wyoming, with offices in six states. Zimmerman is a retired professor of physiology and microbiology and author of several articles on the physiology of hibernation. He serves on the Foundation's executive committee and is chair of the finance committee. [4]

Templeton Foundation: Board of Advisors:

―The Board of Advisors possess expertise in fields covering the full range of the foundation's activities and provide guidance on particular projects and larger strategic initiatives.‖ 10 [4.1] Durre S. Ahmed: Chairperson and Senior Research Fellow at the Center for the Study of Gender and Culture in Lahore, Pakistan. An internationally acknowledged expert on gender and Islam, her interdisciplinary interests include the social-psychology of religion, particularly Islam, and she has extensively researched women‘s spirituality and issues related to gender, culture, religion, and science in the context of Islam and Muslim societies. She is the author of Masculinity, Rationality and Religion: A Feminist Perspective, editor and contributing author of Gendering the Spirit: Women, Religion and Postcolonial Response, and a six volume series on Women and Religion. She has served as a judge for the Commonwealth Writers Prize (2009) and the Templeton Prize (20092011). [4.2] James Arthur: Professor of Education and Civic Engagement and Head of the School of Education in the University of Birmingham. He is editor of the British Journal of Educational Studies. He has written widely on the relationship between theory and practice in education, particularly the links between communitarianism, social virtues, citizenship, religion, and education. Recent publications include: (2010) Education, Identity and Religion, Routledge, London, ( 2009) (ed.) A Reader in Educational Studies, Routledge, London, (2009) (ed.) Handbook in Educational Studies, Routledge, London, (2008) (ed.). Arthur is Director of Citized (www.citized.info) and Learning for Life (www.learningforlife.org.uk) and he has produced a series of major research reports on citizenship and values education. [4.3] Francisco J. Ayala: University Professor and Donald Bren Professor of Biological Sciences at the University of California, Irvine. Ayala has been president and chairman of the Board of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and president of Sigma Xi, the Scientific Research Society of the U.S. His scientific research focuses on population and evolutionary genetics, including the origin of species, genetic diversity of populations, the origin of malaria, the population structure of parasitic protozoa, and the molecular clock of evolution. Ayala also writes about the interface between religion and science, and on philosophical issues concerning epistemology, ethics, and the philosophy of biology. From 1994 to 2001, he was a member of the U.S. President‘s Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology. He was awarded the 2010 Templeton Prize. [4.4] John D. Barrow: Director of the Millennium Mathematics Project, professor of mathematical sciences at the University of Cambridge, and Gresham 10

http://www.templeton.org/who-we-are/our-team/board-of-advisors

Professor of Geometry at Gresham College, London (2008-2011). He is the author of more than 430 scientific papers on gravitation, cosmology and astrophysics, as well as 20 books, translated into 28 languages, which explore many of the wider historical, philosophical and cultural ramifications of developments in astronomy, physics, and mathematics and the author of the award-winning stage play, 'Infinities. [4.5] Mark C. Berner: A social entrepreneur and consultant to foundations and non-profits, Berner is the CEO and co-chairman of Telos, a forum for Christian leaders of international stature from business, finance, science, religion, public policy, the media, the academy, and the arts, committed to renewing public culture. Previously, he was a managing partner and co-founder of SDG Resources, L.P., an oil and gas exploration company with operations in Texas and New Mexico. Berner was also a senior manager of a hedge fund at Credit Suisse First Boston and a partner in a New York law firm. He is a former Trustee of the John Templeton Foundation. [4.6] Andrew Briggs: Professor of nanomaterials at Oxford University, Briggs currently holds an EPSRC Professorial Research Fellowship. He has over 500 publications, the majority in internationally refereed journals. In 2002 EPSRC appointed him Director of the QIP IRC, with a brief to build and coordinate a multidisciplinary team of researchers to address key challenges in Quantum Information Processing. Members of his laboratory have shown that electron and nuclear spins in endohedral fullerene molecules and other materials can be manipulated with exquisite precision, and that the memory time for quantum information can be at least a second. This paves the way for using such materials as components for solid state quantum technologies. [4.7] William T. Cavanaugh: Senior Research Professor at the Center for World Catholicism and Intercultural Theology, and Professor of Catholic Studies at DePaul University in Chicago. Cavanaugh worked in a poor neighborhood of Santiago, Chile, in the 1980s, and that experience became the basis for his first book Torture and Eucharist (Blackwell, 1998). His other books include: Theopolitical Imagination (T. & T. Clark, 2002), Being Consumed (Eerdmans, 2008), The Myth of Religious Violence (Oxford, 2009), and Migrations of the Holy (Eerdmans, 2011). He is co-editor of the journal Modern Theology. [4.8] S. Barry Cooper: Professor of Mathematical Logic in the School of Mathematics at the University of Leeds. His research follows that of Alan Turing in its focus on the nature of mental and physical computation. It seeks to characterise the computational framework underlying emergence in nature and the causal structure of the real universe. He is chair of the Turing Centenary Advisory Committee, which coordinates the wide range of Turing Centenary activities, is

president of the association Computability in Europe, which is responsible for the largest computability-themed international conference series, and chairs the Editorial Board of its Springer book series "Theory and Applications of Computability." He is an organizer of the 2012 Isaac Newton Institute programme "Semantics and Syntax: A Legacy of Alan Turing" in Cambridge. [4.9] Andy Crouch: The author of Culture Making: Recovering Our Creative Calling, winner of Christianity Today‘s 2009 Book Award for Christianity and Culture. In 2011 he became special assistant to the president at Christianity Today International, where he has served as executive producer of the documentary films Where Faith and Culture Meet and Round Trip, and as editorial director of the Christian Vision Project. His writing has appeared in several editions of Best Christian Writing and Best Spiritual Writing. From 1998 to 2003, Andy was the editor-in-chief of re:generation quarterly, a magazine for an emerging generation of culturally creative Christians. For ten years he was a campus minister with InterVarsity Christian Fellowship at Harvard University. [4.10] Pranab Das: Professor of Physics at Elon University, Das was Program Director of the Global Perspectives on Science and Spirituality program and its successor, the GPSS Major Awards Project. These two programs identified and supported research in science and the human spirit by research teams around the world. Presently, Das serves as executive editor of the International Society for Science and Religion (ISSR) Library Project, a program to select a library of essential texts spanning science and religion and its related fields. His academic work spans the fields of neuroscience, nonlinear dynamics and chaos theory, the physics of granular materials, media studies, and science and the human spirit. [4.11] Gurcharan Das: Author, management guru, and public intellectual, Das is the author of The Difficulty of Being Good: On the subtle art of dharma (Penguin 2009) which interrogates the epic, Mahabharata, in order to answer the question, ‗why be good?‘ His international bestseller, India Unbound, is a narrative account of India from Independence to the global information age. Das writes a regular column on Sundays for the Times of India, Dainik Bhaskar, Eenadu, Sakal and other papers and periodic guest columns for the Wall Street Journal, Financial Times, Foreign Affairs, and Newsweek. He was CEO of Procter & Gamble India and later managing director, Procter & Gamble Worldwide (strategic planning). In 1995, Das took early retirement to become a full-time writer. [4.12] Celia Deane-Drummond: Professor of Theology at the University of Notre Dame. Previously, Deane-Drummond held a professorial chair in theology and the biological sciences at the University of Chester, and was director of the Centre for Religion and the Biosciences. During her scientific career, she lectured both nationally and internationally and published over thirty scientific articles.

Since then, she has published numerous articles, books, edited collections, and contributions to books, focusing particularly on the engagement of systematic theology and the biological sciences alongside practical, ethical discussion in bioethics and environmental ethics. She has also lectured widely on all areas relating theology and theological ethics with different aspects of the biosciences. Deane-Drummond is co-editor of a new international journal entitled Philosophy, Theology and the Sciences, to be published with Mohr Stoebeck and launched in 2013. Her more recent books include Creation through Wisdom (2000), Brave New World (2003), Reordering Nature (2003), The Ethics of Nature (2004), Wonder and Wisdom (2006), Genetics and Christian Ethics (2006). [4.13] Jean Bethke Elshtain: Laura Spelman Rockefeller Professor of Social and Political Ethics at the University of Chicago. She has authored and/or edited twenty books, has written some five hundred essays and is a contributing editor for The New Republic. Elshtain has been a Fellow at the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton; a Scholar in Residence, Bellagio Conference and Study Center, Como Italy; a Guggenhein Fellow; a Fellow of the National Humanities Center; and in 2003-2004, she held the Maguire Chair in Ethics at the Library of Congress. [4.14] Thomas F. Farr: Visiting Associate Professor of Religion and International Affairs at Georgetown University‘s Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service. Farr is a senior fellow at Georgetown‘s Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs, where he directs the Program on Religious Freedom as well as the Program on Religion and U.S. Foreign Policy. He is also a senior fellow of the Witherspoon Institute in Princeton, N.J., where he directs a task force on international religious freedom. A former U.S. diplomat, Farr was the State Department‘s first Director of the Office of International Religious Freedom. After a career of 21 years he left the Foreign Service to research and write on religion and U.S. national interests. His own book, World of Faith and Freedom: Why International Religious Liberty is Vital to American National Security, was published by Oxford University Press in 2008. Farr received his Ph.D. in history from the University of North Carolina, and served in the U.S. Army and has taught at both the U.S. Military Academy and the U.S. Air Force Academy. He was a member of the Chicago World Affairs Council‘s Task Force on Religion and U.S. Foreign Policy. Currently he is a contributing editor for the Review of Faith and International Affairs, and vice chair of Christian Solidarity Worldwide-USA, which defends religious freedom for all people. [4.15] John Fischer: Distinguished Professor, University of California President's Chair, and Chair of the Department of Philosophy at the University of California Riverside (UCR). He received his undergraduate degree from Stanford and his Ph.D. from Cornell University. Fischer served on the faculty at Yale before coming to UCR in 1988. Fischer's main research interests lie in free will, moral 15

responsibility, and both metaphysical and ethical issues pertaining to life and death. He is the author of The Metaphysics of Free Will: An Essay on Control; with Mark Ravizza, Responsibility and Control: A Theory of Moral Responsibility; and My Way: Essays on Moral Responsibility. His undergraduate teaching includes an introductory ethics course, philosophy of law, theories of distributive justice, and philosophy of religion. He has also taught various courses on death and the meaning of life. His graduate teaching has primarily focused on free will, moral responsibility, and the metaphysics of death (and the meaning of life). [4.16] Michael Fishbane: The Nathan Cummings Professor of Jewish Studies at the University of Chicago, where he was formerly chair of its Committee on Jewish Studies. His areas of research include Biblical studies, medieval Jewish Bible commentaries and thought, Jewish spirituality, and modern Jewish thought. Among his many works are Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel; The Garments of Torah: Essays in Biblical Hermeneutics; The Kiss of God: Spiritual Death and Dying in Judaism; and The Exegetical Imagination: On Jewish Thought and Theology. [4.17] Bruno Guiderdoni: Director of the Observatory of Lyon. His main research field is in galaxy formation and evolution. He has published more than 140 papers and has organized several international conferences on these issues. Guiderdoni is one of the referent experts on Islam in France and has published 60 papers on Islamic theology and mystics. He was in charge of a French television program called "Knowing Islam" from 1993 to 1999, and the principal investigator of the Science and Religion in Islam network of Muslim scientists from 2005 to 2010. He is now the director of the Islamic Institute for Advanced Studies. [4.18] Hans Halvorson: Professor of philosophy at Princeton University. He has written extensively on the foundations of quantum physics, with articles appearing in the Journal of Mathematical Physics, Physical Review, Philosophy of Science, and the British Journal of Philosophy of Science, among others. [4.19] Jeff Hardin: Professor and chair of the department of zoology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. His numerous research articles focus on the genetic regulation of cell movement and cell adhesion during embryonic development, which has broad implications for understanding human birth defects and cancer. Hardin is the only scientist in the Religious Studies program at the University of Wisconsin-Madision, where he is the director of the Isthmus Society, which is committed to promoting dialogue between science and religion. [4.20] Ian Hodder: Hodder is Dunlevie Family Professor in the Department of Anthropology and Director of the Stanford Archaeology Center. His main largescale excavation projects have been at Haddenham in the east of England and at Çatalhöyük in Turkey where he has worked since 1993. His main books include 16

Spatial Analysis in Archaeology (1976, CUP), Symbols in Action (1982, CUP), Reading the Past (1986, CUP), The Domestication of Europe (1990, Blackwell), The Archaeological Process (1999, Blackwell), The Leopard’s Tale: Revealing the Mysteries of Çatalhöyük (2006, Thames and Hudson). [4.21] Luc Jaeger: Associate professor of chemistry and biochemistry at the University of California, Santa Barbara (UCSB). His present research interests focus on ribonucleic acid (RNA), one of the most important biopolymers on which life is based on Earth. Jaeger's lab research combines a broad range of theoretical and experimental approaches at the interfaces of chemistry, biology, and physics with implications in areas as diverse as synthetic biology, nanobiotechnology, nanomedicine, biomaterial sciences, complex system sciences, astrobiology and evolutionary biology. A member of the advisory board of the Journal of Molecular Recognition, he is the author or co-author of more than fifty-five papers published in renowned international scientific journals. [4.22] Byron Johnson: Distinguished Professor of the Social Sciences and director of the Institute for Studies of Religion (ISR) as well as director of the Program on Prosocial Behavior, both at Baylor University. He is a Senior Fellow at the Witherspoon Institute (Princeton), Senior Research Scholar at the Institute for Jewish and Community Research (San Francisco), and chief advisor for the Center for the Study of Religion and Chinese Society, Peking University (Beijing). Johnson just completed a series of empirical studies for the Department of Justice on the role of religion in prosocial youth behavior and is a member of the Coordinating Council for Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (Presidential Appointment). He is recognized as a leading authority on the scientific study of religion, the efficacy of faith-based organizations, domestic violence, and criminal justice. Recent publications have examined the impact of faith-based programs on recidivism reduction and prisoner reentry and his new book, More God, Less Crime, will be released in April 2011. Johnson and ISR colleagues are partnering with the Gallup Organization on studies addressing religion and spirituality in the world. [4.23] David C. Lahti: Assistant Professor of Biology at Queens College, City University of New York, where he runs a Behavior & Evolution laboratory focusing on the evolution of complex traits such as learned behavior in birds and humans. Current research projects in Lahti's lab include the effects of relaxed natural selection; the predictability of trait evolution; the genetic and cultural divergence of vocal signals; and the correlated cultural evolution of social organization, morality, and religion. [4.24] Heinrich Liechtenstein: Assistant professor of financial management, he specializes in entrepreneurial finance and the management of wealth. Liechtenstein holds a Ph.D. in managerial science and applied economics from The

Economics School of Vienna, Austria, a M.B.A. from IESE Business School, and a B.Sc. in business economics from the University of Graz. Liechtenstein is co-author on several publications on private equity and angel investing. His ongoing research in this field focuses on operational value creation in private equity. He is co-leading The Family Office Research Project, which is a cross-continental effort within the Wharton Global Family Alliance that aims to serve global families by researching and sharing best practices of globally influential family enterprises, and in establishing a framework for understanding the evolution of family offices. [4.25] Robert Martensen: Martensen directs the Office of History at the National Institutes of Health (Bethesda, MD) and is a lecturer in the Department of Global Health and Social Medicine at Harvard Medical School. Recently, he has published and spoken on translational medicine, on caring for patients near the end of life, and on professionalism.He is the author of A Life Worth Living: A Doctorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Reflections on Illness in a High-tech Era. His analysis of early modern European debates over spirituality, rationality, and the proper organization of the human body appeared as a 2004 book, The Brain Takes Shape: An Early History (Oxford). Robert serves on the advisory boards of the journal Science Translational Medicine and the Encyclopedia of Trauma. He holds degrees from Harvard (B.A.), Dartmouth (M.D.), and the University of California, San Francisco (Ph.D.), where he also did clinical training in emergency medicine. [4.26] Michael E. McCullough: Professor in the Department of Psychology at the University of Miami, where he directs the Evolution and Human Behavior Laboratory. His scholarly work focuses on the operation and evolution of human adaptations for social life, and in that vein he has conducted research on religion, forgiveness, gratitude, and self-control. McCullough is the author of more than 100 scholarly publications and has authored or edited six books, the most recent of which is Beyond Revenge: The Evolution of the Forgiveness Instinct (2008, JosseyBass). [4.27] Alan Mittleman: Professor of modern Jewish thought and director of the Tikvah Institute for Jewish Thought at the Jewish Theological Seminary in New York City. He holds a Ph.D. (with distinction) and an M.A. from Temple University and a B.A. (magna cum laude) from Brandeis University. Mittleman is the author of five books, most recently A Short History of Jewish Ethics (Wiley-Blackwell, 2012). He has also served on the advisory board of the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. [4.28] Aref Ali Nayed: Founder and director of Kalam Research & Media (KRM), he currently lectures on Islamic theology, logic, and spirituality at the restored Uthman Pasha Madrasa in Tripoli, Libya, and supervises graduate students at the Islamic Call College there. He is senior advisor to the Cambridge

Inter-Faith Programme, and a senior fellow of the Royal Aal Al-Bayt Institute in Jordan. He has recently been appointed to the board of the C-1 Global Dialogue Foundation and is co-chair of its Education Commission. He was a professor at the Pontifical Institute for Arabic and Islamic Studies (Rome), and the International Institute for Islamic Thought and Civilization (Malaysia). He has been involved in various Inter-Faith initiatives since 1987, including the recent ―A Common Word‖ process, and has authored several scholarly works including, co-authored with Jeff Mitscherling and Tanya Ditommaso, The Author’s Intention (Lexington Books, 2004) and his recent book, Operational Hermeneutics: Interpretation as the Engagement of Operational Artifacts (KRM, 2011). [4.29] Victor Nee: Frank and Rosa Rhodes Professor of Economic Sociology, and director of the Center for the Study of Economy and Society at Cornell University. Nee's research interests focus on studies in economic sociology, new institutionalism, and immigration. He contributed influential theories explaining a variety of macro-societal phenomena. In his recently published book Remaking the American Mainstream, co-authored with Richard Alba, he compares the late European and new immigration from Latin America and Asia to the United States and demonstrates the importance of assimilation in American society. [4.30] Edward Nelson: Professor of mathematics at Princeton University. His work in quantum field theory was recognized by the Steele Prize for seminal contribution to research awarded by the American Mathematical Society in 1995. He is the inventor of stochastic mechanics, a new interpretation of quantum mechanics, and of internal set theory, a new approach to nonstandard analysis. His work in recent years has centered on logic and the foundations of mathematics. [4.31] Robert Cummings Neville: Professor of Philosophy, Religion, and Theology at Boston University. He is Dean Emeritus of the Boston University School of Theology, Dean Emeritus of Marsh Chapel at Boston University, and was Executive Director of the Albert and Jessie Danielsen Institute. He is currently the president of the Highlands Institute for American Religious and Philosophical Thought. He is the author of Behind the Masks of God and Boston Confucianism: Portable Tradition in the Late-Modern World. His current research projects include a theological approach to sexual identities and a three-volume philosophical theology. [4.32] Howard C. Nusbaum: Professor at the University of Chicago in the Department of Psychology and the Committee on Computational Neuroscience and co-director of the Center for Cognitive and Social Neuroscience. He is an associate editor for the journal Brain and Language. He has served as co-principal investigator on the Defining Wisdom Project, which was funded by the JTF to support 23 scholars and scientists studying wisdom and serves as science advisor

on the JTF funded Science of Virtues project, which supports 20 scientists and scholars carrying out virtues research. [4.33] Kenneth A. Olliff: Director for Strategic Foundation Initiatives and CoDirector of Arete, The University of Chicago. He is the editor of Through the Rose Window: Art, Myth, and the Religious Imagination (Skinner House Press, 2002). With colleagues John Cacioppo and Matthew Christian, he founded the Arete Initiative at Chicago in 2007. Led by the Office of the Vice President for Research and for National Laboratories, Arete leverages the University‘s intellectual resources to tackle complex global and societal questions that cross disciplinary and institutional boundaries. To do so, Arete provides comprehensive support to faculty leaders in conceptualizing and launching new large-scale, interdisciplinary research initiatives. [4.34] Steven R. Quartz: Associate professor in the division of humanities and social sciences at the California Institute of Technology and a member of the computational and neural systems program. His research uses advances and methods in neuroscience to probe fundamental problems of the mind, ranging from how the mind emerges from the developing brain to how we make decisions, from individual decision-making under uncertainty to moral decision-making. Quartz is also director of the Social Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory and principal investigator of the NSF IGERT Ph.D. grant and the Brain, Mind, and Society Ph.D. program, which provides innovative, interdisciplinary training opportunities to prepare a new generation of scientists with both the analytic foundations and the experimental skills needed to pursue careers at the intersection of neuroscience and the social sciences. He is co-author (with Terrence Sejnowski) of Liars, Lovers, and Heroes: What the New Brain Science Reveals About How We Become Who We Are. [4.35] Thomas Schmidt: Professor of philosophy of religion on the Roman Catholic theological faculty and a principal investigator of the research cluster ―The Formation of Normative Orders‖ at the Johann Wolfgang Goethe University in Frankfurt and Vice Chairman of the German Society for Philosophy of Religion. Schmidt is also a Fellow at the Max Weber Center for Advanced Cultural and Social Studies at the University of Erfurt and was a Distinguished Visiting Fellow at the Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies in 2009. He is the author of several publications including Scientific Explanation and Religious Beliefs (with Michael Parker) and Religion and the Critique of Culture (with Matthias Lutz-Bachmann). [4.36] Martin Seligman: Zellerbach Family Professor of Psychology and director of the Positive Psychology Center at the University of Pennsylvania. Seligman‘s research includes learned helplessness, depression, optimism, positive psychology, and comprehensive soldier fitness. He is a best-selling author with 25 books translated into more than 35 languages.

[4.37] Arvind Sharma: currently occupies the Birks Chair in Comparative Religion, at McGill University in Montreal, Canada. He was born in India, joined the Indian Administrative Service (I.A.S.) in 1962 and served in the state of Gujarat until 1968. In 1968, he moved to the United States to pursue an advanced degree at Syracuse University, where he obtained an M.A. in economics. He then earned a master in theological studies from the Harvard Divinity School. Sharma was appointed as a lecturer in Asian religions at the University of Queensland, Brisbane, in 1976, while pursuing a Ph.D. in Sanskrit and Indian studies at Harvard University, which he obtained in 1978. He moved to the University of Sydney as a lecturer in 1980 and taught there until 1987. [4.38] Ian Tattersall: Curator in the Division of Anthropology of the American Museum of Natural History in New York City. Born in England and raised in East Africa, he has carried out both primatological and paleontological fieldwork in countries as diverse as Madagascar, Vietnam, Surinam, Yemen and Mauritius. Trained in archaeology and anthropology at Cambridge, and in geology and vertebrate paleontology at Yale, Tattersall has concentrated his research since the 1960s in three main areas: the analysis of the human fossil record and its integration with evolutionary theory, the origin of human cognition, and the study of the ecology and systematics of the lemurs of Madagascar. Tattersall is also a prominent interpreter of human paleontology to the public, with several trade books to his credit, among them Human Origins: What Bones and Genomes Tell Us About Ourselves (with Rob DeSalle, 2007), The Monkey in the Mirror (2002), Extinct Humans (with Jeffrey Schwartz, 2000), Becoming Human: Evolution and Human Uniqueness (1998), The Last Neanderthal: The Rise, Success and Mysterious Extinction of Our Closest Human Relatives (1995; rev. 1999) and The Fossil Trail: How We Know What We Think We Know About Human Evolution (1995; 2nd. ed. 2009). [4.39] Neil Tennant: Humanities Distinguished Professor in Philosophy, Adjunct Professor of Cognitive Science, and Distinguished University Scholar at The Ohio State University, Columbus. He is a Fellow of the Academy of Humanities of Australia, an Overseas Fellow of Churchill College, Cambridge, and an Associate of the Center for Philosophy of Science at the University of Pittsburgh. His research interests include logic (philosophical, mathematical and computational), philosophy of mathematics, philosophy of science (especially biology) and philosophy of language. His books include Natural Logic and Autologic (both with Edinburgh University Press), Anti-Realism and Logic and The Taming of The True (both with Oxford University Press), and Philosophy, Evolution and Human Nature (Routledge and Kegan Paul, co-authored with the behavioral geneticist Florian Schilcher).

[4.40] Robert M. Townsend: Elizabeth and James Killian Professor of Economics at MIT, and Research Associate at the University of Chicago. His recent work analyzes the dynamics of enterprise and the role of financial systems in developing economies by studying applied dynamic general equilibrium models and contract theory. He is an advisor and consultant for international institutions and government agencies including the World Bank, the IMF, and IADB. [4.41] Roger Trigg: Senior Research Fellow at Kellogg College, University of Oxford, and Academic Director of its Centre for the Study of Religion in Public Life. He is Emeritus Professor of Philosophy at the University of Warwick. He is the author of numerous scholarly articles and books on philosophy, including the intersection of religion, science, and public life. His latest book is Equality, Freedom and Religion, Oxford University Press, 2011. Trigg serves as a member of the Center of Theological Inquiry at Princeton, was the founding president of the British Society for Philosophy of Religion, and is a past president of the Mind Association, Most recently (2008-10), he has been president of the European Society for Philosophy of Religion. [4.42] Ian Walmsley: Hooke Professor of Experimental Physics and Pro-Vice Chancellor for Research at the University of Oxford. He is currently Pro-Vice Chancellor for Research and University Collections at Oxford, with broad responsibilities at the institutional level for research across all academic disciplines, libraries, and museums. Walmsley's own research is in experimental quantum optics. [4.43] Merold Westphal: Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at Fordham University in New York City. He has served as president of the Hegel Society of American and of the Soren Kierkegaard Society and as executive co-director of the Society for Phenomenology and Existential Philosophy (SPEP). He is the author of History and Truth in Hegel’s Phenomenology; Hegel, Freedom and Modernity; Kierkegaard’s Critique of Reason and Society; Becoming a Self: A Reading of Kierkegaard’s Concluding Unscientific Postscript; God, Guilt, and Death: An Existential Phenomenology of Religion; Suspicion and Faith: The Religious Uses of Modern Atheism; Overcoming Onto-Theology; Transcendence and SelfTranscendence: An Essay on God and the Soul; Levinas and Kierkegaard in Dialogue; and Whose Community? Which Interpretation? Philosophical Hermeneutics for the Church. [4.44] Harvey Whitehouse: is the Chair in Social Anthropology at Oxford University and Professorial Fellow at Magdalen College. After carrying out two years of field research on a ‗cargo cult‘ in New Britain, Papua New Guinea in the late eighties, Whitehouse developed a theory of the role of ritual in group formation that has been the subject of extensive critical evaluation and testing by

anthropologists, historians, archaeologists, and cognitive scientists. His most recent major project entitled ‗Explaining Religion,' focused on the psychological causes and consequences of religious thinking and behavior. Whitehouse is also studying religion from an evolutionary perspective with co-investigator David Sloan Wilson (Binghamton University), on a project funded by the Templeton Foundation. This research combines approaches from the cognitive sciences with Darwinian perspectives on religious evolution. [4.45] Andreas Widmer: Widmer is the co-founder of S.E.VEN Fund, a philanthropic organization run by entrepreneurs who invest in original research, books, films, and websites to further enterprise solutions to poverty. He is Research Fellow in Entrepreneurship at the Acton Institute and an advisor to the Zermatt Summit, an annual business leadership event that strives to humanize globalization. He also serves as an advisor to Transforming Business, a research and development project at the University of Cambridge. And currently serves on the advisory boards of the Global Adaptation Institute, Spring Hill Equity Partners, Karisimbi Business Partners, and Catholics Come Home. Widmer and his business partner Michael Fairbanks initiated the Pioneers of Prosperity Awards, a first-of-its-kind industry program that finds and promotes the best entrepreneurs in emerging markets. Widmer works closely with top entrepreneurs, investors, and faith leaders around the world to foster enterprise solutions to poverty and promote virtuous business practices. He is on the board of directors at the New Paradigm Research Fund, Virtual Research Associates, and the World Youth Alliance, a global coalition of young people committed to promoting the dignity of the person and building solidarity among youth from developed and developing nations. He was appointed by the Center for Interfaith Action on Global Poverty as a member of the Task Force to Advance Multireligious Collaboration on Faith, Health, and Development, which presented its findings at the White House in November 2010. [4.46] David Sloan Wilson: SUNY Distinguished Professor of Biology and Anthropology at Binghamton University. He applies evolutionary theory to all aspects of humanity in addition to the rest of life, both in his own research and by directing programs designed to reform higher education and public policy formulation. He is known for championing the theory of multilevel selection, which has implications ranging from the origin of life to the nature of religion. His books include Darwin’s Cathedral: Evolution, Religion, and the Nature of Society (Chicago, 2002) and Evolution for Everyone: How Darwin’s Theory Can Change the Way We Think About Our Lives (Bantam, 2007). [4.47] David J. Wood: Senior Pastor of Glencoe Union Church, a nondenominational church in Illinois. An ordained minister in the American Baptist Churches, Wood was awarded a master of divinity degree from Gordon Conwell Theological Seminary and a master of sacred theology degree from Yale University. 23

His studies centered in theology and ethics. As associate director, Wood sought, through grant making and convening groups, to stimulate a sustained, critical, constructive, and ecumenical conversation about the practice of pastoral leadership in a changing church in a changing culture. Since 2008, Wood has helped to design and run two major programs in the John Templeton Foundation science for ministry initiative: Science for Ministry and Scientists in Congregations. [5]

Templeton Foundation’s Signature Program: Templeton Prize:

[5.1] The John Templeton Foundation fund the Templeton Prize, as one of its ‗signature programs‘11, described as follows: The Templeton Prize honors a living person who has made an exceptional contribution to affirming life's spiritual dimension, whether through insight, discovery, or practical works. Established in 1972 by the late Sir John Templeton, the Prize aims, in his words, to identify "entrepreneurs of the spirit"—outstanding individuals who have devoted their talents to expanding our vision of human purpose and ultimate reality. The Prize celebrates no particular faith tradition or notion of God, but rather the quest for progress in humanity's efforts to comprehend the many and diverse manifestations of the Divine. Criteria The qualities sought in a Templeton Prize nominee include creativity and innovation, rigor and impact. The judges seek, above all, a substantial record of achievement that highlights or exemplifies one of the various ways in which human beings express their yearning for spiritual progress. Consideration is given to a nominee's work as a whole, not just during the year prior to selection. Nominations are especially encouraged in the fields of: 

Research in the human sciences, life sciences, and physical sciences.



Scholarship in philosophy, theology, and other areas of the humanities.



Practice, including religious leadership, the creation of organizations that edify and inspire, and the development of new schools of thought.



Commentary and journalism on matters of religion, virtue, character formation, and the flourishing of the human spirit.

These fields do not exhaust the areas in which achievement might qualify for the Templeton Prize, nor is it necessary for a nominee's work to be confined to just one field. 11

http://www.templeton.org/signature-programs/templeton-prize

Award The Prize is a monetary award in the amount of £1,100,000 sterling.

[6]

Critics of the Templeton Prize:

[6.1] British biologist Richard Dawkins said in his book The God Delusion that the prize was given "usually to a scientist who is prepared to say something nice about religion".12 According to The Nation: God, Science and Philanthropy13: ―He and others among the so-called New Atheists have been the foundation's most strident critics lately; they believe Templeton is corrupting science by trying to inject it with religious dogma and, in turn, misrepresent science to the public. The advance of science steamrolls over religion, they say, and Templeton is deluding people into thinking otherwise.‖ [6.2] Sean M. Carroll, a research associate in the Department of Physics at the California Institute of Technology, criticized his colleagues for taking Templeton research grants when they did not support Templeton's beliefs.14 According to Carroll, ―the entire purpose of the Templeton Foundation is to blur the line between straightforward science and explicitly religious activity, making it seem like the two enterprises are part of one big undertaking.‖15 [6.3] Martinus J. G. Veltman, the 1999 Nobel laureate in physics, suggested the prize "bridg[ed] the gap between sense and nonsense".16 [6.4] Sunny Bains: Commentary: Questioning the integrity of the John Templeton Foundation. Evolutionary Psychology17. The Nation: ―Project Reason hired British science journalist Sunny Bains to investigate Templeton and build a case against it. Her unpublished findings include evidence of pervasive cronyism: more than half of the past dozen Templeton Prize winners were connected to the foundation before their win, and board members do well obtaining grant money and speaking gigs. Bains also argues that the true atheistic tendencies of leading scientists were misrepresented in the foundation's Big Questions advertisements. Templeton's mission, Bains concludes, is to promote religion, and its overtures to science are an insidious trick with the purpose of sneaking in God.‖18

Jeffries, Stuart (December 8, 2007). "Is that all there is?". The Guardian. http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2007/dec/08/society1 13 http://www.thenation.com/article/god-science-and-philanthropy# 14 "The Devout Donor". Business Week. November 28, 2005. Retrieved July 2, 2009. http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_48/b3961604.htm 15 http://www.skepdic.com/essays/templeton.html 16 Veltman, Martinus. Facts and mysteries in elementary particle physics. World Scientific Publishing Company. p. 286. ISBN 981-238-149-X. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/981-238-149-X 17 Bains, S. 2011. Commentary: Questioning the integrity of the John Templeton Foundation. Evolutionary Psychology 9:92-115. http://www.epjournal.net/wp-content/uploads/EP09921152.pdf 18 http://www.thenation.com/article/god-science-and-philanthropy?page=0,1 12

[6.5] Jerry Coyne, University of Chicago: Professor in the Department of Ecology and Evolution, wrote that Templeton ―plies its enormous wealth with a single aim: to give credibility to religion by blurring its well-demarcated border with science.‖19 [6.6] According to Robert T Carroll, editor of the Skeptic's Dictionary: ―Of course, no one who cares about science and freedom of inquiry should complain about other people spending their own money to study religions in a scientific way. But Oxford seems bent on using the money to prove certain things about religion and to validate the value of religion, which seem to be the very same goals of the Templeton Foundation. Most of the scholars who will apply for these grants probably believe religion is good, natural, and true, so using the money to investigate these issues may seem proper to them. But what kind of science is it whose goal is to confirm a bias? .. [..].. Those who argue that our only hope for peace on earth is to become purely secular will never win the Templeton prize. To win the Templeton Prize, one must be selective and focus on those aspects of ―spirituality‖ that don‘t involve bigotry, hatred, ignorance, or superstition. If you ignore many religions, many religious beliefs, and many religious practices, you can come up with a fine set of ideas showing how spirituality must move back to the center from the periphery if we wish to live free in a new golden age. I look at it a little differently than Charles Taylor does. In my opinion, secularism is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for peace on earth and for understanding the things of this universe. Religion, on the other hand, is a sufficient but not a necessary condition for continued misery and obfuscation of even the simplest truths.‖20 [6.7] John Horgan writes in The Templeton Foundation: A Skeptics Take21: ―I rationalized that taking the foundation's money did not mean that it had bought me, as long as I remained true to my views. Yes, I used the same justification as a congressman accepting a golf junket from the lobbyist Jack Abramoff. But I'd already written freelance pieces for two Templeton publications, so declining this more-lucrative gig seemed silly. In for a dime, in for a dollar.‖ [6.8] Nobel Prize–winning chemist Harry Kroto says: ―They are involved in an exercise that endangers the fundamental credibility of the scientific community.‖22 [6.9] In God, Science and Philanthropy23, The Nation report that ―There is another glaring omission in Templeton's funding record: the foundation has yet to break ground on one of the six principal causes that John Templeton stipulated— education about voluntary family planning. Gary Rosen explains that this program "is still in development" though it has been in the charter for more than a decade. It http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/?s=templeton&searchsubmit=Find+%C2%BB http://www.skepdic.com/essays/templeton.html 21 http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/horgan06/horgan06_index.html 22 http://www.thenation.com/article/god-science-and-philanthropy?page=0,1 23 http://www.thenation.com/article/god-science-and-philanthropy?page=0,4# 19 20

is also an area where the foundation's mission could come into tension with its political and religious allies.â&#x20AC;&#x2013; [7]

2013 Templeton Prize Judges: [7.1]

Templeton Prize describes24 the 2013 Judges as follows:

[7.2] H.R.H. Princess Areej Ghazi: is the Founder, Director and Curriculum Designer for The School of Life in Amman, Jordan. She serves as the Senior Advisor for Educational Affairs at The Royal Aal-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought and is the Head of the Curriculum Committee for Social Studies National Curriculum at the Jordanian Ministry of Education. [7.3] Stephen Barr: is a professor in the department of physics and astronomy at the University of Delaware, and a member of its Bartol Research Institute, with primary research in theoretical particle physics and cosmology. [7.4] Prof. Russell Cowburn FRS: is the Director of Research of the Thin Film Magnetism group in the Department of Physics at Cambridge University. [7.5] Gurcharan Das: is an author, columnist and management consultant, and the former CEO of Procter & Gamble India. [7.6] Matthieu Ricard: is a Buddhist monk, author and photographer. He is the Founding director of Karuna-Shechen, a charitable non-profit association. [7.7] Vladimir Shmaliy: is an associate professor of theology and vice rector for academic affairs at the Moscow Theological Academy and also holds a master's degree in applied physics from the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology. [7.8] Esther Sternberg: is Director of Research at the Arizona Center for Integrative Medicine at the University of Arizona at Tucson, AZ and is Research Professor at American University (Washington, DC). [7.9] Faraneh Vargha-Khadem: is Professor of Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience at University College London Institute of Child Health and Director of the UCL Centre for Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience. [7.10] Miroslav Volf: is the Director of the Yale Center for Faith & Culture and Henry B. Wright Professor of Theology at Yale University Divinity School. [8]

Professor Steven D. Gish: Desmond Tutuâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Biographer: [8.1]

24 25

Auburn University describes25 Prof Gish as follows:

http://www.templetonprize.org/judges.html http://www.aum.edu/profile?email=sgish@aum.edu

Originally from Iowa, Dr. Steven Gish joined the Department of History in 1997. He specializes in African history and conducts research on modern South African history. Among his publications are Cultures of the World - Ethiopia (Marshall Cavendish, 1996) and Alfred B. Xuma: African, American, South African (New York University Press and Macmillan, 2000). Most recently, he has published Desmond Tutu: A Biography (Greenwood Press, 2004).

[9]

Nomination of Desmond Tutu by Steven D. Gish:

[9.1] According to the Templeton Foundation26, the person who nominated Archbishop Desmond Tutu, was Steven D. Gish, Professor of History at Auburn University in Montgomery, Alabama. "To borrow Sir John Templeton's words, Archbishop Desmond Tutu is a true 'entrepreneur of the spirit,' said Steven D. Gish, Professor of History at Auburn University in Montgomery, Alabama, in his letter of recommendation to the prize judges. "With his unfailing faith in 'God's dream,' he embodies the best instincts of us all."

[9.2] The Templeton Foundation do not reveal that Dr. Gish is also Archbishop Tutu‘s biographer. [9.3] The only article I could find which mentions that Gish is both Tutu biographer, as well as his nominator for the Templeton Prize, was from a newspaper in Alabama: Auburn University prof's nomination hands Bishop Desmond Tutu the Templeton Prize27: ―HUNTSVILLE, Alabama – Auburn University Professor Steven Gish, who has written a biography of Bishop Desmond Tutu, successfully nominated Tutu for the $1.7 million Templeton Prize.‖ [10]

TRC Fraud Correspondence to Templeton:

[10.1] 04 April 2013, I submitted to Archbishop Desmond Tutu, copied to Templeton Prize admin and Judges: Questions to Archbishop Tutu; or if unanswered by Tutu and Prize Upheld by Templeton Prize Judges; (ii) Congratulations on Receipt of the Multinational Corporate Resource and Cultural Imperialists Templeton Prize for excellence in House Nigger subservience to getting rid of Boer Anti-Imperialists, and making SA safe for ‘Compulsive Developmentism’ Imperialists (i) cultural colonization of indigenous cultures, and (ii) resource plundering. Questions to Archbishop Desmond Tutu: 1. Please clarify in writing whether you believe the Templeton Judges are aware of the following Radical Honoursty TRC

26 27

http://www.templetonprize.org/currentwinner.html http://www.al.com/living/index.ssf/2013/04/desmond_tutu_templeton.html

Fraud Fact Censored Apartheid Movement?

Mandela,

Tutu,

ANC

and

Anti-

2. If the Templeton Judges are not aware of the following Radical Honoursty TRC Fraud Fact Censored by Mandela, Tutu, ANC and Anti-Apartheid Movement, why are they ignorant of them? 3. If you (a) continue your policy of endorsing the censorship of the Radical Honoursty TRC Fraud Fact Censored by Mandela, Tutu, ANC and Anti-Apartheid Movement, by refusing to transparently inform the Templeton Judges why you endorse the Anti-Apartheid movement and Constitutional Courts censorship of Radical Honoursty culture allegations of TRC Fraud; and (b) the Templeton Judges endorse your lack of honour and actions of censorship of your involvement in TRC Fraud; we could fairly conclude that (c) You have been awarded the Multinational Corporate Resource and Cultural Imperialists Templeton Prize for excellence in House Nigger subservience to getting rid of Boer AntiImperialists, and making SA safe for ‘Compulsive Developmentism’ Imperialists (i) cultural colonization of indigenous cultures, and (ii) resource plundering? Radical Honoursty TRC Fraud Fact Censored by Mandela, Tutu, ANC and Anti-Apartheid Movement: Corrupt Censorship by SA Constitutional Court of Radical Honoursty culture’s Application for Review of South Africa’s TRC Fraud: Mandela, Tutu, the ANC & Anti-Apartheid movement have censored and silenced the only South African who – for the past 12 years – has exposed South Africa’s Anthropocentric and Ideologically biased TRC Fraud, and advocated on behalf of a brutally honest sincere and ecologically and scientifically credible Truth and Reconciliation Commission, focussed on exposing the underlying psychological, cultural, racial, Compulsive Development and Scarcity induced factors contributing to Apartheid’s Political violence.

[10.2] 05 April 2013, I submitted to Archbishop Tutu and Templeton Prize Judges: President Zuma urges Archbishop Tutu to continue ANC, AntiApartheid Movements Censorship of their TRC Fraud.; Tutu’s Ultimate Spiritual Test. The Ultimate Opportunity to Test your House Nigga Commitment to Jesus vs. Pharisee Values of ‘Love and Forgiveness’.  Should you stand for Truth, Transparency based root cause problem solving?

and

scientific

 Should you find yourself a spiritual backbone to examine the evidence for South Africa’s Anthropocentric and Ideologically biased TRC Fraud?  Should you advocate on behalf of a brutally honest sincere and ecologically and scientifically credible Truth and Reconciliation Commission, focussed on exposing the underlying psychological, cultural, racial, Compulsive Development and Scarcity induced factors contributing to Apartheid’s Political violence? Only if your Spiritual convictions are an unswerving commitment to unbiased and unequivocal truth, 100 % transparency with fuck all concern about whose skeletons are being exposed, and scientific based root cause problem solving!

[10.3] On 11 April 2013, I submitted to Prof. Steven Gish, Archbishop Tutu and Templeton Prize Judges: Radical Honoursty Culture and TYGAE Request for Withdrawal of your Nomination of Desmond Tutu as Recipient of Templeton Prize, due to your (a) biographer conflict of interest, and (b) failure to provide the evidence of Archbishop Tutu’s involvement in the cover-up and censorship of South Africa’s TRC Fraud. [10.4] On 21 April 2013, I submitted to Templeton Foundation, Templeton Judges, Templeton Trustees, Templeton Board of Advisors, and living former Templeton Laureates: Spiritual Test for Templeton Foundation: Confront ‘Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality’ endorsement of (a) fraud, corruption and discrimination of 2013 Templeton Prize; (b) discrimination against non-patriarchal Ecocentric Primitivist spirituality. It included an Enclosure: Summary: Ecocentric Gender Balanced Primitivist Principles. Spiritual Test for Templeton Foundation: If the Templeton Prize considers honesty a spiritual concept, should it not rename the Templeton Prize to the ‘Templeton Prize for Taker – Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric – Spirituality’, considering that (a) All of the recipients for the Templeton Prize, for the past 40 years have been to individuals who are members of, or whose scientific / spirituality endorses, Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Religions; (b) Templeton Prize’s endorsement of Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Tutu’s TRC Fraud and discrimination against Ecocentric, non-Patriarchal, Primitivist Leaver cultures; clearly shows Templeton’s endorsement of Gender and Ideological Discrimination against Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spirituality? Notification and Confirmation of Templeton Foundation Trustees and Board of Advisors Endorsement of Fraud, Corruption and Discrimination by (a) Templeton Foundation President and Chairman: Dr. John M Templeton Jnr, (b) Nominator of

Archbishop Desmond Tutu for Templeton Prize: Archbishop Tutu’s biographer: Steven Gish; (c) 2013 Templeton Prize Recipient: Archbishop Desmond Tutu, and (d) Templeton Foundation Prize Judges: H.R.H. Princess Areej Ghazi, Stephen Barr, Prof. Russell Cowburn FRS, Gurcharan Das, Matthieu Ricard, Vladimir Shmaliy, Esther Sternberg, Faraneh Vargha-Khadem, Miroslav Volf. The nomination of the 2013 Templeton Prize was corrupt and fraudulent: Archbishop Desmond Tutu was nominated for the prize by his own biographer, who censored information from the Judges about Tutu’s involvement in, and endorsement of, South Africa’s TRC Fraud, and discrimination against non-patriarchal Ecocentric Primitivist cultures. Tutu’s biographer refused to withdraw the nomination. Templeton Prize Judges also refused to withdraw the award, endorsing Tutu’s TRC Fraud and discrimination against Ecocentric, non-Patriarchal, Primitivist Leaver cultures. Relief Requested: • Amend the ‘Templeton Prize’ to the ‘Templeton Prize for Taker – Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric – Spirituality’; to accurately reflect the Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric forms of spirituality Templeton endorses. • Withdraw the 2013 Templeton Prize from Archbishop Desmond Tutu for his (i) conflict of interest nomination, and (ii) involvement in, and endorsement of, South Africa’s TRC Fraud, and discrimination against non-patriarchal Ecocentric Primitivist cultures.

Dated at George, South Africa: 27 April 2013

Lara Johnstone, Complainant Encl: Affidavit of Lara Johnstone in support of Complaint to FBI: Pennsylvania: Special Agent in Charge: Edward Hanko and National Fraud Intelligence Bureau, City of London Police: Charges of Fraud, Corruption and Discrimination against (a) Templeton Foundation President & Chairman: Dr. John M Templeton Jnr & VP‘s, (b) 2013 Nominator: Archbishop Tutu‘s biographer: Steven Gish; (c) 2013 Templeton Prize Winner: Archbishop Desmond Tutu, and (d) Templeton Prize Judges, Templeton Trustees and Templeton Board of Advisors.

Affidavit in support of Complaint to FBI: Pennsylvania: Special Agent in Charge: Edward Hanko and National Fraud Intelligence Bureau, City of London Police: Charges of Fraud, Corruption and Discrimination against (a) Templeton Foundation President & Chairman: Dr. John M Templeton Jnr & VP’s, (b) 2013 Nominator: Archbishop Tutu’s biographer: Steven Gish; (c) 2013 Templeton Prize Winner: Archbishop Desmond Tutu, and (d) Templeton Prize Judges, Templeton Trustees and Templeton Board of Advisors. Declaration of Lara Johnstone I, Lara Johnstone, declare as follows: [1] I am an adult Radical Honoursty Ecofeminist Guerrylla Law Sustainable Security practicing paralegal EcoFeminist, member of Friend of Wikileaks (FoWL) and the Radical Honourty culture1; resident in George, Southern Cape, South Africa; where I run a small EcoFeminist pedal-powered wormery business.

TRC Fraud Correspondence to Tutu, SA Goverment: [2]

Request for evidence to SA & International Anti-Apartheid Org’s:

[2.1] In April 2011, I submitted requests for information to dozens of South African and International Anti-Apartheid Organisations: Request for Information: Prior, or subsequent to, the ANC’s M-Plan declaration of War against Apartheid: Did any EU Anti-Apartheid Organisation advise the ANC or any SA Anti-Apartheid Organisation to avoid/suspend the violent ‘liberation struggle ’campaign against the Apartheid Goverment, and to launch a non-violent cultural and political campaign to stop the African ‘swart gevaar’ breeding-war population explosion, to demonstrate the ANC’s honourable Just War Just Cause Intentions?. (PDF2) [2.2] The evidence – to me as a Primitivist, observing two Anthropocentric Patriarchal armies waging war against each other, Leavers and nature – appeared to be that the TRC was a fraud, because it did not enquire into evidence to determine whether the ANC (a) had just cause war to declare war on Apartheid, (b) declared war on Apartheid as a last resort, (c) the ANC‟s war against apartheid was not declared by proper authority; (d) whether the ANC possessed right intention, (e) whether the ANC had – honourably – a reasonable chance of success, (f) whether the ANC used proportional force; and (g) Post Bellum: whether the ANC has kept or repeatedly reneged upon its promises of Amnesty destroying all trust in future political agreements. SA Constitutional Court ruling of 03 May 2012 in CCT 23-10, reads as follows: “Ms. Lara Johnstone, Member of Radical Honesty Culture and Religion, is admitted as an amicus curiae” 2 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/110509_aap-za_trc-fraud-icc?mode=window&viewMode=singlePage 1

PO Box 5042 * George East, 6539 * Tel: (044) 870 7239 * Cel: (071) 170 1954

[2.3] One particular issue the TRC failed to make an impartial enquiry into were the population policy motives and causes for Afrikaners implementing the political policy of Apartheid as an act of Just War Self Defense against African cultures population explosion breeding war. [2.4] In fact when it comes to population policy issues, the TRC made no effort whatsoever to enquire into any population policy related matters, as causal political, economic or psychological factors for Apartheids political violence; even though it is common knowledge that countries with large populations of idle young men, known as youth bulges3, account for 70 – 90 % of all civil conflicts.4 [2.5]

The TRC Fraud specific questions were:

Prior to the ANC‟s M-Plan declaration of War against Apartheid: Did any EU Anti-Apartheid Organisation advise the ANC or any SA AntiApartheid Organisation to avoid/suspend the violent „liberation struggle ‟campaign against the Apartheid Goverment, and to launch a non-violent cultural and political campaign to stop the African „swart gevaar‟ breedingwar population explosion, to demonstrate the ANC‟s honourable Just War Just Cause Intentions?

If (a) it was abundantly clear that the major fundamental motive for establishing Apartheid was fear of the „swart gevaar‟; (2) Apartheid Officials and citizens „swart gevaar‟ population policy fears are not only legally and ecologically justifiable, but common sense; (3) the ANC and Anti-Apartheid movement were culturally honourably concerned with Just War practices; (4) why did the ANC not consider launching a non-violent cultural and political campaign to stop their African „swart gevaar‟ breeding-war population explosion, to demonstrate their honourable Just War Just Cause Intentions to „swart gevaar‟ Apartheid Officials and citizens?

What role did population growth factors play in South Africa‟s Apartheid violence? If understanding demographic roots is a prerequisite for understanding their subsequent symptomatic political violence, and hence preventing their future re-occurrence, why was this not a priority for the TRC to enquire into in its enquiry to determine “as complete a picture as possible of the nature, causes” of Apartheid political violence??

What role did the ANC play in contributing to the Population Explosion of Cannon Fodder and Resource War Violence? Why did the TRC not require

YouthQuake: Population, fertility and environment in the 21st Century, by John Guillebaud, Optimum Population Trust, 2007 4 The Shape of Things to Come: Why Age Structure Matters to a Safer More Equitable World; by E. Leahy with R. Engelman, C. Gibb Vogel, S. Haddock and T.Preston, Population Action International 3

the ANC to take responsibility for their population production of poverty stricken cannon fodder? E.

[3]

What objections and protests, if any, have former Anti-Apartheid Organisations organized in the European Union to object to the ANC‟s Zimbabwefication of South Africa; Deaths in Police custody increase 25,725% under ANC5. Why do the Anti-Apartheid movement hold white governments in Africa to different standards than black governments?

South African Constitutional Court (CCT#23-10):

[3.1] Radical Honesty SA TRC Fraud allegations filed with SA Constitutional Court, supported by expert witness affidavit and statements from Dr. Brad Blanton, founder of the Radical Honesty culture, and Dr. Michael Maher: A.

Application to Chief Justice to proceed as In Forma Pauperis Amicus Curiae, by Lara Johnstone, Member of the Radical Honesty culture and religion (PDF6)

03 May 2010: Concourt Directions dated 03 May 2010: “Ms. Lara Johnstone, Member of Radical Honesty Culture and Religion, is admitted as an Amicus Curiae.” (PDF7)

18 July 2010: Heads of Argument: Radical Honesty SA Amicus Curiae in Support of a Population Policy Common Sense Interpretation of the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act (PDF8)

Written Statement by Consent of Brad Blanton, Ph.D, to testify as expert witness to: Practicing Radical Honesty and Futilitarianism; i.e. Radical Honesty about Anger and Forgiveness; and Paradigms and Contexts: The Revolution of Consciousness (PDF9); and Affidavit of Brad Blanton, Ph.D, evidencing the legal, psychological, and socio-political „citizens privilege‟, Nuremberg Principles skills and competencies of Individual Responsibility, required for acts of civil disobedience to perceived illegitimate authority; and their application to the common law „reasonableness test‟; in terms of Criminal Procedure Act 51, of 1977: § 213: Proof of Written Statement by Consent; & § 171 & 172: Evidence on Commission (PDF10)].

Written Statement of Consent by T. Michael Maher, Ph.D, to testify as expert witness for How and Why Journalists Avoid the Population-

http://www.jussanguinis.com/BP/C_RI-TRC-Fraud.htm http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/100326_rhapplic2concourt-amicus?mode=a_p 7 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/100718_rhwr-concourt-amicus?mode=a_p 8 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/100718_rhwr-concourt-amicus?mode=a_p 9 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/100518_cc2310_affid-bblanton?mode=a_p 10 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/091202_affid-bblanton-reasonablenesstest?mode=a_p 5 6

Environment Connection and Media Framing and Salience of the Population Issue (PDF11) and Study: How and Why Journalists Avoid the Population-Environment Connection (PDF12) F.

[4]

Less than 48 hours after being honourably served with the documentation for Tutu and TRC Officials response; Archbishop Tutu abruptly announced his retirement: Archbishop Tutu Announces Retirement After TRC Fraud Allegations13.

International Criminal Court:

[4.1] Communication and Complaint (PDF14) under Art.15 of the Rome Statute: Charges of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity, in terms of Art 5(1)(a) & (b), 6(c) and 7(1)(h) of the Rome Statute, against Archbishop Tutu, Nelson Mandela, FW de Klerk, et al. [4.2]

The Complainants Request the ICC: Prosecutor‟s Office to:

Initiate an investigation into the allegations that the respondents are to be held criminally culpable for their endorsement and concealment of TRC FRAUD, the consequences of which are genocide and crimes against humanity against white South Africans, and ethno-cultural legal and political persecution of Afrikaner/Boer and Radical Honesty cultures. Complainants allege the Defendants cover up and censorship of the ANC and Anti-Apartheid Movements (i) Frantz Fanon/Black Consciousness („liberation by violence on the rotting corpse of the settlers‟) (ii) Black Liberation Theology („violent elimination of „whiteness‟); and (iii) Houari Boumediene/Black Power Breeding War (“The wombs of our women will give us victory”)15 inspired TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION FRAUD (“TRC FRAUD”) perpetrated against citizens of South Africa, and predominantly against white Afrikaner/Boer/Settlers; is committed in the context of endorsing the ANC‟s institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by Africans over other racial groups, particularly Boer/Afrikaners and committed with the intention of maintaining the ANC regime.

[5]

South African Constitutional Court:

http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/100522_cct2310_affid-dr-t-m-maher?mode=a_p http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/mahertm_journo-env-pop-connection?mode=a_p 13 beforeitsnews.com/story/112/406/Archbishop_Tutu_announces_retirement_after_TRC_fraud_allegations.html 14 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/110406_aap-notice?mode=window&viewMode=singlePage 15 “One day, millions of men will leave the Southern Hemisphere to go to the Northern Hemisphere. And they will not go there as friends. Because they will go there to conquer it. And they will conquer it with their sons. The wombs of our women will give us victory.” -- Houari Boumediene, President of Algeria, at the United Nations, 1974 (Boumediene was an ardent supporter of the ANC and SWAPO) 11 12

[5.1] Johnstone v. Afriforum et al16 Review of Afriforum v. Malema et al: Equality Court (07-2010 EQ JHB) & Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA 815/11) and TRC Fraud: [5.2] 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. [5.3] 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.

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.

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‟17, and the TRC‟s “failure to investigate demographic youth

http://sqswans.weebly.com/cct-alien-v-afriforum.html

bulge18 and „population production‟ breeding war19 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.” C.

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.

Alternatively, to order all South African’s to prepare for SA’s Race War in the impending Peak NNR Crisis of Conflict: If South Africa‟s TRC Fraud Fragile Egos are more important than confronting the „Scarcity as Cause of Violent Conflict‟ factor; all South African‟s should prepare themselves for the impending Race and Class War Consequences of the Peak NNR Crisis of Conflict.

[5.4] From 29 November 2012, to present, the Concourt Registrar have refused to issue my application a case number, or process it. [5.5] On 11 December 2012, I filed two complaints with the CRL Rights Commission (Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities) against the SA Constitutional Court Registrar (PDF20) and a dozen media Editors (PDF21) in that they discriminate against the – Tourette Syndrome like – Radical Honesty culture22. their resentments and appreciations, until all suppressed sensate anger is released. Radical Honesty forgiveness occurs when two former enemies sit across from each other, and have verbally liberated their pent up sensate anger and rage, the body is in a state of released sensate tension, similar to the emotions released in a sexual orgasm, irrespective of however long it takes. Reconciliation occurs when the fragile ego mind is no longer colonized by the suppressed anger in the body. 18 Demographics & Violence: Youth Bulges: Numerous reports provide details how population age structures have significant impacts on a countries stability, governance, economic development and social well-being. Put differently, countries with large populations of idle young men, known as youth bulges, account for 70 – 90 percent of all civil conflicts. Additionally a wealth of historical studies indicates that cycles of rebellion and military campaigns in the early modern and modern world tended to coincide with periods when young adults comprised an unusually large proportion of the population. Youth Bulge Reports: (1) The Shape of Things to Come: Why Age Structure Matters to a Safer More Equitable World, by Population Action International; (2) YouthQuake: Population, fertility and environment in the 21st Century, by Optimum Population Trust. 19 “We must all understand that the most potent weapons of war are the penis and the womb. Therefore, if you cannot convince a group to control its population by discussion, debate, intelligent analysis etc., you must consider their action in using the penis and the womb to increase population an act of war.” - Former Municipal Court Judge Jason G. Brent 20 http://sqswans.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/12-12-11_crlrightscomm_complaint_concourt_registrar.pdf 21 http://sqswans.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/12-12-11_crlrightscomm_complaint_sapa_-_sa_media_encla.pdf 22 SA Media, Concourt & Lawyers Discriminate Against – Tourette Syndrome like -- Radical Honesty Culture http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-894174

[5.6] On 28 February 2013, complaints were also submitted to: SA Gender Commission (PDF23); SA Human Rights Council (PDF24) [WC/1213/0873]; Public Protector (PDF25) [7/2-003999/13]: Complaints of AnthroCorpocentric Patriarchal Dominant culture/s Cultural and Gender discrimination, by: (1) SA Concourt Registrar & Director; (2) SAPA & SA Media Editors; (3) CRL Rights Commission: Chair, against Ecocentric Gender Balanced Radical Honoursty culture.

TRC Fraud Correspondence to Templeton & Tutu: [6] 04 April 2013, I submitted to Archbishop Desmond Tutu, copied to Templeton Prize admin and Judges: Questions to Archbishop Tutu; or if unanswered by Tutu and Prize Upheld by Templeton Prize Judges; (ii) Congratulations on Receipt of the Multinational Corporate Resource and Cultural Imperialists Templeton Prize for excellence in House Nigger subservience to getting rid of Boer Anti-Imperialists, and making SA safe for ‘Compulsive Developmentism’ Imperialists (i) cultural colonization of indigenous cultures, and (ii) resource plundering. (Annex A) From: Lara Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2013 1:21 PM To: 'info@tutu.org'; 'vivian@tutu.org.za'; 'Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Ctr: Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad of Jordan'; 'Univ Delaware: Stephen Barr'; 'Univ of Cambridge: Prof. Russell Cowburn FRS'; 'jk525@cam.ac.uk'; 'Karuna Shechen: Matthieu Ricard'; 'AZ Ctr Integrative Medicine: Esther Sternberg'; 'University College London: Faraneh Vargha-Khadem'; 'Yale Divinity School: Miroslav Volf' Cc: 'info@templetonprize.org' Subject: Q's for Desmond Tutu & Templeton Prize Judges: RE: Tutu's & SA's Censorship of TRC Fraud

[7] 05 April 2013, I submitted to Tutu and Templeton Prize Judges: President Zuma urges Archbishop Tutu to continue ANC, Anti-Apartheid Movements Censorship of their TRC Fraud.; Tutu’s Ultimate Spiritual Test. (Annex B) Sent: Friday, April 05, 2013 11:22 AM To: 'info@tutu.org'; 'vivian@tutu.org.za'; 'Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Ctr: Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad of Jordan'; 'Univ Delaware: Stephen Barr'; 'Univ of Cambridge: Prof. Russell Cowburn FRS'; 'jk525@cam.ac.uk'; 'Karuna Shechen: Matthieu Ricard'; 'AZ Ctr Integrative Medicine: Esther Sternberg'; 'University College London: Faraneh Vargha-Khadem'; 'Yale Divinity School: Miroslav Volf' Cc: 'info@templetonprize.org'; 'Clio Mallin' Subject: Tutu/Templeton: Zuma Urges Tutu's Continued TRC Fraud Censorship; Tutu's Ultimate Spiritual Test

[8] On 11 April 2013, I submitted to Prof. Steven Gish, Archbishop Tutu and Templeton Prize Judges: Radical Honoursty Culture and TYGAE Request for Withdrawal of your Nomination of Desmond Tutu as Recipient of

http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/130228_gcomm?mode=window&viewMode=singlePage http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/130228_sahrc_discrimination_encl_aa-ii?mode=window&viewMode=singlePage 25 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/130228_pprotector?mode=window&viewMode=singlePage 23 24

Templeton Prize, due to your (a) biographer conflict of interest, and (b) failure to provide the evidence of Archbishop Tutu’s involvement in the cover-up and censorship of South Africa’s TRC Fraud. (Annex C) Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 1:37 AM To: 'Prof Steven Gish'; 'AUM Provost: Joe King' Cc: 'Templeton Prize Judges'; 'Templeton: Donald Lehr'; 'Tutu Peace Center'; 'Tutu Peace Center'; 'Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Ctr: Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad of Jordan'; 'Univ Delaware: Stephen Barr'; 'Univ of Cambridge: Prof. Russell Cowburn FRS'; 'jk525@cam.ac.uk'; 'Karuna Shechen: Matthieu Ricard'; 'AZ Ctr Integrative Medicine: Esther Sternberg'; 'University College London: Faraneh Vargha-Khadem'; 'Yale Divinity School: Miroslav Volf' Subject: AUM Prof Steven Gish: Request withdrawal of Tutu nomination for Templeton Prize

[9] On 21 April 2013, I submitted to Templeton Foundation, Templeton Judges, Templeton Trustees, Templeton Board of Advisors, and living former Templeton Laurettes: Spiritual Test for Templeton Foundation: Confront ‘Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality’ endorsement of (a) fraud, corruption and discrimination of 2013 Templeton Prize; (b) discrimination against non-patriarchal Ecocentric Primitivist spirituality. It included an Enclosure: Summary: Ecocentric Gender Balanced Primitivist Principles. (Annex D) Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2013 11:23 PM To: 'Templeton Prize Judges'; 'Templeton: Donald Lehr' Cc: 'Tutu Peace Center'; 'Tutu Peace Center'; 'AUM Provost: Joe King'; 'AUM: Steven Gish' Subject: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:15 AM To: TJ: Princess Areej Ghazi: Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Ctr: Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad of Jordan (opinion@rissc.jo); TJ: Princess Areej Ghazi: School of Life (admin@theschooloflife.edu.jo) Subject: H.R.H. Princess Areej Ghazi: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:19 AM To: TJ: Univ Delaware: Stephen Barr (smbarr@bartol.udel.edu) Subject: Stephen Barr: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:21 AM To: TJ: Univ of Cambridge: Prof. Russell Cowburn FRS (rpc12@cam.ac.uk); TJ: Univ of Cambridge: Prof. Russell Cowburn FRS (jk525@cam.ac.uk) Subject: Prof. Russell Cowburn FRS: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:22 AM To: TJ: Gurcharan Das: Agent (bindu.krishna@9dot9.in); TJ: Gurcharan Das: Agent (bindu@londonspeakerbureau.in); TJ: Gurcharan Das: Agent Andrew Vine (andrewvine@insightbureau.com) Subject: Gurcharan Das: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality

Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:23 AM To: TJ: Matthiu Ricard (monastery.nepal@shechen.org); TJ: Karuna Shechen: Matthieu Ricard (asia@karuna-shechen.org) Subject: Matthieu Ricard: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:46 AM To: TJ: University College London: Faraneh Vargha-Khadem (f.vargha-khadem@ucl.ac.uk) Subject: Faraneh Vargha-Khadem: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:46 AM To: TJ: AZ Ctr Integrative Medicine: Esther Sternberg (imclinic@list.arizona.edu) Subject: Esther Sternberg: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:47 AM To: TJ: Yale Divinity School: Miroslav Volf (miroslav.volf@yale.edu) Subject: Miroslav Volf: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:49 AM To: TT: St. Edmunds: Dr Denis Alexander (dra24@hermes.cam.ac.uk) Subject: Denis R. Alexander: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:53 AM To: TT: St Edmunds: Prof Nidhal Guessoum (nguessoum@aus.edu) Subject: Nidhal Guessoum: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:55 AM To: TT: StonyBrook: Stephen G. Post (stephen.post@stonybrook.edu) Subject: Stephen G. Post: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:57 AM To: TT: Westmont: Jeffrey Schloss (schloss@westmont.edu) Subject: Jeffrey P. Schloss: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:00 AM To: TT: Harvard: John W. Schott (hlprp@bidmc.harvard.edu) Subject: John W. Schott: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:01 AM To: TT: Green Cay: Jane Siebels (info@greencay.com.bs) Subject: Jane M. Siebels: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:02 AM To: TT: WY Financial: Gail Zimmerman (personal@wyomingfinancialinsurance.com) Subject: Gail Zimmerman (WERCS): Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality

Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:08 AM To: TP: Baba Amte: Anandwan Comm: Office (anandwan@gmail.com) Subject: Baba Amte: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:10 AM To: 'TP: Billy Graham' (info@bgea.org.au) Subject: Billy Graham: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:10 AM To: 'TP: BerkU: Charles H Townes' (cht@ssl.berkeley.edu) Subject: Charles Townes: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:11 AM To: 'TP: Charles Taylor: ProjSynd: Ed: Whitney Arana' (whitney@prosyn.org); 'TP: Charles Taylor: CEO: Nicolas Chatara-Morse'; 'TP: Charles Taylor: ProjMng: Damen Dowse' Subject: Charles Taylor: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:13 AM To: 'TP: Freeman Dyson' (dyson@ias.edu) Subject: Freeman Dyson: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 2:07 AM To: 'TP: Holmes Rolston III' (rolston@lamar.colostate.edu) Subject: Holmes Rolston III: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:17 AM To: 'TP: UCambridge: John Barrow' (J.D.Barrow@damtp.cam.ac.uk) Subject: John Barrow: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 2:07 AM To: TP: UCT: George F. R. Ellis (George.ellis@uct.ac.za) Subject: George Ellis: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:25 AM To: 'John Polkinghorne' (nb@sciteb.com) Subject: John Polkinghorne: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 2:07 AM To: 'TP: Lord MacLeod: Iona: Office' (admin@iona.org.uk); 'TP: Lord MacLeod: NWF-Iona: Pres: John Dillan' Subject: Lord MacLeod: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:53 AM To: 'TP: Michael Bourdeaux: Keston Institute: Office' (administrator@keston.org.uk); 'TP: Michael Bourdeaux: Keston Institute: Baylor: Larisa Seago' Subject: Michael Bourdeaux: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality

Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 2:09 AM To: TP: DalaiLama: Office (ohhdl@dalailama.com) Cc: M: Tibet Post (news@thetibetpost.com) Subject: Dalai Lama: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 2:11 AM To: 'TP: Michal Heller: AL Kuzemsky' (kuzemsky@theor.jinr.ru) Subject: Michal Heller: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 2:22 AM To: 'TP: Paul Davies' (deepthought@asu.edu) Subject: Paul Davies: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 2:22 AM To: 'TP: Cambridge: Martin Rees' (mjr@ast.cam.ac.uk) Subject: Martin Rees: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 11:02 AM To: TBA: Durre Sameen Ahmed: WPFDC: Office (office@wpfdc.at); TBA: Durre Sameen Ahmed: WPFDC: Water Schwimmer (Walter_Schwimmer@wpfdc.org); TBA: Durre Sameen Ahmed: WPFCD: Vladimir Kulikov (Vladimir_Kulikov@wpfdc.org) Subject: Durre S. Ahmed: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 11:05 AM To: 'UBirmingham: James Arthur' (j.arthur@bham.ac.uk) Subject: James Arthur: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 11:19 AM To: 'Mark Berner: StJohns: CLR' (clr@stjohns.edu) Cc: 'St Johns: Marc De Girolami'; 'St Johns: Nina Crimm'; 'St Johns: Michael Simons'; 'St Johns: David Gregory'; 'St Johns: Lawrence Joseph'; 'St Johns: Rosemary Salomone' Subject: Mark Berner, Telos, St. Johns: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 11:24 AM To: 'Oxford: Andrew Briggs' (andrew.briggs@materials.ox.ac.uk) Subject: Andrew Briggs: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 11:51 AM To: 'DePaul U: William Cavanaugh' (wcavana1@depaul.edu) Subject: William T. Cavanaugh: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 11:54 AM To: 'Leeds: Barry Cooper' (pmt6sbc@leeds.ac.uk) Subject: S. Barry Cooper: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:00 PM To: 'Andy Crouch: Christianity Today: Mark Galli' (mgalli@christianitytoday.com)

Subject: Andy Crouch, c/o Christianity Today: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:04 PM To: 'ElonU: Pranab Das' (daspra@elon.edu) Subject: Pranab Das: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:07 PM To: 'NotreDame U: Celia Deane Drummond' (cdeanedr@nd.edu) Subject: Celia Deane-Drummond: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:09 PM To: 'UChicago: Jean Bethke Elshtain' (jbelshta@uchicago.edu) Subject: Jean Bethke Elshtain: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:11 PM To: 'Georgetown: Thomas Farr' (tff8@georgetown.edu) Subject: Thomas F. Farr: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:13 PM To: 'Riverside: John Fischer' (john.fischer@ucr.edu) Subject: John Fischer: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:14 PM To: 'UChicago: Michael Fishbane' (mfishban@uchicago.edu) Subject: Michael Fishbane: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:17 PM To: 'Lyon: Bruno Guiderdoni' (bruno.guiderdoni@obs.univ-lyon1.fr) Subject: Bruno Guiderdoni: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:21 PM To: 'Hans Halvorson: PhilosophyDep: Chair: Michael Smith' (msmith@princeton.edu); 'Princeton: Hans Halvorson' Subject: Hans Halvorson: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:24 PM To: 'UW-Madison: Jeff Hardin' (jdhardin@wisc.edu) Subject: Jeff Hardin: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:26 PM To: 'Stanford: Ian Hodder' (archaeology@stanford.edu) Subject: Ian Hodder: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:28 PM To: 'UCSB: Luc Jaeger' (jaeger@chem.ucsb.edu) Subject: Luc Jaeger: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality

Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:30 PM To: 'Baylor: Byron Johnson' (BRJ@baylor.edu) Subject: Byron Johnson: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:32 PM To: 'CUNY: David Lahti' (david.lahti@qc.cuny.edu) Subject: David C. Lahti: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:34 PM To: 'IESE: Heinrich Liechtenstein' (hl@iese.edu) Subject: Heinrich Liechtenstein: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:39 PM To: 'Miami: Michael E. McCullough' (mikem@miami.edu) Subject: Michael E. McCullough: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:41 PM To: 'JTS: Alan Mittleman: JTS Office' (Communications@jtsa.edu) Subject: Alan Mittleman, JTSA: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:47 PM To: 'Aref Ali Nayed: Altus Org: Zeynep K覺lk覺l' (zeynep@altusorg.com); 'Aref Ali Nayed: Sohail Nakhooda' (sohail@kalamresearch.com) Subject: Aref Ali Nayed: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:49 PM To: 'Princeton: Edward Nelson' (nelson@math.princeton.edu) Subject: Edward Nelson: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:50 PM To: 'Boston: Robert Cummings Neville' (rneville@bu.edu) Subject: Robert Cummings Neville: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:53 PM To: 'Chicago: Howard C. Nusbaum' (h-nusbaum@uchicago.edu) Subject: Howard C. Nusbaum: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:55 PM To: 'Chicago: Ken Olliff' (kolliff@uchicago.edu) Subject: Kenneth A. Olliff: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 12:58 PM To: 'Caltech: Steven Quartz' (steve@hss.caltech.edu) Subject: Steven R. Quartz: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality

Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:01 PM To: 'Frankfurt: Thomas Schmidt' (t.schmidt@em.uni-frankfurt.de) Subject: Thomas Schmidt: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:03 PM To: 'UPenn: Martin Seligman' (seligman@psych.upenn.edu) Subject: Martin Seligman: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:07 PM To: 'McGill: Arvind Sharma' (arvind.sharma@mcgill.ca); 'McGill: AsiaRel' Subject: Arvind Sharma: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:09 PM To: 'AMNH: Ian Tattersall' (iant@amnh.org) Subject: Ian Tattersall: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:11 PM To: 'Ohio: Neil Tennant' (tennant.9@osu.edu) Subject: Neil Tennant: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:13 PM To: 'MIT: Robert M. Townsend' (rtownsen@mit.edu) Subject: Robert M. Townsend: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:15 PM To: 'Oxford: Roger Trigg' (roger.trigg@theology.ox.ac.uk) Subject: Roger Trigg: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:17 PM To: 'Oxford: Ian Walmsley' (walmsley@physics.ox.ac.uk) Subject: Ian Walmsley: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:19 PM To: 'Fordham: Merold Westphal' (westphal@fordham.edu) Subject: Merold Westphal: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:21 PM To: 'Oxford: Harvey Whitehouse' (harvey.whitehouse@anthro.ox.ac.uk) Subject: Harvey Whitehouse: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:25 PM To: 'Binghampton: David Sloan Wilson' (dwilson@binghamton.edu) Subject: David Sloan Wilson: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:28 PM To: 'CUA: Andreas Widmer' (abela@cua.edu); 'Acton: Andreas Widmer' (awidmer@acton.org) Subject: Andreas Widmer: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality

Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:32 PM To: 'Glencoe Union Church: David Wood' (david@glencoeunionchurch.org); 'Glencoe UnCh: Rebecca Anderson' Subject: David J. Wood: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:36 PM To: 'NIH: History: Robert Martenson' (history@nih.gov) Subject: Robert Martensen: Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality's discrimination against Primitivist Spirituality

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C ยง 1746, I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Executed this 27th day of April, 2013. George, South Africa

Lara Johnstone PO Box 5042 George East, 6539 RSA Cel: (071) 170 1954. E: (jmcswan@mweb.co.za)

Templeton: Fraud & Discrimination Fraud: ‘Templeton Prize’ is a fraudulent misrepresentation. Templeton Prize Chairman, Judges, Trustees & Advisors refuse to amend ‘Templeton Prize’ to ‘Templeton Prize for Taker – Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric – Spirituality’; to accurately reflect the forms of spirituality Templeton endorses & rewards. Discrimination: Templeton Prize practices Gender and Ideological Discrimination against Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist religions. All of the recipients for the Templeton Prize, for the past 40 years have been to individuals who are members of, or who endorse, Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric religions/spirituality.

Annex D: 21 April 2013 letter submitted to Templeton Foundation, Templeton Judges, Templeton Trustees, Templeton Board of Advisors, and living former Templeton Laureates on 22 April 2013: Earth Day: Spiritual Test for Templeton Foundation: Confront ‘Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality’ endorsement of (a) fraud, corruption and discrimination of 2013 Templeton Prize; (b) discrimination against non-patriarchal Ecocentric Primitivist spirituality. It included an Enclosure: Summary: Ecocentric Gender Balanced Primitivist Principles.

Radical Honoursty Culture Yshmael Guerrylla Law Party CommonSism: Common Sense Guerrylla Laws for a Sustainable Commons AEquilibriaex: balanced Eco/Anthropocentric law www.guerrylla -law.co.nr

22 April 2013 Templeton Prize Judges c/o: Ms. Judith Marchand, Director John Templeton Foundation 300 Conshohocken State Road, Suite 500 West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania 19428 Tel: 610.941.2828 | Fax: 610.825.1730 info@templetonprize.org

Templeton Brd of Trustees & Advisors c/o: Ms. Judith Marchand, Director John Templeton Foundation 300 Conshohocken State Road, Ste 500, West Conshohocken, PA 19428 USA Tel: (610) 941-2828 | Fax: (610) 825-1730

Desmond Tutu c/o: Nomfundo Walaza Desmond Tutu Peace Center 42 Hans Strijdom Ave, Capetown, 8001 Tel: (21) 443 6760 | Fax: (21) 443 6768 E: info@tutu.org, vivian@tutu.org.za

Professor Steven Gish Auburn University at Montgomery Box 244023 · Montgomery, AL 36124-4023 Tel: 334-244-3958 | Fax: 334-244-3740 Email sgish@aum.edu

CC: Deep Green Resistance, Femen, Idle No More, Primitivist‟s, etc.

Templeton Foundation Board of Trustees & Advisors, Spiritual Test for Templeton Foundation: Confront „Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality‟ endorsement of (a) fraud, corruption and discrimination of 2013 Templeton Prize; (b) discrimination against non-patriarchal Ecocentric Primitivist spirituality. Spiritual Test for Templeton Foundation: If the Templeton Prize considers honesty a spiritual concept, should it not rename the Templeton Prize to the ‗Templeton Prize for Taker – Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric – Spirituality‘, considering that (a) All of the recipients for the Templeton Prize, for the past 40 years have been to individuals who are members of, or whose scientific / spirituality endorses, Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Religions; (b) Templeton Prize‘s endorsement of Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Tutu‘s TRC Fraud and discrimination against Ecocentric, non-Patriarchal, Primitivist Leaver cultures; clearly shows Templeton‘s endorsement of Gender and Ideological Discrimination against Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spirituality? PO Box 5042 * George East, 6539 * Tel: (044) 870 7239 * Cel: (071) 170 1954

Notification and Confirmation of Templeton Foundation Trustees and Board of Advisors Endorsement of Fraud, Corruption and Discrimination by (a) Templeton Foundation President and Chairman: Dr. John M Templeton Jnr, (b) Nominator of Archbishop Desmond Tutu for Templeton Prize: Archbishop Tutu‘s biographer: Steven Gish; (c) 2013 Templeton Prize Recipient: Archbishop Desmond Tutu, and (d) Templeton Foundation Prize Judges: H.R.H. Princess Areej Ghazi, Stephen Barr, Prof. Russell Cowburn FRS, Gurcharan Das, Matthieu Ricard, Vladimir Shmaliy, Esther Sternberg, Faraneh Vargha-Khadem, Miroslav Volf. The nomination of the 2013 Templeton Prize was corrupt and fraudulent: Archbishop Desmond Tutu was nominated for the prize by his own biographer, who censored information from the Judges about Tutu‘s involvement in, and endorsement of, South Africa‘s TRC Fraud, and discrimination against nonpatriarchal Ecocentric Primitivist cultures. Tutu‘s biographer refused to withdraw the nomination. Templeton Prize Judges also refused to withdraw the award, endorsing Tutu‘s TRC Fraud and discrimination against Ecocentric, nonPatriarchal, Primitivist Leaver cultures.

Notification & Confirmation to Templeton Trustees & Board of Advisors: Notification and Confirmation of Templeton Foundation Trustees and Board of Advisors Endorsement of Fraud, Corruption and Discrimination by (a) Templeton Foundation President and Chairman: Dr. John M Templeton Jnr, (b) Nominator of Archbishop Desmond Tutu for Templeton Prize: Archbishop Tutu‘s biographer: Steven Gish; (c) 2013 Templeton Prize Recipient: Archbishop Desmond Tutu, and (d) Templeton Foundation Prize Judges: H.R.H. Princess Areej Ghazi, Stephen Barr, Prof. Russell Cowburn FRS, Gurcharan Das, Matthieu Ricard, Vladimir Shmaliy, Esther Sternberg, Faraneh Vargha-Khadem, Miroslav Volf. Templeton Foundation Trustees1: Denis R. Alexander: Director of the Faraday Institute for Science and Religion | Heather Templeton Dill | Nidhal Guessoum: Associate Professor of Physics at American University of Sharjah, United Arab Emirates | Stephen G. Post: Center for Medical Humanities, Stony Brook University & The Institute for Research on Unlimited Love | Eric Priest: James Gregory and Bishop Wardlaw Professor of Theoretical Solar Physics at the University of St. Andrews | Jeffrey P. Schloss: Distinguished professor of biology and T. B. Walker Chair of Natural and 1

http://www.templeton.org/who-we-are/our-team/board-of-trustees

Behavioral Sciences at Westmont College | John W. Schott: Harvard Medical School | Jane M. Siebels: Founder, chairwoman, and CIO of Green Cay Asset Management | Josephine (Pina) Templeton | Harvey M. Templeton, III | Gail Zimmerman: Chairman of the board of directors of Wyoming Financial (WERCS). Templeton Foundation Board of Advisors2: Durre S. Ahmed: Chairperson and Senior Research Fellow at the Center for the Study of Gender and Culture in Lahore, Pakistan | James Arthur: Professor of Education and Civic Engagement and Head of the School of Education in the University of Birmingham | Francisco J. Ayala: University Professor and Donald Bren Professor of Biological Sciences at the University of California, Irvine | John D. Barrow: Director of the Millennium Mathematics Project, professor of mathematical sciences at the University of Cambridge | Mark C. Berner: CEO and co-chairman of Telos | Andrew Briggs: Professor of nanomaterials at Oxford University | William T. Cavanaugh: Senior Research Professor at the Center for World Catholicism and Intercultural Theology, and Professor of Catholic Studies at DePaul University in Chicago | S. Barry Cooper: Professor of Mathematical Logic in the School of Mathematics at the University of Leeds | Andy Crouch: Executive Producer at Christianity Today International | Pranab Das: Professor of Physics at Elon University | Gurcharan Das: Author, management guru, and public intellectual | Celia Deane-Drummond: Professor of Theology at the University of Notre Dame | Jean Bethke Elshtain: Laura Spelman Rockefeller Professor of Social and Political Ethics at the University of Chicago | Thomas F. Farr: Visiting Associate Professor of Religion and International Affairs at Georgetown University | John Fischer: Department of Philosophy at the University of California Riverside (UCR) | Michael Fishbane: Nathan Cummings Professor of Jewish Studies at the University of Chicago | Bruno Guiderdoni: Director of the Observatory of Lyon | Hans Halvorson: Professor of philosophy at Princeton University | Jeff Hardin: Professor and chair of the department of zoology at the University of WisconsinMadison | Ian Hodder: Dunlevie Family Professor in the Department of Anthropology and Director of the Stanford Archaeology Center | Luc Jaeger: Associate professor of chemistry and biochemistry at the University of California, Santa Barbara (UCSB) | Byron Johnson: Professor of the Social Sciences and director of the Institute for Studies of Religion (ISR) Baylor University | David C. Lahti: Assistant Professor of Biology at Queens College, City University of New York | Heinrich Liechtenstein: Assistant professor of financial management | Robert Martensen: Office of History at the National Institutes of Health (Bethesda, MD) | Michael E. McCullough: Professor in the Department of Psychology at the University of Miami | Alan Mittleman: Professor of modern Jewish thought and director of the Tikvah Institute for Jewish Thought at the Jewish Theological Seminary in New York City | Aref Ali Nayed: Founder and director of Kalam Research & Media (KRM), Uthman Pasha Madrasa in Tripoli, Libya | Edward Nelson: Professor of mathematics at Princeton University | Robert Cummings 2

http://www.templeton.org/who-we-are/our-team/board-of-advisors

Neville: Professor of Philosophy, Religion, and Theology at Boston University | Howard C. Nusbaum: Professor at the University of Chicago | Kenneth A. Olliff: Director for Strategic Foundation Initiatives and Co-Director of Arete, The University of Chicago | Steven R. Quartz: Associate professor in the division of humanities and social sciences at the California Institute of Technology | Thomas Schmidt: Professor of philosophy of religion on the Roman Catholic theological faculty, Johann Wolfgang Goethe University in Frankfurt | Martin Seligman: Zellerbach Family Professor of Psychology and director of the Positive Psychology Center at the University of Pennsylvania | Arvind Sharma: Birks Chair in Comparative Religion, at McGill University | Ian Tattersall: Curator in the Division of Anthropology of the American Museum of Natural History in New York City | Neil Tennant: Humanities Distinguished Professor in Philosophy, Adjunct Professor of Cognitive Science, and Scholar at The Ohio State University Columbus | Robert M. Townsend: Professor of Economics at MIT | Roger Trigg: Senior Research Fellow at Kellogg College, University of Oxford | Ian Walmsley: Hooke Professor of Experimental Physics and Pro-Vice Chancellor for Research at the University of Oxford | Merold Westphal: Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at Fordham University in New York City | Harvey Whitehouse: Chair in Social Anthropology at Oxford University and Professorial Fellow at Magdalen College | Andreas Widmer: co-founder of S.E.VEN Fund | David Sloan Wilson: SUNY Distinguished Professor of Biology and Anthropology at Binghamton University | David J. Wood: Senior Pastor of Glencoe Union Church, Illinois.

Spiritual Test for Templeton Foundation: „Templeton Prize for Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Spirituality‟ If the Templeton Prize considers honesty a spiritual concept, should it not rename the Templeton Prize to the ‗Templeton Prize for Taker – Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric – Spirituality‘, considering that (a) All of the recipients for the Templeton Prize, for the past 40 years have been to individuals who are members of, or whose spirituality endorses, Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Religions; (b) Templeton Prize‘s endorsement of Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Tutu‘s TRC Fraud and discrimination against Ecocentric, non-Patriarchal, Primitivist Leaver cultures; clearly shows Templeton‘s endorsement of Gender and Ideological Discrimination against Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spirituality?

Templeton Prize‟s endorsement of Gender and Ideological Discrimination against Leaver Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spirituality: [1]

Patriarchy (pa·tri·arch·y):

[1.1] A system of society or government, is Patriarchal to the extent that it regulates (a) the relations between humans, nature and other animals species and

(b) the relations between humans amongst themselves, in terms of their gender, culture, ethnic, religious and ideological conflicts; for the (c) almost exclusive benefit of violent Anthropocentric humans and corporations. [1.2] Put differently a legal, political or social system is Patriarchal to the extent of its (a) failure to provide automatic equal legal personhood and rights to nature and animal and plant species; (b) disregard for the objective and scientific carrying capacity truth of the laws of nature/ecology; and (c) disregard for the laws of human nature; when they contradict the AnthroCorpocentric – breeding and consumption war – objectives of the holders of subjective AnthroCorpocentric Truth. [2]

Taker AnthroCorpocentric Civilization (civ·i·li·za·tion): [2.1]

Derrick Jensen: Civilization and Enlightenment3:

[2.2] ―Civilization is a way of life characterized by the growth of cities; and that definition is defensible both linguistically and historically. So what that means is that civilization comes from Civitas which means city. Historically that‘s pretty much where civilization starts is the rise of cities. A city is a collection of people, living in numbers large enough to require the importation of resources. A couple of things happen as soon as you require the importation of resources. One is that your way of living can never be sustainable. Because if you require the importation of resources, what that means is that you have denuded the landscape of that particular resource. As your city grows, you will denude an ever larger area. Because by definition you are requiring the importation of resources, which means its not there. Functionally your way of life will never be sustainable. You can talk about sustainability all you want, it won't last. The other thing it means is that your way of life must be based on violence. Because if you require the importation of resources, what that means is that trade will never be sufficiently reliable, because if you require a resource that the next village won't give to you, you will take it, because you require it. Which means we could all become the most enlightened beings, on the entire planet, and it wouldn't matter, the US military would still have to engage in militarism, because if not, how are we going to get access to our oil that is under someone else's land? Psychologically and socially it does not matter, you could have this huge transformation of the heart, and if you still require the importation of resources, what are you going to do about it?‖ [2.3]

Derrick Jensen Interview Pt3: On [Taker] Science4:

[2.4] ―According to scientific culture, power exists only in how you use raw materials -- the more raw materials you use more effectively than anyone else, the more power to you. And science is a potent tool for that. Thats the point of science. 3 4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkEmLRCP078 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jR2O5cvknvo

.[..]. The very epistemology of this [Taker] culture is based upon domination; such that how we know something is true, is by someone's ability to make matter and energy jump through hoops on command and to predict what will happen and when. .[..]. Are hammerhead sharks better off, because of science? Is plankton better off because of science? Are traditional people's better off because of science? I think the answer is pretty obviously, NO. .[..]. Science is based upon the ability to predict and on objectification.‖ [2.5] ―Here's another perspective: If you ask ten thousand scientists if they believe the world was created for human beings, and all evolution existed so that human beings are the apex of evolution. The vast majority of them would probably say 'absolutely not'. Evolution has no point that way. Humans are not the apex of evolution. Its an absurd question and allot of them would laugh. But then when they are done laughing and they go back to work, what would they be doing? If you judge their answers by their actions, instead of by their theory, what you would find is essentially that all of them are working to make the world conform to industrial ends. Science is pernicious, its really harmful and it has been incredibly harmful to the natural world.‖ [2.6] ―Science is the latest monotheism really. Catholicism said that outside the church there is no salvation, and science says that outside of science there is no knowledge. Another way to put all this is that monotheism has been the problem. Abrahamaic monotheisms, Christianity, Catholicism and Islam did the heavy lifting. They took the divinity out of nature and put it in heaven. They took the divinity out of this tree, and this dog and this flesh, and to put it somewhere out there. All science did was come along, much later, and turn off the light out there, and remove meaning from the world entirely. You don't have to take my word for this. Once again Richard Dawkins is quite clear that the universe is meaningless. But he also says that we are put here to rise above nature, which is an extraordinary statement because why would you rise up out of something, and who put us here in the first place, when he doesn't believe in any meaning whatsoever. But anyway, science is on the main incredibly harmful. Sure science is able to record that global warming is happening, and sure they are able to study species extinction, but why is global warming and species extinction happening in the first place? .[..]. It doesn't help to study it, unless you stop it. .[..]. Catherine McKinnon says that law is how power organizes. I would say that science is the manual version of that. Law is how power organizes politically and science is how it organizes in physically. And there are other forms of knowledge that are not based on domination, but on relationship, non-mathematical relationship.‖

[2.7] Counterpunch (28 Oct 2009): Against Prometheus: An Interview with Derrick Jensen on Science and Technology5: [2.8] ―The stories we are told shape the way we see the world, which shapes the way we experience the world. R.D. Laing once wrote that how we experience the world shapes how we behave in the world. If the world is presented as resources to be exploited, then more than likely, you‘re going to exploit the world. For example, if one sees trees as dollar bills, then one will look at trees and treat trees one way; if one sees trees as trees, for what they are – as other beings to be in communion with – then one will see them and treat them another way. Philosophy is the telling of the world a certain way.‖ [2.9] Taker Utilitarian vs. Leaver Spiritual Relationship to Nature: ―If you do not perceive the fundamental beingness of others (i.e. nonhuman animals, trees, mountains, rivers, rocks, etc), or in some senses do not even perceive their existence, then nothing I say or write can convince you. Nor will evidence be likely to convince you, since, as already mentioned, you won‘t perceive it, or more accurately, won‘t allow yourself to perceive it. No matter how well I write, if you have never made love, I cannot adequately describe to you what it feels like to do so. Even moreso, if you insist that no such thing as making love even exists, then I will certainly never be able to adequately explain to you what it feels like. For that matter, I cannot describe the color green to someone who is blind, and who even moreso insists that green does not exist, could never exist; as well as to someone who knows that philosophers from Aristotle to Descartes to Dawkins have conclusively shown that green does not exist, could not exist, has never existed, and will never exist; or to someone who is under the thrall of economic and legal systems (insofar as there is a meaningful difference, since the primary function of this culture‘s legal systems is to protect—through laws, police, courts, and prisons—the exploitative activities of the already-wealthy) based so profoundly on green not existing; who cannot acknowledge that this culture would collapse if its members individually and/or collectively perceived this green that cannot be allowed to exist. If I could describe the color green to you, I would do it. I would drive you, as R.D. Laing put it, out of your wretched mind. And you might be able to see the color green. Or someone else could drive you out of your wretched mind. It certainly needn‘t be me. I‘m not the point. You‘re not the point. Your perceived experience isn‘t even the point. The point is your wretched mind, and getting out of it. And beyond that, the point then is your experience.‖ [2.10] Leaver‟s experience the world personally, emotionally, convivially and reciprocally with other beings, Takers experience the world as a set of objective truths for personal material gain or information, or as protocol

http://www.counterpunch.org/2009/10/28/agaisnt-prometheus/

to maintain the status quo: ―This culture is based on the assumption that all of the world is without volition, is mechanistic, and is therefore predictable. The existence of the willfully unpredictable destroys a foundational assumption of this culture. The existence of the willfully unpredictable also invalidates this culture‘s ontology, epistemology, and philosophies, and reveals them for what they are: lies upon which to base this omnicidal system of exploitation, theft, and murder; it‘s much easier to exploit, steal from, or murder someone you pretend has no meaningful existence (especially if you have an entire culture‘s ontology, epistemology, and philosophy to back you up), indeed, it becomes your right, even your duty (e.g. war, genocide, death squads, mercenaries, etc). The existence of the willfully unpredictable reveals this culture‘s governmental and economic systems for what they are as well: means to not only rationalize but enforce systems of exploitation, theft, and murder (e.g., effectively stop Monsanto‘s exploitation, theft, and murder, and see how you are treated by governments across the world).‖ [2.11] Difference between indigenous spirituality‟s kinship with nonhumans, and absence of a utilitarian worldview over their landbase insofar as they perceived the natural landscape as a matrix of reciprocal relationships to enter into: ―In all of my books I‘ve emphasized that the fundamental difference between civilized and indigenous ways of being is that for even the most open-minded of the civilized, listening to the natural world is a metaphor. For traditional indigenous peoples it is not a metaphor. It is how you relate with the real world. This culture‘s way of life is based on exploitation, domination, theft, and murder. And why? Because it is based on the perceived right of the powerful to take whatever resources they want. If you see yourself as entitled to a resource, and if you‘re not willing or incapable of seeing this other as a being with whom you can and should be in relation with, then you‘re going to take the resource.‖ [2.12] How scientific philosophy galvanizes the exploitative utilitarian worldview: ―Richard Dawkins, the popular scientific philosopher—he‘s got almost as many Google hits as Mick fuckin‘ Jagger—states that we exist in ―a universe of electrons and selfish genes, blind physical forces and genetic replication.‖ Implying that humans are the only meaningful intelligence on earth, and possibly in the universe, the world then consists of objects to be exploited, not other beings to enter into relationship with. Dawkins also writes: ―You won‘t find any rhyme or reason in it [the universe], nor any justice. The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference.‖ Because the latter scientific assumption posits that nonhumans have no meaningful intelligence, they have nothing to say, to each other or to us. Thus interspecies communication is bunk, no matter who the nonhumans are: animals, plants, rivers, rocks, stars, muses, and so on. Anyone who

thinks otherwise, and this is key, is superstitious, that is, delusional, maybe primitive, maybe crazy, maybe childish, maybe just plain stupid. Suddenly science has a stronger hold on one‘s belief moreso than any religion. Scientific philosophy is much better at controlling people because if you don‘t buy into it, you‘re stupid. The fundamental religion of this culture is that of human dominion, and it does not matter so much whether one self-identifies as a Christian, a Capitalist, a Scientist, or just a regular member of this culture, one‘s actions will be to promulgate this fundamentalist religion of unbridled entitlement and exploitation. This religion permeates every aspect of this culture.‖ [2.13]

Has science provided the world with anything good?:

[2.14] ―That‘s a very common question that is asked: Hasn‘t science done a lot of good for the world? For the world? No. Show me how the world—the real, physical world, once filled with passenger pigeons, great auks, cod, tuna, salmon, sea mink, lions, great apes, migratory songbirds, forests—is a better place because of science. Science has done far more than facilitate the destruction of the natural world: it has increased this culture‘s ability to destroy by many orders of magnitude. We can talk all we want about conservation biology and about the use of science to measure biodiversity, but in the real, physical world the real, physical effects of science on real, living nonhumans has been nothing short of atrocious. Science has been given three hundred years or so to prove itself. And of course three hundred years ago great auks (and fish, and whales) filled the seas, and passenger pigeons and Eskimo curlews filled the skies, and soil was deeper, and native forests still stood. If three hundred years of chainsaws, CFCs, depleted uranium, automobiles, genetic engineering, airplanes, routine international trade, computers, plastics, endocrine disrupters, pesticides, vivisection, internal combustion engines, fellerbunchers, dragline excavators, televisions, cellphones, and nuclear (and conventional) bombs are not enough to convey the picture, then that picture will never be conveyed.‖ [2.15] Without science, there would not be ten times more plastic than phytoplankton in the oceans. The Nazi Holocaust was, as I made clear in The Culture of Make Believe, and as Zygmunt Bauman made clear in Modernity and the Holocaust, a triumph of the modern industrial rationalistic scientific instrumentalist perspective. Global warming, which may end in planetary murder, would not be running rampant without the assistance of science and scientists. Without science there would be no hole in the ozone. Without science and scientists, we would not face the threat of nuclear annihilation. Without science, there would be no industrial civilization, which even without global warming would still be leading to planetary murder. Sure, science brought us television, modern medicine (and modern diseases), and cardboard-tasting strawberries in January, but anyone who would rather have those than a living planet is, well, a typical member of this culture. If it‘s the case that evolution happened so that we would come to exist,

then it‘s pretty damn obvious we‘re fucking up whatever we were brought into being to do. How much sense would it make to have all of this evolution take place simply so that the point, the apex, the pinnacle of this evolution can end life on the planet? Talk about the world‘s longest and stupidest shaggy dog story.‖ [3] Patriarchy‟s „Civilized‟ (War Against Nature & AnthroCorpocentric (corporate human focussed) Spirituality:

Women)

“Civilization, very fundamentally, is the history of the domination of nature and of women” – Primitivist, John Zerzan in Patriarchy, Civilization, and the Origins of Gender6 “It may, I think, even be argued that Communism in Russia, National Socialism in Germany, and Capitalism and Liberal Democracy in the Western countries are really three forms of the same thing, and that they are all moving by different but parallel paths to the same goal, which is the mechanization of human life and the complete subordination of the individual to the state and to the economic process.” - Christopher Dawson, Religion and the Modern State7

[3.1] An in depth introduction into the concepts of primitivism (Leavers) and/or the history of patriarchy‘s relationship to totalitarian agriculture civilization, can be found in, among others: John Zerzan8: (2012): Future Primitive Revisited; (2010): Origins: A John Zerzan Reader; (2008): Twilight of the Machines; (2002): Running On Emptiness; (1999): Against Civilization (editor); (1994): Future Primitive; (1991): Questioning Technology (co-edited with Alice Carnes); (1999): Elements of Refusal. Richard Heinberg (1995): The Primitivist Critique of Civilization9. Daniel Quinn (1992) Ishmael; (1996) The Story of B; (1997) My Ishmael; (2000) Beyond Civilization. Robert McElvaine (2001): Eve's Seed: Masculine Insecurity, Metaphor and the Shaping of History; (2001): Eve's Seed: Biology, the Sexes and the Course of History. [4] Fundamental Differences between Gender Balanced Primitivism (Leavers) & Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization (Takers): [4.1] Problem Solving: Transparent Management Coercion Takers: A.

Listening

Leavers

Perception

Transparent Listening: Every individual deserves to be heard, where ideas are valued on their merit. Reputations are based upon an individual‘s commitment to total transparency which includes exposure of individuals and cultural skeletons for public analysis and cultural ownership.

John Zerzan: Patriarchy, Civilization, And The Origins Of Gender http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/john-zerzan-patriarchy-civilization-and-the-origins-of-gender 7 Christopher Dawson, Religion and the Modern State (New York: Sheed & Ward, 1935), xv. 8 http://www.johnzerzan.net/books/ 9 http://www.primitivism.com/primitivist-critique.htm 6

Perception Management Coercion: Only individuals who endorse breeding and consumption war socio-political values deserve to be heard; i.e. those with a large following or those with consumptionist materialist status symbols. Reputations are based upon an individual‘s capacity for perception management. Their ability to ignore, silence and censor critics.

[4.2] Ecocentric Insecurity Takers:

Masculinity

Leavers

AnthroCorpocentric

Masculine

Ecocentric Masculinity: application of a single human standard for all, irrespective of culture; cultural endorsement for taking personal responsibility for procreation and consumption below carrying capacity, where character and integrity are considered socio-political status symbols.

AnthroCorpocentric Masculine Insecurity: political correct application of different standards for men from different cultures, and between men and women; cultural endorsement for breeding and consumption wars as sociopolitical status symbols.

[4.3]

Law of Limited Competition Leavers vs Totalitarian Agriculture Takers:

Law of Limited Competition: Agriculture based upon producing enough for survivable needs, enables population control and provision of/sharing of resources to other species to enable their sustainable survival.

Totalitarian Agriculture: Agriculture based upon maximizing surpluses, to generate consumption war materialist status, enabling greater population growth, who are used as cannon fodder to conquer new territory and deny other species and groups access to ecological resources for food.

[4.4] Lifestyle Consciousness: Carrying Capacity Leavers vs Breeding & Consumption War Takers: A.

Carrying Capacity: Cultural values which value procreation and consumption practices below carrying capacity.

Breeding and Consumption Wars: Cultural values which endorse breeding and consumption wars as socio-political status symbols.

[4.5] See Annexure: Summary: Ecocentric Gender Balanced Primitivist Principles, for additional background to aforementioned principles. [5] Spiritual Test: Rename Templeton Prize to „Templeton Prize for Taker – Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric -- Spirituality‟ [6]

Templeton Prize Nomination Procedures:

[6.1] The Templeton Prize‘s focus on Taker Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric spirituality is clearly visible in its nomination procedures.

[6.2] The following information is required from an individual nominating another individual for the Templeton Prize10: The following nomination:

information

required

complete

your

The nominator's name, organizational affiliation, and valid email address The candidate's full name, gender, organizational affiliation, and contact information A detailed narrative explaining why the candidate is worthy of consideration for the Templeton Prize. This narrative can be of any length as long as it demonstrates the candidate's significant contributions to affirming life's spiritual dimension. When writing your Templeton Prize Nomination narrative, please consider the following criteria. These criteria are all equally important aspects of a Nominee's candidacy. However, realistically no single nominee will reflect every dimension noted, but on the whole, the Nomination narrative should reflect the creativity, innovation, rigor and impact of the work of your candidate. Please consider all of the following when writing your Narrative, and to the best of your ability, define how the nominee's work is effective in each of these criteria: Spiritual Dimensions - How has the individual made exceptional contributions to affirming life's spiritual dimensions, whether through insight, discovery or practical works? Entrepreneurship - Does the individual capture the full meaning and breadth of being an "entrepreneur of the spirit" someone who has both explored and then achieved a substantial record of contributions to "spiritual progress" - especially in regard to truly innovative discoveries and then widely influential dissemination? New Insights regarding the Divine - From any domain of human effort: from science to philosophy - to social science - to theology - and/or to creation of new high-impact organizations - how has the individual demonstrated singular success or breakthroughs with clear evidence of progress in humanity's effort to comprehend the many and diverse manifestations of the Divine? Spiritual Realities - Does the individual's work clearly represent innovative - theoretical - practical - and enduring impact in accomplishments and communications regarding previously unrecognized dimensions of "Spiritual Realities", including love, forgiveness, gratitude, creativity, infinity, ultimate reality and purpose in the cosmos? Spiritual Dilemmas in Life - What has the individual done to demonstrate breakthroughs in addressing the timeless spiritual 10

http://www.templetonprize.org/nomination.html

dilemmas of human life through open-minded humility in asking and seeking innovative answers to questions of substance and meaning and the challenging of assumptions? Nominee's Curriculum Vitae or Biography if Curriculum Vitae not available. A list of up to five relevant works (essays, book chapters, books, journal articles, lectures, blogs, or websites) that demonstrate the candidate's achievements or discuss the impact of the candidate's contributions to life's spiritual dimension. For those candidates with numerous publications, we ask that the nominator list only the works most relevant to the purpose of the Templeton Prize. A minimum of 3 (three) and a maximum of 5 (five) References who can speak to the qualifications of the candidate. Please list their names, organizational affiliation, and full contact information, and most importantly, their email addresses. Nominators are strongly advised to contact the list of References submitted and alert them regarding your submission of their name as a Reference. The Templeton Prize office will contact each Reference and ask them to submit a letter of concrete analysis as to the named candidate's significant contributions in any one of several of the listed criteria that strongly pertain to the goals and purposes of the Templeton Prize.

[6.3] Organized religion – i.e. an organizational affiliation – is a Patriarchal Anthropocentric religious concept, based upon patriarchal concepts of domination and the objectification of nature, accumulation of power, socio-political status, etc. Ecocentric and Primitivist religions do not objectify nature, or create corporate or organizational affiliations justifying the objectification of nature, they worship nature and living in harmony with nature; not corporations and power. [6.4] The language and concepts referred to in the ‗spiritual dimensions‘ ‗entrepreneurship‘ ‗New Insights regarding the divine‘ ‗Spiritual realities‘, ‗Spiritual dilemma‘s‘ paragraphs all reflect a Patriarchal Taker (Civilization) Anthropocentric perspective towards spirituality and life. [6.5]

For example:

―organisational affiliation‖ – endorsement of organized religion, which is a Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric religious concept. Ecocentric Primitivist spiritual teachers and practitioners do not establish organized religions, for domination, exploitation and conquering purposes.

―"entrepreneur of the spirit" - someone who has both explored and then achieved a substantial record of contributions to "spiritual progress" especially in regard to truly innovative discoveries and then widely influential dissemination?‖. Corpratization of spirituality: entrepreneur of the spirit… widely influential dissemination.

―creation of new high-impact organisations‖ – i.e. organisations with a high impact power to exploit raw materials; the more raw materials the corporation uses more effectively than anyone else, the more power – high impact – to it.

[6.6] In fact many of the ‗spiritual problems‘ of Takers – crime, war, racism, sexism, political correctness, resource war, scarcity, poverty, unemployment, mental illness, alienation, etc – are a direct result of the Taker Civilization lifestyle; i.e. the adoption of Patriarchal breeding and consumption war values, as the foundation for power and domination, by means of socio-political status or economic, political or military coercion. Templeton Prize Recipients (1973-2013): [7] According to the Templeton Prize website11, the following individuals were awarded the Templeton Prize for the following reasons: [7.1]

Mother Teresa (1973):

Taker Templeton‟s: Mother Teresa, founder of India‘s Missionaries of Charity, was recognized by the inaugural Templeton Prize (six years before she received the Nobel Peace Prize) for her extraordinary efforts to help the homeless and neglected children of Calcutta. Her heroic work brought about real change among those she served and continues to inspire millions around the world.

Leaver Primitivists: Mother Theresa‘s ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. a. Vatican Crimes (24 Feb 2013): Deceitful and Dark Side of Mother Theresa Revealed by 3 Montreal Professors12; b. New Statesman (12 Jan 2012): Mother Teresa and the Paedophile13; c.

Christopher Hitchens: The Missionary Position: Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice14.

d. Christopher Hitchens: Hell’s Angel: Mother Theresa of Calcutta15: Facts: 1. The Catholic Church and the brainless mass media loved her. 2. She raised a ton of money, much of it from criminals who needed to recycle their image. 3. The money she raised was used primarily for

http://www.templetonprize.org/previouswinner.html http://www.vaticancrimes.us/2013/02/deceiftul-and-dark-side-of-mother.html 13 http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/nelson-jones/2012/01/mother-teresa-mcguire-abuse 14 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Missionary_Position 15 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJG-lgmPvYA 11 12

additional self promotion and the few people her Order did help received the most low level assistance imaginable. [7.2]

Brother Roger (1974):

Taker Templeton‟s: Brother Roger was founder and Prior (director) of the religious brotherhood known as the Taizé Community in France. He initiated efforts to aide orphans in the region surrounding the community, which led to the founding of the Council of Youth and then the Intercontinental Meetings of Young Adults, which annually bring tens of thousands of young adults from throughout the world to pray and reflect in Taizé.

Leaver Primitivists: Brother Roger ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Brother Roger endorsing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.3]

Sir Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan (1975):

Taker Templeton‟s: Sir Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan was President of India from 1962 to 1967. An Oxford Professor of Eastern Religions and Ethics, he consistently advocated non-aggression in India‘s conflicts with neighboring Pakistan. His accessible writings underscored his country‘s religious heritage and sought to convey a universal reality of God that embraced love and wisdom for all people.

Leaver Primitivists: Sir Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Sir Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan endorsing Ecocentric nonPatriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.4]

Cardinal Suenens (1976):

Taker Templeton‟s: Cardinal Suenens, Archbishop of Malines-Brussels, Belgium, was a pioneer in the research and discourse of the Charismatic Renewal Movement. The Cardinal‘s enlightened discourse provided guidance and reassurance about the movement, eliminating misunderstanding and offering thoughtful insight to followers and observers alike.

Leaver Primitivists: Cardinal Suenens ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Cardinal Suenens endorsing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.5]

Chiara Lubich (1977):

Taker Templeton‟s: Chiara Lubich founded and developed Italy‘s Focolare Movement, a community dedicated to serving the poor. With roots in Trent, it expanded to other Italian cities, followed by Focolare settlements worldwide, including in Belgium, Germany, France, the United States, Japan, and Hong Kong.

Leaver Primitivists: Chiara Lubich ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Chiara Lubich endorsing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.6]

Thomas Torrance (1978):

Templeton Takers: Thomas Torrance, former Moderator of the Church of Scotland, became one of the first religious thinkers to win the respect of both theologians and scientists. His insights on the rationality of the universe attempt to provide evidence of God through scientific reasoning.

Leaver Primitivists: Thomas Torrance ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle

Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Thomas Torrance endorsing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity. [7.7] A.

Taker Templeton‟s: Nikkyo Niwano co-founded the Japanese Buddhist movement Rissho Kosei-Kai, which aims to establish ―the teaching of the true Law in the world, mutual exchange of thought among people of faith, and the perfection of the personality.‖ The movement blossomed from a handful of adherents into the world‘s largest Buddhist lay group. Niwano was also the founder of the World Conference of Religion and Peace.

Leaver Primitivists: Nikkyo Niwano‘s ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Thomas Torrance practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity. For example the Risshō Kōsei Kai‘s Peace activities16 totally ignore overpopulation and overconsumption (living above carrying capacity) as root causes of conflict.

[7.8]

Nikkyo Niwano (1979):

Ralph Wendell Burhoe (1980):

Taker Templeton‟s: Ralph Wendell Burhoe was the founder and editor of Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science. Burhoe pursued a passionate investigation into the differences and similarities between theology and science, becoming one of the world‘s most informed voices in communicating this evolving research.

Leaver Primitivists: Ralph Wendell Burhoe‘s ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Ralph Wendell Burhoe practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d)

http://www.rk-world.org/peace.aspx

Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity. [7.9]

Dame Cicely Saunders (1981):

Taker Templeton‟s: Dame Cicely Saunders spent years close to terminally ill patients as they expressed their physical, psychological, and spiritual pain. She went on to found the Hospice and Palliative Care Movement, combining a scientifically rigorous program with a unique social and spiritual awareness.

Leaver Primitivists: Dame Cicely Saunders‘s ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Dame Cicely Saunders practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.10]

Billy Graham (1982):

Taker Templeton‟s: Billy Graham took his message of Christianity into the electronic world of radio and television, invigorating an entire generation with a simple and poignant message of salvation. He maintained a dignity that drew enormous audiences and enthusiastic support with an interpretation of the Gospel that still speaks to the problems and pressures of today.

Leaver Primitivists: Billy Graham‘s ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Billy Graham practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.11] A.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (1983): Taker Templeton‟s: Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn‘s struggle for open expression made him one of the world‘s most respected men. Under the repressive Soviet regime, he held firm in his beliefs and shared his

worldview through powerful writings and devastating critiques of Russian Communism. His works renewed vitality in the Orthodox tradition and evidenced a profound spirituality. B.

[7.12]

Leaver Primitivists: Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn‘s ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity. Michael Bourdeaux (1984):

Taker Templeton‟s: Michael Bourdeaux, founder of Keston College in England, worked to examine and explain the systematic destruction of religion in Iron Curtain nations during the Cold War and to defend the rights of faiths in these countries to worship as they chose. When the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc regimes collapsed, Bourdeaux‘s efforts for universal religious freedom were widely embraced.

Leaver Primitivists: Michael Bourdeaux‘s ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Michael Bourdeaux practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.13]

Sir Alister Hardy (1985):

Taker Templeton‟s: Sir Alister Hardy, founder of the Sir Alister Hardy Research Centre at Oxford, England, began his career as a marine biologist but went on to gain prominence for original empirical studies that used scientific methodology to investigate religious experience. He spent a lifetime seeking evidence of God‘s centrality to the human condition.

Leaver Primitivists: Sir Alister Hardy‘s ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization

values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Sir Alister Hardy practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity. [7.14]

James McCord (1986):

Taker Templeton‟s: James McCord was chancellor Theological Inquiry in Princeton, New Jersey and Princeton Theological Seminary. He spent his investigating the relationship between science and studies on the nature of reality.

Leaver Primitivists: James McCord‘s ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of James McCord practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.15]

of the Center for president of the professional life religion through

Stanley L. Jaki (1987):

Taker Templeton‟s: Stanley L. Jaki, a Benedictine monk and Professor of Astrophysics at Seton Hall University, was a leading thinker in areas at the boundary of science and theology. His many books carefully delineate the importance of differences as well as similarities between science and religion.

Leaver Primitivists: Stanley L. Jaki‘s ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Jaki practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.16]

Inamullah Kahn (1988):

Taker Templeton‟s: Inamullah Kahn, founder and former secretarygeneral of the Modern World Muslim Congress in Karachi, Pakistan, devoted his life to advancing peace among Muslims, Christians, and Jews. His interfaith activism provided important new opportunities to foster good will and understanding, in particular, by playing a crucial role in helping to settle the war between Iran and Iraq and to bring a message of peace to apartheid-era South Africa.

Leaver Primitivists: Inamullah Kahn‘s ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Kahn practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.17]

Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker (1989) (awarded jointly):

Taker Templeton‟s: Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker explored the intersection of physics, cosmology, and theology in work that placed him at the forefront of the reconciliation between religion and natural science. His key discoveries in nuclear physics, along with his application of nuclear physics to astrophysics, caused him to question the estrangement of religion and science and led to his investigation of Christianity‘s obligation to technology.

Leaver Primitivists: Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of von Weizsäcker endorsing/practicing Ecocentric nonPatriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.18] A.

Lord MacLeod (1989) (awarded jointly): Taker Templeton‟s: Lord MacLeod, founder of the monastic Iona Community on an island off the west coast of Scotland, spent his life reviving a prayer-centered spiritual movement. This ecumenical community‘s work continues, encouraging peace in the world and helping ordinary men and women with their personal struggles.

[7.19]

Leaver Primitivists: Lord MacLeod‘s ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of von Weizsäcker endorsing/practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity. L. Charles Birch (1990) (awarded jointly):

Taker Templeton‟s: L. Charles Birch, Emeritus Professor at the University of Sydney, Australia, engaged in adventurous reflection on questions of science and faith throughout his career as a biologist and geneticist. He saw modern discoveries about natural science as expanding the understanding of God as designer and creator of the universe and its creatures.

Leaver Primitivists: L. Charles Birch‘s ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of von Weizsäcker endorsing/practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.20]

Baba Amte (1990) (awarded jointly):

Taker Templeton‟s: Baba Amte left his comfortable life as a wealthy Hindu lawyer to follow a personal calling, developing modern communities to help those with Hanson‘s Disease (leprosy) and other so-called untouchables of his native India.

Leaver Primitivists: Baba Amte‘s ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Amte endorsing/practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.21]

Lord Jakobovits (1991):

Taker Templeton‟s: Lord Jakobovits, Chief Rabbi of Great Britain and the Commonwealth from 1967 to 1991, was a spiritual leader of steadfast principles and unwavering ethics for more than 50 years. His book, Jewish Medical Ethics, helped to establish that field. His prominent public voice extended his moral authority far beyond the Jewish community.

Leaver Primitivists: Lord Jakobovits‘s ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Lord Jakobovits endorsing/practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.22]

Kyung-Chik Han (1992):

Taker Templeton‟s: Kyung-Chik Han was the founder of Seoul‘s 60,000member Young Nak Presbyterian Church. His fervent work for refugees and the poor epitomized the growth of Christianity in South Korea. His experience as a survivor of war and political oppression made him one of his country‘s most respected religious leaders.

Leaver Primitivists: Kyung-Chik Han‘s ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Han endorsing/practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.23] A.

Charles W. Colson (1993): Taker Templeton‟s: Charles W. Colson, former special counsel to President Richard Nixon, began Prison Fellowship after serving a federal prison sentence for obstructing justice in the Pentagon Papers case. It is now the largest prison outreach program in the world, operating a network of ministries in more than 110 nations. The organization has made substantial gains in breaking the cycle of crime and recidivism.

[7.24]

Leaver Primitivists: Charles W. Colson‘s ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Colson endorsing/practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity. Michael Novak (1994):

Taker Templeton‟s: A former university professor and U.S. ambassador and now a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, Michael Novak has developed influential new insights into the spiritual foundations of economic and political systems. His book, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism, and other writings won the enthusiastic notice of such world leaders as Pope John Paul II, Margaret Thatcher, Lech Walesa, and Vaclav Havel.

Leaver Primitivists: Michael Novak‘s ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Novak endorsing/practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.25]

Paul Davies (1995):

Taker Templeton‟s: Paul Davies, a theoretical physicist and cosmologist, holds the post of College Professor at Arizona State University. His research has been in the fields of quantum gravity, black holes, earlyuniverse cosmology, and astrobiology as it relates to the origin of life and the transfer of microorganisms between planets.

Leaver Primitivists: Paul Davies‘ ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Davies endorsing/practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition

agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx consuming below carrying capacity. [7.26]

jurisprudence:

procreating

and

William R. “Bill” Bright (1996):

Taker Templeton‟s: William R. ―Bill‖ Bright began a person-to-person sharing of New Testament scripture on the campus of the University of California, Los Angeles in the 1950s, calling his movement Campus Crusade for Christ. The organization grew to become an international ministry. His later efforts included calling for worldwide spiritual revival through prayer and fasting.

Leaver Primitivists: William R. ‗Bill‘ Bright‘s ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Bright endorsing/practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.27]

Pandurang Shastri Athavale (1997):

Taker Templeton‟s: Pandurang Shastri Athavale was 19 when he and his co-workers began bhaktiferi—devotional visits to villages in India to spread the message of love for God and others. Athavale and his coworkers developed the Hindu practice of swadhyaya, a form of self-study that inspires each individual to recognize an inner God, cultivate an increased self-respect, and abandon immoral behavior.

Leaver Primitivists: Pandurang Shastri Athavale‘s ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Athavale endorsing/practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.28]

Sir Sigmund Sternberg (1998):

Taker Templeton‟s: Sir Sigmund Sternberg, a British philanthropist and businessman, has encouraged interfaith dialogue for decades. His behindthe-scenes diplomacy and leadership have played a critical role in promoting better relations among Jews, Christians, and Muslims.

Leaver Primitivists: Sir Sigmund Sternberg‘s ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Sternberg endorsing/practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.29]

Ian Barbour (1999):

Taker Templeton‟s: Ian Barbour is one of the world pioneers in the integration of science and religion. His books and articles have helped to expand the field of theology not only for Christianity but also for other faiths. A physicist and former chair of the religion department, Barbour is Winifred and Atherton Bean Professor Emeritus of Science, Technology and Society at Carleton College.

Leaver Primitivists: Ian Barbour‘s ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Barbour endorsing/practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.30] A.

Freeman Dyson (2000): Taker Templeton‟s: Freeman Dyson is a physicist and mathematician and Professor Emeritus at the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, New Jersey. His contributions to science include the unification of the three versions of quantum electrodynamics invented by Feynman, Schwinger, and Tomonaga. Dyson‘s writings on the meaning of science and its relation to other disciplines, especially religion and ethics, challenge humankind to reconcile technology and social justice.

[7.31]

Leaver Primitivists: Freeman Dyson‘s ‗scientific spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Dyson endorsing/practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity. Arthur Peacocke (2001):

Taker Templeton‟s: Arthur Peacocke was a biochemist who, after pioneering early research into the physical chemistry of DNA, received a Bachelor of Divinity from the University of Birmingham and was ordained in the Church of England as a priest-scientist. In 1973, he became Dean of Clare College, Cambridge, where he pursued his interdisciplinary vocation. He also founded the Society of Ordained Scientists to advance the development of the field of science and religion.

Leaver Primitivists: Arthur Peacocke‘s ‗scientific spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Peacock endorsing/practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.32]

John C. Polkinghorne (2002):

Taker Templeton‟s: John C. Polkinghorne is a mathematical physicist and Anglican priest whose treatment of theology as a natural science has invigorated the search for an interface between science and religion. His writings apply scientific approaches to the fundamentals of Christian orthodoxy and have brought him recognition as a unique voice for understanding the Bible and Christian doctrine.

Leaver Primitivists: John C. Polkinghorne‘s ‗scientific spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any

evidence of Polkinghorne endorsing/practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity. [7.33]

Holmes Rolston III (2003):

Taker Templeton‟s: Holmes Rolston III is University Distinguished Professor at Colorado State University and a Presbyterian minister whose 40 years of research on the religious imperative to respect nature helped to establish the field of environmental ethics. His work assigns value not only to human beings but also to plants, animals, species, and ecosystems as core issues of theological and scientific concern.

Leaver Primitivists: Holmes Rolston III‘s ‗environmental ethics‘ ‗scientific spirituality‘ endorses Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness, with an ‗environmental ethics‘ twist. I was not able to find any evidence of Rolston advocating a return to an Ecocentric masculinity, the termination of totalitarian agriculture industrial civilization, or the adoption of jurisprudence limiting procreation and consumption to below carrying capacity levels. The value assigned to nature, plants, animals and ecosystems appears to stem from a philosophical perspective of taking care of it as human‘s property; for the benefit of humans; not from recognizing the spirit of plants, and nature, and relating to those spirits.

In Environmental Ethics17 he writes: ―Environmental ethics remained unknown until the mid-1970s… Environmental ethics applies ethics to the environment, analogously to ethics applied to BUSINESS (chapter 19), MEDICINE (chapter 17), engineering, LAW (chapter 13) and technology. Such humanist applications may be challenging: limiting population growth or development, questioning consumerism and the distribution of wealth, advocating the inclusion of women or aboriginal peoples, or fearing global warming. Environmental quality is necessary for quality of human life‖; ignoring environmental spirituality that has existed for millions of years. Environmental ethics is thus an anthropocentric concept, where humans are still the center of the universe, but simply realize they need to take better care of their objectified property: nature, for their own personal profits and benefits.

http://lamar.colostate.edu/~rolston/ee-blackwell-comp.pdf

[7.34]

I have not been able to read all of Rolston‘s work, but Rolston‘s ‗environmental ethics‘ does not appear to endorse an Ecocentric spirituality; where nature is revered as the ‗spirit‘ or ‗source of life‘. Instead it remains Anthropocentric, where humans are the superior being, and choose to behave ethically towards nature, as its inferior object, by treating it ‗ethically‘ for the ‗sustainable development‘ (an oxymoron) profits of humans. Nature still remains anthropocentric human‘s object. Human is simply choosing to feel more self righteous about himself, by choosing to treat his ecological objects with more ‗respect‘; for his own ultimate benefit and profit. George F. R. Ellis (2004):

Taker Templeton‟s: George F. R. Ellis is a theoretical cosmologist and Professor Emeritus of Applied Mathematics at the University of Cape Town, South Africa. He has investigated whether or not there was a start to the universe, if there is one universe or many, the evolution of complexity, and the functioning of the human mind, as well as the intersection of these issues with areas beyond the boundaries of science.

Leaver Primitivists: George F. R. Ellis‘ ‗scientific spirituality‘ endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Ellis endorsing/practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.35]

Charles H. Townes (2005):

Taker Templeton‟s: Charles H. Townes, Professor in the Graduate School at the University of California, Berkeley, shared the 1964 Nobel Prize in Physics. His 1966 article, ―The Convergence of Science and Religion,‖ established him as a voice seeking commonality between the two disciplines. He describes his 1951 discovery of the principles of the maser—while sitting on a park bench—as a ―revelation‖ and an example of the interplay between the ―how‖ and ―why‖ of science and religion.

Leaver Primitivists: Charles H. Townes‘ ‗scientific spirituality‘endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Townes endorsing/practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual

values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity. [7.36]

John D. Barrow (2006):

Taker Templeton‟s: John D. Barrow is Professor of Mathematical Sciences at Cambridge University and Gresham Professor of Geometry at Gresham College in London. His writings on the relationship between life and the universe draw insights from mathematics, physics, and astronomy, challenging scientists and theologians to cross disciplinary boundaries to test what they may or may not understand about the origins of time, space, and matter and the behavior of the universe.

Leaver Primitivists: John D. Barrow‘s ‗scientific spirituality‘ endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Barrow endorsing/practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.37]

Charles Taylor (2007):

Taker Templeton‟s: Charles Taylor, Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at McGill University, argues that problems such as violence and bigotry can be solved only by considering both their secular and spiritual dimensions. He suggests that depending wholly on secularized viewpoints leads to fragmented reasoning and prevents crucial insights that might help a global community that is increasingly exposed to clashes of culture, morality, nationality, and religion.

Leaver Primitivists: Charles Taylor‘s ‗scientific spirituality‘ endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Taylor endorsing/practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.38]

Michael Heller (2008):

Taker Templeton‟s: Michael Heller, Professor in the Faculty of Philosophy at the Pontifical Academy of Theology in Cracow, Poland, is a cosmologist and Catholic priest who has developed sharply focused and strikingly original concepts on the origin and cause of the universe. He engages a wide range of sources in mathematics, philosophy, cosmology, and theology, allowing each field to share insights that may inform the others without any violence to their respective methodologies.

Leaver Primitivists: Michael Heller‘s ‗scientific spirituality‘ endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Heller endorsing/practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.39]

Bernard d‟Espagnat (2009):

Taker Templeton‟s: Bernard d‘Espagnat is a French physicist and philosopher of science whose explorations of the philosophical implications of quantum physics have opened new vistas on the definition of reality and the potential limits of knowable science. Much of his work centers on what he calls ―veiled reality,‖ a hidden yet unifying domain beneath what is perceived as time, space, matter, and energy – concepts challenged by quantum physics as possible mere appearances.

Leaver Primitivists: Bernard d‘Espagnat‘s ‗scientific spirituality‘ endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Bernard d‘Espagnat endorsing/practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.40] A.

Francisco J. Ayala (2010): Taker Templeton‟s: Francisco J. Ayala, Professor of Biological Sciences at the University of California, Irvine, is known for his achievements as an evolutionary geneticist and for his opposition to the entanglement of science and religion while also calling for mutual respect between the two. He has been a major voice on the ethical issues related to the study of

human evolution and a frequent spokesperson in the debate between evolution and creationism. B.

[7.41]

Leaver Primitivists: Francisco J. Ayala‘s ‗scientific spirituality‘ endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Ayala endorsing/practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity. Martin J. Rees (2011):

Taker Templeton‟s: Martin J. Rees, Master of Trinity College, Cambridge, Astronomer Royal, and former president of the Royal Society, is one of the world‘s leading theoretical astrophysicists. His distinguished achievements in cosmology and astrophysics have been exceptionally broad-based, and his pioneering research has contributed to the understanding of the origin and nature of the universe.

Leaver Primitivists: Martin J. Rees‘ ‗scientific spirituality‘ endorsed Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Rees endorsing/practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

[7.42]

The 14th Dalai Lama (2012):

Taker Templeton‟s: The 14th Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso, is a Tibetan Buddhist spiritual leader whose engagement with multiple dimensions of science and with people far beyond his own religious traditions has made him an incomparable global voice for universal ethics, nonviolence, and harmony among world religions. For decades he has focused on the connections between the investigative traditions of science and Buddhism, specifically, by encouraging scientific reviews of the power of compassion and its potential to address the world's fundamental problems.

Leaver Primitivists: Dalai Lama‘s ‗scientific spirituality‘ practices/endorses Taker Masculine Insecurity Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric Civilization values of: Perception Management

Coercion, Masculine Insecurity, Totalitarian Agriculture, and Breeding and Consumption War Lifestyle Consciousness. I was unable to find any evidence of Dalai Lama endorsing/practicing Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spiritual values: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity. a. The Great Deception:18 ―So much for Shangri-la and a ―holy‖ political leader. A Great Deception is a compelling account of Tibetan history and the activities of the current 14th Dalai Lama that stand in shocking contrast to popular perceptions. The aims of this book are religious – to end the Dalai Lama‘s illegal ban on a mainstream Buddhist practice.‖ b. Crosstalk: Dalai Lama: CIA Monk exposed19 | Penn & Teller: Dalai Lama the Slave Owner20 | Al Jazeera: People & Power: Dalai Lama the Devil Within21 | Dalai Lama expels thousands of monks and ostracizes Tibetan families 22 | Russia Today: The Dalai Lama: Front Man for a Feudal Clique, Darling of Wealthy Mystics and Cold Warriors23 | Dalai Lama - The Wrong Guy for a Nobel Peace Prize?24 | The Dalai Lama and prime minister enforcing the ban of Dorje Shugden25 | Documentary uncovers the persecution under the Dalai Lama26 | Michael Parenti: Friendly Feudalism – The Tibet Myth27 | Newsweek: When Heaven Shed Blood: Details Of The Cia's Secret War In Tibet Are Only Now Leaking Out, A Tale Of Daring Espionage, Violence And Finally Betrayal28 | Reuters: Female Living Buddha condemns Dalai Lama29 | Tibet: The Other side of the story30 | Documents present picture of brutal past31 | When the Dalai Lama ruled: Hell on Earth32 | The Tawdry Politics of Tibetan Buddhism33 | The Dalai Lama’s Hidden Past34 | CIA’s Secret War in Tibet35 | Tibet, the Great Game & the CIA36.

http://www.agreatdeception.com/ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmw5FIjDDBY 20 www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7t2Ztb92mE 21 http://www.westernshugdensociety.org/video/dalai-lama-devil-within/ 22 http://www.westernshugdensociety.org/video/dalai-lama-expelling-monks/ 23 http://www.westernshugdensociety.org/video/mystics-and-cold-warriors/ 24 http://www.westernshugdensociety.org/video/dalai-lama-nobel-prize/ 25 http://www.westernshugdensociety.org/video/speeches-enforcing-the-ban/ 26 http://www.westernshugdensociety.org/video/dorje-shugden-documentary/ 27 http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html 28 http://www.newsweek.com/id/88042 29 http://in.reuters.com/article/topNews/idINIndia-33305820080429 30 http://news.deviantart.com/article/46683/ 31 http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-04/10/content_7951789.htm 32 http://www.rwor.org/a/firstvol/tibet/tibet1.htm 33 http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/mar2000/tib-m22.shtml 34 http://www.greenleft.org.au/1996/248/13397 35 http://www.historynet.com/cias-secret-war-in-tibet.htm/6 36 http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8442 18 19

[7.43] Not one of the Templeton Prize‘s recipients from 1973 to 2012 ‗spirituality‘ practiced/endorsed Ecocentric non-Patriarchal, Primitivist spirituality: (a) Transparent Listening; (b) Ecocentric Masculinity; (c) Law of Limited Competition agriculture, and (d) Æquilibriæx jurisprudence: procreating and consuming below carrying capacity.

Nomination of the 2013 Templeton Prize was corrupt, fraudulent and discriminatory [8]

Professor Steven D. Gish: Desmond Tutu‟s Biographer: [8.1]

Auburn University describes37 Prof Gish as follows:

[9]

Nomination of Desmond Tutu by Steven D. Gish:

[9.1] According to the Templeton Foundation38, the person who nominated Archbishop Desmond Tutu, was Steven D. Gish, Professor of History at Auburn University in Montgomery, Alabama. "To borrow Sir John Templeton's words, Archbishop Desmond Tutu is a true 'entrepreneur of the spirit,' said Steven D. Gish, Professor of History at Auburn University in Montgomery, Alabama, in his letter of recommendation to the prize judges. "With his unfailing faith in 'God's dream,' he embodies the best instincts of us all."

http://www.aum.edu/profile?email=sgish@aum.edu http://www.templetonprize.org/currentwinner.html 39 http://www.al.com/living/index.ssf/2013/04/desmond_tutu_templeton.html 37 38

University Professor Steven Gish, who has written a biography of Bishop Desmond Tutu, successfully nominated Tutu for the $1.7 million Templeton Prize.‖ [10]

Tutu Receives 2013 Templeton Prize Award:

[10.1] Taker Templeton‟s: Desmond Tutu rose to world prominence with his stalwart - and successful - opposition to South Africa's apartheid regime. After Nelson Mandela's release from prison in 1990 and subsequent election as president in the country's first multi-ethnic democratic elections, Tutu chaired the Truth and Reconciliation Commission employing a revolutionary and relentless policy of confession, forgiveness and resolution that helped shepherd his nation from institutionalized racial repression toward an egalitarian democracy. His deep faith and commitment to prayer and worship provides the foundation for his message of love and forgiveness, which has helped to liberate people around the world. [11] TRC Fraud Correspondence to Templeton Prize Judges, Tutu and Gish: [11.1] 04 April 2013, I submitted to Archbishop Desmond Tutu, copied to Templeton Prize admin and Judges: Questions to Archbishop Tutu; or if unanswered by Tutu and Prize Upheld by Templeton Prize Judges; (ii) Congratulations on Receipt of the Multinational Corporate Resource and Cultural Imperialists Templeton Prize for excellence in House Nigger subservience to getting rid of Boer Anti-Imperialists, and making SA safe for ‘Compulsive Developmentism’ Imperialists (i) cultural colonization of indigenous cultures, and (ii) resource plundering. (PDF40) Questions to Archbishop Desmond Tutu: 1. Please clarify in writing whether you believe the Templeton Judges are aware of the following Radical Honoursty TRC Fraud Fact Censored by Mandela, Tutu, ANC and AntiApartheid Movement? 2. If the Templeton Judges are not aware of the following Radical Honoursty TRC Fraud Fact Censored by Mandela, Tutu, ANC and Anti-Apartheid Movement, why are they ignorant of them? 3. If you (a) continue your policy of endorsing the censorship of the Radical Honoursty TRC Fraud Fact Censored by Mandela, Tutu, ANC and Anti-Apartheid Movement, by refusing to transparently inform the Templeton Judges why you endorse the Anti-Apartheid movement and Constitutional Courts censorship of Radical Honoursty culture allegations of TRC Fraud; and (b) the Templeton Judges endorse your lack of honour and actions of censorship of your 40

http://sqswans.weebly.com/1/post/2013/04/130404_tutu-templeton1.html

involvement in TRC Fraud; we could fairly conclude that (c) You have been awarded the Multinational Corporate Resource and Cultural Imperialists Templeton Prize for excellence in House Nigger subservience to getting rid of Boer AntiImperialists, and making SA safe for „Compulsive Developmentism‟ Imperialists (i) cultural colonization of indigenous cultures, and (ii) resource plundering? Radical Honoursty TRC Fraud Fact Censored by Mandela, Tutu, ANC and Anti-Apartheid Movement: Corrupt Censorship by SA Constitutional Court of Radical Honoursty culture’s Application for Review of South Africa’s TRC Fraud: Mandela, Tutu, the ANC & Anti-Apartheid movement have censored and silenced the only South African who – for the past 12 years – has exposed South Africa‟s Anthropocentric and Ideologically biased TRC Fraud, and advocated on behalf of a brutally honest sincere and ecologically and scientifically credible Truth and Reconciliation Commission, focussed on exposing the underlying psychological, cultural, racial, Compulsive Development and Scarcity induced factors contributing to Apartheid‟s Political violence.

[11.2] 05 April 2013, I submitted to Archbishop Tutu and Templeton Prize Judges: President Zuma urges Archbishop Tutu to continue ANC, Anti-Apartheid Movements Censorship of their TRC Fraud.; Tutu’s Ultimate Spiritual Test. (PDF41) The Ultimate Opportunity to Test your House Nigga Commitment to Jesus vs. Pharisee Values of ‘Love and Forgiveness’.  Should you stand for Truth, Transparency based root cause problem solving?

and

scientific

 Should you find yourself a spiritual backbone to examine the evidence for South Africa‟s Anthropocentric and Ideologically biased TRC Fraud?  Should you advocate on behalf of a brutally honest sincere and ecologically and scientifically credible Truth and Reconciliation Commission, focussed on exposing the underlying psychological, cultural, racial, Compulsive Development and Scarcity induced factors contributing to Apartheid‟s Political violence? Only if your Spiritual convictions are an unswerving commitment to unbiased and unequivocal truth, 100 % transparency with fuck all concern about whose skeletons are being exposed, and scientific based root cause problem solving!

[11.3] 11 April 2013 I submitted to Prof. Steven Gish, Archbishop Tutu and Templeton Prize Judges: Radical Honoursty Culture and TYGAE Request for 41

http://sqswans.weebly.com/1/post/2013/04/130405_zumatrcfraud1.html

Withdrawal of your Nomination of Desmond Tutu as Recipient of Templeton Prize, due to your (a) biographer conflict of interest, and (b) failure to provide the evidence of Archbishop Tutu’s involvement in the cover-up and censorship of South Africa’s TRC Fraud. (PDF42)

[12]

Relief Requested:

[12.1] Amend the ‗Templeton Prize‘ to the ‗Templeton Prize for Taker – Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric – Spirituality‘; to accurately reflect the Patriarchal AnthroCorpocentric forms of spirituality Templeton endorses. [12.2] Withdraw the 2013 Templeton Prize from Archbishop Desmond Tutu for his (i) conflict of interest nomination, and (ii) involvement in, and endorsement of, South Africa‘s TRC Fraud, and discrimination against non-patriarchal Ecocentric Primitivist cultures. Dated at George, South Africa: 22 April 2013: Earth Day.

Lara Johnstone Member: Radical Honesty Culture Founder: Radical Honoursty Culture Founder: Yshmael Guerrylla Law Party Founder: CommonSism: Common Sense Laws for a Sustainable Commons Founder: Æquilibriæx Jurisprudence: Equal & Balanced Eco/Anthropocentric Law Encl: Summary: Ecocentric Gender Balanced Primitivist Principles

http://sqswans.weebly.com/1/post/2013/04/130411_tututempgish.html

Radical Honoursty Culture Yshmael Guerrylla Law Party CommonSism: Common Sense Guerrylla Laws for a Sustainable Commons AEquilibriaex: balanced Eco/Anthropocentric law www.guerrylla -law.co.nr

SUMMARY: ECOCENTRIC GENDER BALANCED PRIMITIVIST SPIRITUAL PRINCIPLES Problem Solving: Transparent Listening vs Perception Management Coercion: [1] Transparent Listening: Every individual deserves to be heard, where ideas are valued on their merit. Reputations are based upon an individual and culture‘s commitment to total transparency which includes exposure of individuals and cultural skeletons for public analysis and cultural ownership. [2] Perception Management Coercion: Only individuals who endorse breeding and consumption war socio-political values deserve to be heard; i.e. those with a large following or those with consumptionist materialist status symbols. Reputations are based upon an individual‘s capacity for perception management. Their ability to ignore, silence and censor critics, and skeletons. [3] For example: The TYGÆ Æx Party, based upon CommonSism Æquilibriæx jurisprudence principles, has bylaws, which require Party Officials to honestly answer all correspondence for their attention. Neither Political correctness, nor public relations image management is allowed. Officials are not allowed to engage in plausible deniability behaviour. To ignore anyone‘s correspondence is equivalent to castrating their voice or opinion, and castrating your own integrity an honour. If or where any individual‘s correspondence is ignored and denied an honest response from any party official, that individual may submit a Seppuku application to the party. Any TYGAE official found guilty of receiving correspondence and ignoring it, either by attempting to hide behind plausible deniability, or simply refusing to provide an honest answer, may voluntarily resign from the party, or if they wish to die an honourable member of the party, they can nominate a member of the party to assassinate them.

PO Box 5042 * George East, 6539 * Tel: (044) 870 7239 * Cel: (071) 170 1954

Ecocentric Masculinity vs Masculine Insecurity: [4] Eve‟s Seed: Patriarchy‟s History and „Control of Reproduction‟ Religion of Masculine Insecurity: ―What is history? The lie that everyone agrees on...‖ – Voltaire

[4.1] In Eve’s Seed: Masculine Insecurity, Metaphor, and the Shaping of History, and Eve’s Seed: Biology, the Sexes and the Course of History, Robert McElvaine described it thus: ―Karl Marx had it wrong. Class has, to be sure, been a major factor in history; but class itself is a derivative concept that is based on the ultimate causative power in history: sex. Marx‗s famous formulation must be revised: The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of struggles based on the division of our species into two sexes, jealousies emanating from this division, exaggerations of the differences between the sexes, misunderstandings about sexual reproductive power, and metaphors derived from sex. Together, these closely related matters constitute the most important, but largely neglected, set of motive forces in human history. Control -- or the claim of control -- over the means of reproduction has been even more fundamental to history than has control of the means of production... [4.2] Robert McElvaine ―throws down the gauntlet to academics and nonspecialists alike, daring a radical rethinking of the basic 'truths' on which cultures have been constructed.‖ He argues that ―there is nothing unique to Islam about male insistence on the subordination of and male control over women and their bodies.‖ McElvaine says misogynistic rulers may be religious fanatics, but their religion is not Islam, but Woody Allen‗s religion in his 2001 movie, The Curse of the Jade Scorpion: ―insecure masculinity‖. [4.3] Eve's Seed reviews ―some 94 centuries of human history, stretching from 8,000 B.C.E. and the invention of agriculture through the Middle Ages‖, to 20th century America, explaining how and why sexually insecure – ―not-a-woman‖ – men seek validation of their manhood by pursuing power, and have used their power to disproportionately influence the shaping of cultures. [4.4] According to John Pettegrew, Deepening the History of Masculinity and the Sexes: ―Vitally important to early economic and political history (bringing such changes as the creation of substantial material surplus and the rise of large states and war), agriculture—what McElvaine describes as the first of two "megarevolutions"—also sparked a massive male "backlash," as the female invention of planting crops and animal husbandry undermined the male role as hunter. Among the masculinist responses, men took over agriculture and invented war, as women became relegated to increasing the population needed for the new social order.‖ 2

[4.5] Subsequent cultural consequences being the â&#x20AC;&#x2022;conception misconceptionâ&#x20AC;&#x2013;, that men held all procreative power, and women were simply the dirt, wherein the seed was planted, which led to the assumption that the God-Creative-Force is male. The second mega-revolution occurred in the 16th century with the rise of geographic mobility and the marketplace. Manhood became associated with possessive individualism, however this conflicts with mans natural state towards association and cooperation formed during humanityâ&#x20AC;&#x2014;s long history of hunting in groups. [4.6] Women can do all the important things that men can (although, because of physical differences, in some areas not as well, on average), but there are some essential things that women can do that men cannot: bear and give birth to children and nourish them from their bodies. [4.7] Because of this relative incapacity, many men suffer, largely subconsciously, from what might be termed "womb envy" and "breast envy," or even the "non-menstrual syndrome." [4.8] To compensate for the things that they cannot do, men tell women that they may not do other things. Which activities women are excluded from varies from one culture to another, but some form of the procedure can be found in all societies. (A striking example of this practice in our own culture can be seen in a statement a Catholic bishop made in 1992: "A woman priest is as impossible as for me to have a baby.") [4.9] Because they cannot compete with women's capabilities in the crucial realms of reproduction and nourishing offspring, men generally seek to avoid a single standard of human behavior and achievement. They create separate definitions of "manliness" which are based on a false opposition to "womanliness." A "real man" has been seen in most cultures as "notawoman." [4.10] The "notawoman" definition of manhood leads men greatly to exaggerate the genuine, but small, differences between the sexes. Far from being genderbenders, men tend to be genderextenders. This produces the fallacious, but virtually universal, idea that women and men are "opposite sexes." This way of thinking can accurately be termed a bi-polar disorder. [4.11] Although this viewpoint actually begins with woman as the "standard" human and proceeds to define man by its supposed vast differences from that standard, people do not like to see themselves in negative terms, so men have generally sought ways to transform woman into a negative, thus making man positive. [4.12] These basic tendencies have existed throughout history, including what is inaccurately called "prehistory," but during the vast majority of human existence

both sexes had obviously essential roles. Women seemingly produced the children, nourished and cared for them, and also provided a large portion of the food for the group through gathering. Men provided meat through hunting and had the bulk of the responsibility for protecting the group from predators. This added up in many hunter-gatherer societies to some approximation of equality between the sexes. [4.13] Human life -- and the situation of both sexes -- was radically changed by the invention of agriculture, which in all likelihood was accomplished by women. These changes were so dramatic that they comprise one of two mega-revolutions in human existence. [4.14] Many ancient myths (including, most notably, chapters 3 of the Book of Genesis) constitute allegories for the invention of agriculture by women (Eve's eating from the Tree of Knowledge) and its long-term consequences (the loss of what seemed in distant retrospect to have been a pre-agricultural paradise in which people lived easily, without work, simply picking fruit from trees, and man having to go forth and till the soil to earn his bread by the sweat of his brow). The "Fall of Man" is a metaphor for an actual fall of men. [4.15] Agriculture moved Homo sapiens from what ecologists refer to as a Kselected reproductive strategy (limited resources make it appropriate to have a small number of offspring and invest heavily in each) to an r-selected reproductive strategy (abundant resources relative to population make it possible and desirable to have a large number of offspring). [4.16] This meant that the development of agriculture greatly enhanced the importance of one of the traditional female roles. Women would now be called upon to spend more of their lives in reproduction and less in production of food and other resources. [4.17] The development of methods for the intentional production of food (animal herding as well as agriculture) substantially devalued what men had traditionally done. Hunting was no longer needed and defense against other species declined in importance as groups of humans settled in growing numbers in farming areas into which predators ventured less frequently than their paths had crossed those of human hunter-gatherers. [4.18] The loss of value in their traditional roles left men adrift, seeking new meaningful roles, and increasingly resentful of women. The result was what can accurately be seen as a Neolithic and early Bronze Age backlash or "masculinist movement." [4.19] As men sought new roles, they took over what had previously been considered female roles. Agriculture itself was one of these. By the time plow agriculture began (ca. 4000 BCE), men were displacing women in the fields.

[4.20] At this point there arose an almost irresistible metaphor, the very widespread acceptance of which has shaped (or, more accurately, misshaped) human life through all of recorded history. The apparent analogy of a seed being planted in furrowed soil to a male's "planting" of semen in the vulva of a female led to the conclusion that men provide the seed of new life and women constitute the soil in which that seed grows. This metaphor has remained with us throughout history and it continues to mislead us in profound ways down to the present. [4.21] The seed metaphor reversed the apparent positions of the sexes in regard to procreative power. What had always appeared to be a principally female power was transformed into an entirely male power. No longer apparent bystanders in reproduction, men now claimed to be the reproducers, while women were reduced from the seeming creators to the soil in which men's creations grow. Women were left with all the work of procreation, but men now took all the credit. [4.22] During the Neolithic Age, then, women both ceased to be major producers (as men took over the production of plant food along with continuing their traditional responsibility for providing animal food) and ceased to be seen as having reproductive power. [4.23] The woman-made world of agriculture had, paradoxically, become a man's world to a degree unprecedented in human existence. Hell hath no fury like a man devalued. [4.24] The belief that men have procreative power led inevitably to the conclusion that the supreme Creative Power must also be male. The toxic fruit that grew from the seed metaphor was male monotheism. [4.25] The combination of the belief that God (or the god who is the ultimate creator) is male with the notion that humans are created in God's image yielded the inescapable conclusion that men are closer than women to godly perfection. Thus the line from the misconceptions about conception emanating from the seed metaphor to the belief, given its classic expressions by Aristotle, Aquinas, and Freud, that women are deformed or "incomplete" men is clear and direct. [4.26] As is suggested by the fact that the root of the word authority is author, it is the erroneous idea that men are the "authors" -- the creators -- that has formed the largely unspoken but pervasive basis for male authority throughout history. A clear example is the patria potestas that gave an ancient Roman man the power to "dispose of" his children. A father was thought to be the creator of "his" children and so he was granted the right to take away the life he was supposed to have given. [4.27] The seed metaphor and the mistaken conclusions that followed from it enabled men to stand womb envy on its head. The reversal was given its most

influential religious authority in the Bible. The human female is named woman (meaning "out of man") in Genesis 2 because we are told that the first woman was born from a man. And in Genesis 3 woman's creative power is reclassified as a curse and burden: "in pain you shall bring forth children." [4.28] The reversal of womb envy found its strongest "scientific" authority in Aristotle's Generation of Animals, where he argued that the great defect in women is that they lack generative power. In earlier times, when the male role in procreation was not comprehended, men had seemed like "infertile women" or "deformed women." Aristotle asserted that it was the other way around. By contending that menstrual fluid is a weak form of semen, lacking in the male fluid's life-giving powers, he also reversed the non-menstrual syndrome. He was saying, in effect, that men have the good genital discharge and menstrual bleeding is just a weak, infertile form of the powerful male secretion. [4.29] Once the seed metaphor had sprouted into the idea that God is male and so women are inferior, the original "notawoman" definition of manhood took on new and more menacing implications. Now what had been an essentially horizontal division became a clearly vertical one: traits and values associated with women were not simply classified as improper for men, but as inferior. [4.30] The total subordination of women throughout recorded history is but the first part of the devastating legacy of the Neolithic backlash and the seed metaphor. Equally important has been the concomitant suppression in men of all values, ideas, and characteristics associated with women and so defined as inferior. [4.31] Since many of the values classified as "feminine" (such as compassion, cooperation, nurturing, and self-sacrifice) are essential for the well-being of human societies, ways had to be found to bring them back, at least to a degree. This was accomplished principally through a series of male religious and philosophical figures, between the sixth century BCE and the first century CE, ranging from Confucius and the Buddha through the later Hebrew prophets and Jesus. These men preached the values that had been defined as feminine to men as well as women. [4.32] Religion has played a paradoxical role in the shaping of history based on sex. On the one hand, most religions since the rise of male monotheism have provided major weapons in advancing the argument of male superiority and female subordination. The paradox lies in the fact that religions have also been the principal means through which the more "feminine" characteristics and values have been urged upon society (especially men). [4.33] The need to appeal to men was at cross purposes with the objective of religions to restrain some of the maladaptive traits that are classified as "masculine" (e.g. quick resort to violence, hierarchical domination, and 6

competitiveness). Men were unlikely to listen to women telling them to act in ways that had been defined as "feminine," so a male priesthood seemed essential. But the men who took over Christianity had by the fourth century gone a long way towards "efeminating" (removing its feminine characteristics) the religion. [4.34] The basic problem insecure males have with sexual equality is that it threatens to re-establish a single human standard, one that includes areas in which men are unable to compete. Hence such men react fiercely and attempt to reinforce the wall they have erected between the sexes.

Law of Limited Competition vs Totalitarian Agriculture: [5] In Genetic feedback and human population regulation 1, Russell Hopfenberg argues there are only two agri-cultures on planet earth, and describes the consequences between the practices of these two Agri-Cultures: ―Lack of cultural variability is precisely the situation in which the human species finds itself. Except for a tiny minority of tribal peoples on the planet, the human species can be seen as participating in a monoculture. This monoculture, called civilization (Quinn 1992; Cohen 1995), has as its foundation, the basic feature of continually increasing food production. As Cohen (1995) stated, ―The ability to produce food allowed human numbers to increase greatly and made it possible, eventually, for civilizations to arise.‖ Farb (1978) pointed out that ―intensification of production to feed an increased population leads to a still greater increase in population.‖ He also asserted ―the population explosion, the shortage of resources, the pollution of the environment, exploitation of one human group by another, famine and war—all have their roots in that great adaptive change from foraging to production.‖ Farb’s statement makes clear that the ―adaptive change from foraging to production‖ is coming into focus as one that has provided some relatively short-term benefits and many long-term difficulties. These difficulties may ultimately lead to an environment that is no longer capable of sustaining human life (Pimm et al. 1995).‖

[6] Primitive Sustainable Leavers: Ecological Law of Competition: “You may compete but you may not wage war”:

Limited

[6.1] Daniel Quinn defines the Ecological Law of Limited Competition as such: you may compete to the full extent of your capabilities but you may not hunt down your competitors or destroy their food or deny them access to food.

Hopfenberg, R. (2009)

[6.2] Essentially what this means is that you cannot claim ownership of all the food. You can compete for the food that you need, but you cannot say "all the food is mine and no one else who wants any can have some." You can fight for food but you cannot act in a genocidal fashion, setting out to kill those who compete with you merely because they compete with you. [6.3] A lion and a hyena may compete with each other to determine who gets to eat the dead antelope. However the lions may not rally together and set out to eliminate hyenas lest they challenge them for any of their kills. To do so would be to operate outside the boundaries of the law. [6.4] How The Law is Self Eliminating: If the lions did rally together and kill of all the hyenas then there would be more food for them. Their population would increase and their territory would expand. But there would still be other competitors for their food. So the lions set up a special task force to go out and eliminate other species that compete for food and living space. [6.5] Elimination doesn't occur instantly. It takes place when there is nowhere left to expand, no competitors left to destroy. If a species destroys their competitors then there is more food available to them. With more food they can support a higher population. And with a higher population they need more living space so they expand their territory. But as they expand their territory they meet more competitors who are eating food that could be theirs. So they destroy them, taking all the food in the new territory. With all this new food population expands again and so does territory. [6.6] And then it happens all over again. This way of life works for a short period of time. It doesn't eliminate the species instantly. Elimination only takes place when there is nowhere left to expand into, no competitors left to destroy. [6.7] When this happens the way of life implodes. So many competitors have been destroyed that the biodiversity of the ecosystem has been fatally weakened. All that the landscape now supports is the lawbreaker and the lawbreaker's food. With biodiversity gone and the food chain destroyed the food supply of the lawbreakers will fall apart and when the food supply falls apart the lawbreaker is eliminated. [6.8] Quinn argues that humans are the only species to have broken this law, beginning with Agriculture, 10 000 years ago. [6.9] Takers exterminate their competitors, which is something that never happens in the wild. In the wild, animals will defend their territories and their kills and they will invade their competitors' territories and pre-empt their kills. Some species even include competitors among their prey, but they never hunt competitors down just to make them dead, the way ranchers and farmers do with coyotes and foxes and crows. What they hunt, they eat." When animals go huntingâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;even extremely aggressive animals like baboonsâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;it's to obtain food, not to exterminate competitors or even animals that prey on them."

[6.10] Takers systematically destroy their competitors' food to make room for their own. Nothing like this occurs in the natural community. The rule there is: Take what you need, and leave the rest alone." [6.11] Takers deny their competitors access to food. In the wild, the rule is: You may deny your competitors access to what you're eating, but you may not deny them access to food in general. In other words, you can say, `This gazelle is mine,' but you can't say, `All the gazelles are mine.' The lion defends its kill as its own, but it doesn't defend the herd as its own." "Bees will deny you access to what's inside their hive in the apple tree, but they won't deny you access to the apples." [7] Two Agri-Cultures: Sustainable Primitive Leavers and Unsustainable Civilized Takers: [7.1] World Food and Human Population Growth, describes how food supply drives human population growth, and how human population growth adversely affects our environment and our ability to sustain our culture. This began with the agricultural revolution, a cultural change which advocates continually increasing food production. The consequences of Agricultural expansion are: * decreased carbon sequestration (80%), decreased soil nutrients (20%), decreased base stream flow (30%), and decreased species biodiversity (80%).2

Lifestyle & Jurisprudence: Sustainable RNR Carrying Capacity vs Unsustainable NNR Breeding & Consumption War: ―The comfort of the rich depends upon an abundant supply of the poor.‖ ― Voltaire

Hopfenberg, Russell (2007): Chapter 32-33: Before – After Forest Conversion to Cropland

―Every right must be evaluated in the network of all rights claimed and the environment in which these rights are exercised. If we hold that every right, ―natural" or not, must be evaluated in the total system of rights operating in a world that is limited, we must inevitably conclude that no right can be presumed to be absolute, that the effect of each right on the suppliers as well as on the demanders must be determined before we can ascertain the quantity of right that is admissible. From here on out, ours is a limited world. Rights must also be limited. The greater the population, the more limited the per capita supply of all goods; hence the greater must be the limitation on individual rights, including the right to breed. At its heart, this is the political meaning of the population problem.‖ – Garrett Hardin, Limited World, Limited Rights3, Biological Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA

The Birthday (1964): American-German artist Edward Kienholz: Woman in a Masonic doctors room (tiled floor), covered in dirt (dirt represents the furrow/earth of a woman's vagina, where the seed is planted). She is tied down (not consenting) while, screaming into a bubble (her voice is censored), and giving birth to missiles, implying Masonic use of women as brood sows for Human Factory Farming War Economy cannon fodder. Limited World, Limited Rights, by Garrett Hardin, Biological Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA http://www.garretthardinsociety.org/articles/art_limited_world_limited_rights.html 3

[8] AnthroCorpocentric4 Flat Earth Society5 Jurisprudence views the world from a firmly entrenched inaccurate Anthropocentric (human-centred) perspective, where there is always a brighter future, because the implicit assumption of our Anthropocentric political, economic and legal worldview is that there will always be ―enough‖ Non Renewable Natural Resources (NNR‗s) to enable a brighter future, and all politics, religion and economics needs to concern itself with, is how to use these NNR‗s to provide ever improving material living standards for our everexpanding global population6. From a broader Ecocentric7 Finite Resource Scarcity perspective, beyond Peak NNR8, there is no hope for a brighter future, the future is one of depletion, austerity, resource wars & socio-economic and political collapse;9 because the fundamental assumption of ever-increasing NNR‗s, underlying our limited AnthroCorpocentric jurisprudence perspective is inaccurate.10

[9]

Peak Oil is the end of cheap oil, it is the point where every barrel of oil is harder to find, more expensive to extract, and more valuable to whoever owns or controls it. As early as 2000, geological experts warned Peak Oil would occur sometime between 2000 and 200711. Cheap oil is the oxygen of the ―economic growth‖12 global economic system and industrial food production13. Scarcity: Humanity‟s Last Chapter: A Comprehensive Analysis Nonrenewable Natural Resource (NNR) Scarcity‟s Consequences:

[10]

Overview:

Clugston (2012) (p.127): ―The AnthroCorpocentric perspective considers the philosophy, processes, and activities by which natural resource inputs to a society‗s economy are converted into goods and services outputs (wealth creation). It also considers the philosophy, processes, and activities by which goods and services (wealth) are allocated among a society‗s population. The fundamental assumption underlying the prevailing AnthroCorpocentric perspective is that notwithstanding periodic temporary shortfalls, natural resource inputs and natural habitat waste absorption capacities will remain sufficient to perpetuate global industrialism indefinitely.‗ – Scarcity, Clugston Chris (pg. 127) 5 Bartlett (1993) (1996/09) (1999/01) (2002); Hardin (1999); 6 Hardin (1985); Bartlett (2006/09); Guillebaud (2007); Leahy (2003) 7 ―The ecological perspective considers natural resource inputs and natural habitat waste absorption capacities as the ultimate limiting factors governing a society‗s economic/political processes and activities, its attainable economic output (GDP) level, and its attainable level of societal wellbeing—i.e., the material living standards enjoyed by the society‗s population.‖ – Scarcity, Clugston C (127) 8 Bartlett (2006/09); Clugston (2012): Peak NNR: ―NNRs are finite; and as their name implies, NNR reserves are not replenished on a time scale that is relevant to humans. More unfortunately, economically viable supplies associated with the vast majority of NNRs that enable our industrialized way of life are becoming increasingly scarce, both domestically (US) and globally. While there will always be ―plenty of NNR‘s in the ground, there will not always be ―plenty of economically viable NNR‘s in the ground. In fact, there are ―no longer enough economically viable NNR‘s in the ground to enable continuous improvement in human societal wellbeing at historical rates.‖ –Clugston, C: Scarcity 9 Scarcity (p.4) 10 Clugston Chris: Scarcity: Humanity‗s Final Chapter: The realities, choices and likely outcomes associated with ever-increasing non-renewable natural resource scarcity, page 4 11 On February 11, 2006 Deffeyes claimed world oil production peaked on December 16, 2005 12 Deffeyes (2006): "The economists all think that if you show up at the cashier's cage with enough currency, God will put more oil in ground." 13 Ruppert (2004): p.24: ―We eat oil. It is a little known fact that for every 1 calorie of food energy produced, 10 calories of hydrocarbons are consumed.‗ 4

Mr. Chris Clugston‘s14 Domestic (US) & Global NNR Scarcity Analysis is based upon his analysis of the criticality and scarcity associated with each of the 89 analyzed NNRs, using data from USGS, EIA, BEA, BLS, Fed, CBO, FBI, IEA, UN, World Bank, etc; and concludes in general that ―absent some combination of immediate and drastic reductions in our global NNR utilization levels, ... we will experience escalating international and intranational conflicts during the coming decades over increasingly scarce NNR‗s, which will devolve into global societal collapse, almost certainly by the year 2050.‖15 [10.1]

[10.2] Scarcity‘s Global NNR Scarcity Analysis (pg.51-59) (pg 41-4916) summarizes global criticality and scarcity associated with each of the 89 analyzed NNR‘s: (a) An overwhelming majority, 63 of the 89 analyzed NNRs, were considered ―scarce‖ globally in 2008, immediately prior to the Great Recession; (b) A significant number, 28 of the 89 analyzed NNRs have peaked: are ―almost certain‖ to remain scarce permanently going forward; and a sizeable number, 16 of the 89 analyzed NNRs, will ―likely‖ remain scarce permanently; and (c) Global extraction/production levels associated with 39 of the 89 analyzed NNRs, are considered ―at risk‖. [10.3] NNR‘s at risk – i.e. years to global exhaustion of reserves – are: (a) Antimony: 8 yrs (used for starter lights ignition batteries in cars and trucks; (b) Bauxite: 40 years (only economically viable feedstock for aluminium); (c) Bismuth: 17 years (non-toxic substitute for lead in solder and plumbing fixtures); (d) Cadmium: 25 years; (e) Chromium: 26 years (stainless steel, jet engines and gas turbines); (f) Coal: 40 years (electricity generation); (g) Cobalt: 26 years (gas turbine blades, jet aircraft engines, batteries); (h) Copper: 27 years; (i) Fluorspar: 23 years (feedstock for fluorine bearing chemicals, aluminium and uranium processing); (j) Graphite (Natural): 23 years; (k) Iron Ore: 15 years (only feedstock for iron and steel); (l) Lead: 17 years; (m) Lithium: 8 years (aircraft parts, mobile phones, batteries for electrical vehicles); (n) Manganese: 17 years (stainless steel, gasoline additive, dry cell batteries); (o) Molybdenum: 20 years (aircraft parts, electrical contacts, industrial motors, tool steels); (p) Natural Gas: 34 years; (q) Nickel: 30 years; (r) Niobium: 15 years (jet and rocket engines, turbines, superconducting magnets); (s) Oil: 39 years; (t) Rhenium: 22 years (petroleum refining, jet engines, gas turbine blades); (u) Silver: 11 years; (v) Thalium: 38 years; (w) Tin: 18 years; (x) Tungsten: 32 years; (y) Uranium: 34 years (primary energy source, weapons); (z) Zinc: 13 years; (aa) Zirconium: 19 years (nuclear power plants, jet engines, gas turbine blades).

Clugston, Chris: Scarcity: Humanity‗s Final Chapter: The realities, choices and likely outcomes associated with ever-increasing non-renewable natural resource scarcity (Booklocker.com Inc 2012). Scarcity is a comprehensive, multidisciplinary assessment of the realities, choices, and likely outcomes associated with everincreasing non-renewable natural resource (NNR) scarcity. NNRs are the fossil fuels, metals, and non-metallic minerals that enable our industrialized existence. 15 Clugston, C: Scarcity: Preface, pg. ix 16 issuu.com/js-ror/docs/clugston_scarcity_pg31-55 14

[10.4] Scarcity concludes ―Our Next Normal is Catastrophe‖: Our AnthroCorpocentric worldview does not recognize that ―from a broader ecological perspective, all human economics and politics are irrelevant,‖ to ―paraphrase Thoreau, we are ‗thrashing at the economic and political branches of our predicament, rather than hacking at the ecological root.‘‖17 [10.5] ―Because the underlying cause associated with our transition from prosperity to austerity is ecological (geological), not economic or political, our incessant barrage of economic and political ―fixes‖ are misguided and inconsequential. Our national economies are not ―broken‖; they are ―dying of slow starvation‖ for lack of sufficient economically viable NNR inputs. [10.6] ―Our industrial lifestyle paradigm, which is enabled by enormous quantities of finite, non-replenishing, and increasingly scarce NNRs, is unsustainable, i.e. physically impossible – going forward.18 [10.7] ―Global humanity‗s steadily deteriorating condition will culminate in selfinflicted global societal collapse, almost certainly by the year 2050. We will not accept gracefully our new normal of ever-increasing, geologically-imposed austerity; nor will we suffer voluntarily the horrifically painful population level reductions and material living standard degradation associated with our inevitable transition to a sustainable, pre-industrial lifestyle paradigm. [10.8] ―All industrialized and industrializing nations, irrespective of their economic and political orientations, are unsustainable and will collapse in the nottoo-distant future as a consequence of their dependence upon increasingly scarce NNRs. [10.9] We can voluntarily reduce population and consumption, or NNR scarcity depletion will force it upon us, in our inevitable transition to a sustainable, preindustrial lifestyle paradigm. [11]

Natural Resources and Human Evolution:

[11.1] During the past 2+ million years, humanity—Homo sapiens and our hominid predecessors—evolved through three major lifestyle paradigms: huntergatherer, agrarian, and industrial. [11.2] Each of the three paradigms is readily distinguishable from the other two in terms of its worldview, natural resource utilization behavior, and resulting level of societal wellbeing—i.e., attainable population levels and material living standards.

17 18

Clugston, C: Scarcity: Preface, pg. 103-104 Clugston, C: Scarcity: Preface, pg. 103-104

[12]

The Hunter-Gatherer Lifestyle Paradigm:

[12.1] The hunter-gatherer (HG) lifestyle paradigm spanned over 2 million years, from the time that our hominid ancestors first stood erect on the continent of Africa to approximately 8,000 BC. HG societies consisted of small nomadic clans, typically numbering between 50 and 100 individuals, who subsisted primarily on naturally occurring vegetation and wildlife. [12.2] The HG lifestyle can best be described as subsistence living for a relatively constant population that probably never exceeded 5 million globally. Huntergatherers produced few manmade goods beyond the necessities required for their immediate survival, and they generated no appreciable wealth surplus. [12.3] The HG worldview revered Nature as the provider of life and subsistence, a perspective that fostered a passive lifestyle orientation through which huntergatherers sought to liveâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;albeit somewhat exploitativelyâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;within the environmental context defined by Nature. The HG resource mix consisted almost entirely of renewable natural resources such as water and naturally occurring edible plant life and wildlife. [13]

The Agrarian Lifestyle Paradigm:

[13.1] The agrarian lifestyle paradigm commenced in approximately 8,000 BC and lasted until approximately 1700 AD, when England initiated what was to become the industrial revolution.

[13.2] Agrarian societies existed primarily by raising cultivated crops and domesticated livestock. [13.3] The agrarian worldview perceived Nature as something to be augmented through human effort, by domesticating naturally occurring plant and animal species. The agrarian lifestyle orientation was proactive in the sense that it sought to improve upon what Nature provided. [13.4] While modest wealth surpluses were sometimes generated by agrarian populations, agrarian existence typically offered little more in the way of material living standards for the vast majority of agrarian populations than did the HG lifestyle—although the global agrarian population did increase significantly, reaching nearly 800 million by 1750 AD. [13.5] The agrarian resource mix consisted primarily of RNRs, which were increasingly overexploited by ever-expanding, permanently-settled agrarian populations. As agrarian cultivation and grazing practices became increasingly intensive, renewable natural resource reserves were increasingly depleted and natural habitats were increasingly degraded as well. [14]

The Industrial Lifestyle Paradigm:

[14.1] The inception of the industrial lifestyle paradigm occurred with England‘s industrial revolution in the early 18th century, less than 300 years ago. [14.2] Today, over 1.5 billion people—approximately 22% of the world‘s 6.9 billion total population—is considered ―industrialized‖; and nearly three times that many people actively aspire to an industrialized way of life. [14.3] Our industrialized world is characterized by an incomprehensibly complex mosaic of interdependent yet independently operating human and non-human entities and infrastructure. [14.4] These entities must function continuously, efficiently, and collectively at the local, regional, national, and global levels in order to convert natural resource inputs into the myriad goods and services that enable our modern industrial way of life. [14.5] [Note that failures within the industrial mosaic can disrupt, temporarily or permanently, the flow of societal essentials—water, food, energy, shelter, and clothing—to broad segments of our global population.] [14.6] Tremendous wealth surpluses are typically generated by industrialized societies; such wealth surpluses are actually required to enable the historically unprecedented material living standards enjoyed by increasingly large segments of ever-expanding industrialized populations.

[14.7] The industrialized worldview perceives Nature as something to be harnessed through industrial processes and infrastructure, in order to enhance the human condition. It is an exploitive worldview that seeks to use natural resources and habitats as the means to continuously improve human societal wellbeing—that is, to provide continuously improving material living standards for ever-increasing numbers of ever-expanding human populations. [14.8] The resource mix associated with today‘s industrialized societies is heavily skewed toward nonrenewable natural resources, which, in addition to renewable natural resources and natural habitats, have been increasingly overexploited since the dawn of the industrial revolution. [14.9] It is precisely this persistent overexploitation of natural resources and natural habitats—especially NNRs—that has enabled the ―success‖ associated with the industrial lifestyle paradigm—success being defined here as continuous increases in both human population levels and human material living standards. [15]

Nonrenewable Natural Resources—the Enablers of Industrialization:

[15.1] Our industrial lifestyle paradigm is enabled by nonrenewable natural resources (NNRs)—energy resources, metals, and minerals. Both the support infrastructure within industrialized nations and the raw material inputs into industrialized economies consist almost entirely of NNRs; NNRs are the primary sources of the tremendous wealth surpluses required to perpetuate industrialized societies. [15.2] As a case in point, the percentage of NNR inputs into the US economy increased from less than 10% in the year 1800, which corresponds roughly with the inception of the American industrial revolution, to approximately 95% today. Between 1800 and today, America‘s total annual NNR utilization level increased from approximately 4 million tons to nearly 7 billion tons—an increase of over 1700 times! [15.3] In the absence of enormous and ever-increasing NNR supplies, the 1.2 billion people who currently enjoy an industrialized way of life will cease to do so; and the billions of people aspiring to an industrialized way of life will fail to realize their goal. [16]

NNR Scarcity:

[17] As their name implies, NNRs are finite—they are not replenished by Nature; and they are scarce—economically viable NNR deposits are rare. Persistent extraction (production) will therefore deplete recoverable NNR reserves to exhaustion. [Note: the terms NNR ―production‖ and NNR ―extraction‖ are used interchangeably throughout the paper. Although ―extraction‖ is the proper term—

humans do not produce NNRs—the term ―production‖ has gained wide acceptance within the NNR extraction industries.] [17.1] The typical NNR depletion cycle is characterized by: a period of ―continuously more and more‖, as the easily accessible, high quality, low cost resources are extracted; followed by a ―supply peak‖,8 or maximum attainable extraction level; followed by a period of ―continuously less and less‖, as the less accessible, lower quality, higher cost resources are extracted. [17.2] Since the inception of our industrial revolution, humanity has been the beneficiary of ―continuously more and more‖ with respect to available NNR supplies. [17.3] Unfortunately, in the process of reaping the benefits associated with ―continuously more and more‖, we have been eliminating—persistently and systematically—the very natural resources upon which our industrialized way of life depends. [17.4] Increasingly, global NNR supplies are transitioning from ―continuously more and more‖ to ―continuously less and less‖, as they peak and go into terminal decline. As a result, NNRs are becoming increasingly scarce—ever-tightening global NNR supplies are struggling to keep pace with ever-increasing global demand. [18]

The Analysis:

[18.1] The following Global Nonrenewable Natural Resource Scarcity Assessment quantifies the magnitude associated with increasing global NNR scarcity and the probabilities associated with imminent and permanent global NNR supply shortfalls. The assessment consists of two analyses, both of which are based on US Geological Survey (USGS) and US Energy Information Administration (EIA) data. [18.2] The Global NNR Scarcity Analysis assesses the incidence of global scarcity associated with each of 57 NNRs during the period of global economic growth (20002008) prior to the Great Recession. [18.3] The Global NNR Supply Shortfall Analysis assesses the probability of a permanent global supply shortfall associated with each of 26 NNRs between now and the year 2030. [19]

Global NNR Supply Shortfall Analysis Findings:

[19.1] Fifty (50) of the 57 NNRs (88%) analyzed in the Global NNR Scarcity Analysis experienced global scarcity—and therefore experienced temporary (at least) global supply shortfalls—during the 2000-2008 period. Twenty three (23) of the 26 NNRs (88%) analyzed in the Global NNR Supply Shortfall Analysis are

likely to experience permanent global supply shortfalls by the year 2030. Each permanent NNR supply shortfall represents another crack in the foundation of our globalizing industrial lifestyle paradigm; at issue is which crack or combination of cracks will cause the structure to collapse?

[19.2] Permanent global supply shortfalls associated with a single critical NNR or with a very few secondary NNRs can be sufficient to cause significant lifestyle disruptionsâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;population level reductions and/or material living standard degradation. [19.3] A permanent shortfall in the global supply of oil, for example, would be sufficient to cause significant local, national, and/or global lifestyle disruptions, or outright global societal collapse; as would permanent global supply shortfalls associated with 2-3 critical NNRs such as potassium, phosphate rock, and (fixed) nitrogen; as would concurrent permanent global supply shortfalls associated with 4-5 secondary NNRs such as the alloys, catalysts, and reagents that enable the effective use of critical NNRs.

[19.4] Given our vulnerability to an ever-increasing number of imminent and permanent global NNR supply shortfalls, the likelihood that the mix and volume of shortfalls will reach their ―critical mass‖ is a question of ―when‖, not ―if‖. [20]

Implications of Increasing Global NNR Scarcity:

[21]

Increasing NNR Scarcity:

[21.1] Available supplies associated with an overwhelming majority of NNRs— including bauxite, copper, iron ore, magnesium, manganese, nickel, phosphate rock, potash, rare earth metals, tin, and zinc—have reached their domestic US peak extraction levels, and are in terminal decline.16 Based on the evidence presented above, available supplies associated with a vast majority of NNRs are becoming increasingly scarce globally as well. [21.2] Because global NNR supplies are transitioning from ―continuously more and more‖ to ―continuously less and less‖, our global societal wellbeing levels— our economic activity levels, population levels, and material living standards—are transitioning from ―continuously more and more‖ to ―continuously less and less‖ as well.

[22]

Sustainability is Inevitable:

[22.1] ―Business as usual‖ (industrialism), ―stasis‖ (no growth), ―downscaling‖ (reducing NNR utilization), and ―moving toward sustainability‖ (feel good initiatives) are not options; we will be sustainable…

[23]

Unintended Consequences:

[23.1] It is difficult to argue that our incessant quest for global industrialization and the natural resource utilization behavior that enables our quest are inherently evil. We have simply applied our everexpanding knowledge and technology over the past several centuries toward dramatically improving our level of societal wellbeing, through our ever-increasing utilization of NNRs. [23.2] However, despite our possibly justifiable naïveté during our meteoric rise to ―exceptionalism‖, and despite the fact that our predicament was undoubtedly an unintended consequence of our efforts to continuously improve the material living standards enjoyed by our ever-expanding global population; globally available, economically viable supplies associated with the NNRs required to perpetuate our industrial lifestyle paradigm will not be sufficient going forward. [24]

Our Transition to Sustainability:

[24.1] Humanity‘s transition to a sustainable lifestyle paradigm, within which a drastically reduced human population will rely exclusively on renewable natural resources (RNRs)—water, soil (farmland), forests, and other naturally occurring biota—is therefore inevitable. Our choice is not whether we ―wish to be sustainable‖; our choice involves the process by which we ―will become sustainable‖. [24.2] We can choose to alter fundamentally our existing unsustainable natural resource utilization behavior and transition voluntarily to a sustainable lifestyle paradigm over the next several decades. In the process, we would cooperate globally in utilizing remaining accessible NNRs to orchestrate a relatively gradual—but horrifically painful nonetheless—transition, thereby optimizing our population level and material living standards both during our transition and at sustainability. Or, we can refrain from taking preemptive action and allow Nature to orchestrate our transition to sustainability through societal collapse, thereby experiencing catastrophic reductions in our population level and material living standards. [25]

The Squeeze is On:

[25.1] It would be convenient if our unraveling were to occur in 1,000 years, or 500 years, or even 50 years. We could then dismiss it as a concern for future generations and go busily about improving our national and global societal wellbeing levels in the meantime. Unfortunately, this is not the case. The Great Recession was a tangible manifestation of our predicament—NNR scarcity was epidemic in 2008, both domestically (US) and globally. Our unraveling is in process. At present, however, only an extremely small minority of the global populace understands that NNR scarcity is the fundamental cause underlying our predicament and its derivative economic and political problems. When the general

public becomes aware of this fact and of the fact that NNR scarcity is a permanent, ever-increasing, and unsolvable phenomenon, collapse will ensue in short order. [26]

Public Ignorance:

[26.1] Historically, globally available, economically viable supplies associated with most NNRs were generally sufficient; NNR scarcity, when it occurred, was a temporary phenomenon. Incremental economically viable NNR supplies were available to be brought online, thereby restoring economic output (GDP) and growth to ―expected‖ levels. Because episodes of NNR scarcity have occurred periodically since the dawn of our industrial revolution, they are considered temporary ―inconveniences‖ associated with the boom phases of ―normal‖ commodity boom/bust cycles. [26.2] Today, despite the fact that NNR scarcity is becoming increasingly prevalent—as clearly demonstrated by the NNR Scarcity Analysis—and despite the fact that the impact associated with NNR scarcity has certainly been felt—as an underlying cause of the Great Recession—the general public remains almost completely unaware. This is understandable, as it is obviously in nobody‘s interest to see humanity fail. [26.3] Our opinion leaders—i.e., the political, economic, and other societal elites who have the greatest vested interest in preserving the status quo—continue to preach that historically robust levels of economic growth can be sustained forever. Some of our opinion leaders may still believe this to be true, although it is difficult to believe that many or most do. [26.4] [There currently exists considerable speculation regarding the extent to which our opinion leaders actually understand our predicament and its consequences, and are merely conducting a charade in order to perpetuate ―business as usual‖, from which most of them benefit disproportionately, for as long as possible. At the end of the day, the awareness levels and motives associated with our opinion leaders are irrelevant; the outcome—societal collapse—remains unchanged.] [26.5] The general public—given their cornucopian worldview and their almost complete lack of understanding regarding the enablers of their industrialized lifestyles—adheres steadfastly to the notion that ―every generation will have it better than the last‖. The vast majority of the general public undoubtedly still believes this to be true, despite stagnant or declining material living standards in much of the industrialized world. So long as myth supersedes reality and the general public remains ignorant regarding the nature of our predicament and of the fact that our predicament cannot be solved, complete societal collapse is unlikely. It is likely, however, that as our situation devolves, the general public will become increasingly frustrated, angry, and scared. 21

[26.6] ―We‖ will blame ―them‖—the government, corporations, foreigners, capitalists, communists, Christians, Muslims, the rich, the poor, anybody who is not ―us‖—for our continuously deteriorating circumstances. And we will become increasingly susceptible to the empty rhetoric of Hitleresque demagogues who promise—and fail—to restore ―normalcy‖, at the expense of our remaining freedoms. Through their ignorance, the general public will exacerbate our already deteriorating situation. [27]

Public Awareness: [27.1]

Within the next few years, however, NNR scarcity will become:

―Noticeable‖—NNR supplies will become increasingly constrained and prices will rise continuously; then

―Inconvenient‖—periodic and temporary shortages and rationing associated with NNRs and derived goods and services will occur with increasing frequency; then

―Disruptive‖—shortages and rationing associated with ever-increasing numbers of NNRs and derived goods and services will become permanent; and finally,

―Debilitating‖—supplies associated with ever-increasing numbers of NNRs and derived goods and services will become permanently unavailable.

[27.2] As this scenario unfolds, increasingly large segments of humanity will become aware of the fact that NNRs enable our industrialized way of life, and that ever-increasing NNR scarcity is the fundamental cause underlying our continuously declining economic output (GDP) and societal wellbeing levels, both domestically (US) and, by that time, globally as well. Historically prevalent public attitudes of generosity and forbearance, which were made possible by abundant and cheap NNRs during our epoch of ―continuously more and more‖, will be displaced by public intolerance: A.

Childbirth will be condemned rather than celebrated;

All immigration will be outlawed;

Traditionally unquestioned resource uses—from ―social entitlements‖ and universally accessible healthcare, to professional sports and cosmetics— will be considered ―unfair‖ or ―wasteful‖, and ultimately eliminated; and

―Excessive wealth‖ will be appropriated for ―the public good‖.

[27.3] Ultimately, the general public will become aware of the fact that our predicament has no solution; and the following ―trigger‖ conditions for societal collapse will be met: NNR scarcity will become ―disruptive‖—the available mix and levels associated with economically viable NNRs and derived goods and services 22

will become insufficient to enable ―tolerable‖ day-to-day existence; and sufficiently large segments of society will: A.

Become aware of the fact that ever-increasing NNR scarcity is a permanent phenomenon; &

Acknowledge the fact that our predicament cannot be ―fixed‖; ―continuously less and less‖—continuously declining societal wellbeing—is our new reality.

[27.4] Previously sporadic social unrest and resource wars will degenerate— seemingly instantaneously—into full fledged conflicts among nations, classes, and ultimately individuals for remaining natural resources and real wealth. It will become universally understood that the only way to ―stay even‖ within a continuously contracting operating environment—much less to improve one‘s lot— is to take from somebody else. Life will become a ―negative sum game‖ within the ―shrinking pie‖ of ―continuously less and less‖. [27.5] Social institutions will dissolve; law and order will cease to exist; and chaos will fill the void— nations will collapse. [27.6] Given that half of the 89 analyzed NNRs are either likely or almost certain to remain scarce permanently at the global level; that no extraterrestrial source NNR imports exists for the world as a whole, and that the global industrialized / industrializing population has increased nearly 5 fold since 1975… …it is highly likely that the interval between global societal wellbeing ―divergence‖ in 2008 and global societal collapse will be 35 years or less. [28]

Humanity's Predicament:

[28.1] During the course of our unrelenting pursuit of global industrialization, and our consequent ever-increasing utilization of the earth‘s increasingly scarce NNRs, we have been eliminating— persistently and systematically—the very natural resources upon which our industrialized way of life and our very existence depend. [28.2] Ironically, the natural resource utilization behavior that has enabled our historically unprecedented ―success‖—our industrial lifestyle paradigm—and that is essential to our continued success, is also pushing us toward our imminent demise. This is humanity‘s predicament. [29]

Humanity's Limited Perspective:

[29.1] To date, our distorted cornucopian worldview and limited anthropocentric perspective have rendered us incapable of understanding our predicament and its fundamental cause, which is ecological—ever-increasing NNR scarcity—not economic or political. The economic and political problems with which we concern

ourselves are merely manifestations of our predicament—they are symptoms, not the disease. Because none of the economic and political expedients that we employ to solve these problems can create additional NNRs, our attempted economic and political ―solutions‖ are irrelevant. [29.2] Metaphorically, the well is running dry, yet we insist on tinkering with the pump. What is Sustainable Consumption and Procreation Behaviour?: [30] In Peace seekers have no plan for enduring peace19, Dr. Jack Alpert argues that Peaceniks failure to move society from conflict to peace, their establishment of never ending or honoured ―peace accords, moral codes, acts of economic justice, and environmental laws, are like traffic signals‖ which ―cause people to relinquish freedoms‖ but, ―do not stop (change) the behaviors that increase scarcity, conflict, and environmental destruction‖20: ―result from a faulty perception of what increases or decreases conflict. Where, peace seekers have acted as if conflict is caused by bad leadership maybe they should have acted as if trends in conflict are driven by trends in scarcity. Maybe they would have been more successful if they acted as if trends in scarcity are driven by the collective behaviors of 6 billion people. That while each individual acts benignly to achieve personal objectives the unintentional result is an increase in scarcity and conflict.‖ [30.1] Another reason for ignoring the above view of human conflict – according to Dr. Alpert -- is that peace seekers, even when successful at restraining the police, military or mediating hostilities, do not change our course toward conflict. They only delay it. In the process, peace seekers consume the very energy required to change the things that would make societies head toward peace. [31] In Human Predicament: Better Common Sense Required: The Future of Social Conflict21, Dr. Jack Alpert challenges us to answer two questions AnthroCorpocentric Jurisprudence Jurists sincerely concerned with the violent consequences of scarcity, have so far failed to ask themselves: [31.1] If Peace and conflict are defined not as descriptions of behaviour between nations, but as trends describing social conditions. Put differently: Conflict is not defined as the violence between neighbours and nations, but as the unwanted intrusion of one person‘s existence and consumption behaviour upon another person.

www.skil.org/position_papers_folder/Peaceniks_Wake_up.html Alpert, Jack (04/01/04): Footprint vs. Freedom: www.skil.org/position_papers_folder/Footprint_vs_freedom.html 21 youtu.be/sK8WxeGxkPk 19 20

[31.2] There are two kinds of conflict: Direct: he took my car, he enslaved me, he beat me, he raped me, he killed me; and Indirect. Indirect intrusions are the byproduct of other people's behaviour. ‗All the trees on our island were consumed by our grandparents,‘ is an indirect intrusion of a past generation on a present one. ‗The rich people raised the price of gasoline and we can't afford it,‘ and ‗The government is offering people welfare to breed more children‘ are current economic and demographic intrusions by one present group on another present group. [31.3] System conflict is the sum of intrusions experienced by each constituent, summed over all the constituents. A measure of the existing global conflict is the sum of six billion sets of intrusions. A measure of South Africa‘s conflict is the sum of 50 million sets of intrusions. [31.4] Using this definition of conflict, any AnthroCorpocentric Jurisprudence legislator or Jurist sincerely concerned about whether and how South Africa‘s socioeconomic and political system is moving towards peace or towards conflict; by determining the answers to the following questions: A.

How many children per family leads to peace; or conversely how many children per family, contributes to greater resource scarcity, and exponential increase in conflict, i.e. an individuals‘ ‗breeding war combatant‘ status? [According to the research of Dr. Jack Alpert22, the answer is one child per family]

How much consumption relative to the nation‘s footprint carrying capacity leads to peace; or conversely how much consumption relative to the nations bio-capacity per person, contributes to greater resource scarcity, and exponential increase in conflict, i.e. an individuals ‗consumption combatant status‘?

What are the Consequences Procreation Behaviour?:

Unsustainable

Consumption

and

[32] In the absence of AnthroCorpocentric Jurisprudence determining the answers to the aforementioned questions, and implementing Jurisprudence in accordance thereto; Dr. Alpert provides proof how AnthroCorpocentric Jurisprudence Suicide Freight Train has as much chance of muddling through the coming ‗Falling Man Syndrome‘ (‗I‘ve fallen 90 stories in the past 5 seconds and nothing bad has happened yet‖ | ―In 200 years, our endorsement of the Inalienable Right to Breed and consume has resulted in the exponential consumption of over half of the Earth's resources, and nothing bad has happened yet...‖) Crisis of Conflict, as an

http://sqswans.weebly.com/human-predicament.html

individual sitting in an unbelted car crash. (Non-Linearity and Social Conflict23) [33]

Carrying Capacity: Tragedy of the Commons:

[33.1] The Tragedy of the Commons is an ecological concept that refers to the depletion of a shared resource by individuals, acting independently and rationally according to each one's self-interest, despite their understanding that depleting the common resource is contrary to their long-term best interests. Ecologist Garrett Hardin famously explored this social dilemma in ―The Tragedy of the Commons‖.24 [33.2] Social Trap is a term used by psychologists to describe a situation in which a group of people act to obtain short-term individual gains, which in the long run leads to a loss for the group as a whole; such as for example overfishing, energy "brownout" and "blackout" power outages during periods of extreme temperatures, overgrazing on the Sahelian Desert, and the destruction of the rainforest by logging interests and agriculture. Social fence refers to a short-term avoidance behavior by individuals that leads to a long-term loss to the entire group. [34]

Tragedy of the Commons (ToC) Principles:

[34.1] Garrett Hardin‘s Tragedy of the Commons, 1968 essay focussed on clarifying how the population problem was a moral problem, and required a moral solution. Hardin showed why Adam Smith's laissez-faire doctrine and belief that the invisible hand enables a system of individuals to pursue their private interests which will automatically serve the collective interest; is flawed. [34.2] Hardin‘s key metaphor, the Tragedy of the Commons (ToC) showed why Smith was wrong. Hardin argued that when a resource is held "in common," with many people having "ownership" and access to it, a self-interested "rational" actor will decide to increase his or her exploitation of the resource since he or she receives the full benefit of the increase, but the costs are spread among all users. When many people think this way, the tragic result is the overexploitation and ruin of the commons. Similar to the herdsman, couples expect to experience a large benefit from having a second child, or consuming above carrying capacity, without having to bear the full social and ecological cost of their choices. [35]

Hardin‟s Tragedy of the Commons Assumptions & Solutions: [35.1]

23 24

The world is biophysically finite.

The more people there are, and the more they consume, the less each person's share must be.

Technology (ie, agricultural) cannot fundamentally alter this.

We can't both maximize the number of people and satisfy every desire or "good" of everyone.

youtu.be/W5capqGod9A Hardin, G (1968/12/13)

Practically, biophysical limits dictate we must both stabilize population, and consumption.

Both steps will generate opposition, since many people will have to relinquish their procreation and/or consumption behaviour.

[35.2] Over-population and overconsumption are exampleâ&#x20AC;&#x2DC;s of the tragedy of the commons (ToC). A.

Commons are un-owned or commonly-held "pool" resources that are "free," or not allocated by markets.

Hardin's ToC model assumes that individuals are short-term, selfinterested "rational" actors, seeking to maximize their own gains.

Such actors will exploit commons (have more babies, add more cattle to pastures, pollute the air, overconsume) as long as they believe the costs to them individually are less than the benefits.

The system of individual welfare insulates individuals from bearing the full costs of over-reproducing, and corporate welfare insulates corporations from bearing the costs of overproduction.

When every individual believes and behaves in this manner, commons are quickly filled, degraded, and ruined along with their erst-while exploiters.

A laissez-faire system (letting individuals choose as they like) will not "as if by an invisible hand" solve over-population and/or overconsumption.

[35.3] The "commons" system for breeding and consuming must be abandoned (as it has been for other resources). A.

In other words, something must restrain individual reproduction and consumption.

but it must not be individual conscience; appealing to conscience will only result in fewer people with conscience in the population (assuming here that it is genetic, or perfectly transmitted by learning).

It should be accomplished by "mutual coercion mutually agreed upon."

Sacrificing freedom to breed and consume will obtain for us other more important freedoms which will otherwise be lost.

"Coercive" restrictions on breeding and consuming could take a number of forms.

The "right" to determine the size of one's family and socio-economic consumption status, must be rescinded.

This will protect the conscientious traits in the population.

[35.4]

The problem is then to gain peoples' consent to a system of coercion.

People will consent if they understand the dire consequences of letting the population growth rate and consumption growth rate, be set only by individuals' choices.

Educating all people about the ToC, its consequences, and the alternatives to it, is necessary.

Then various restraints and incentives for low reproduction and consumption, below the commons carrying capacity limits, can and must be instituted.

[36] Reducing Human Impact on the Environment, requires population and consumption reduction. [37] The impact of humans on the environment and the demands that people place on the resources available on the planet can be summarised by what is known as the Ehrlich or IPAT equation, I=PAT. I = impact on the environment or demand for resources, P = population size, A = affluence and T = technology. [38]

The two most important conclusions deriving from this relationship are that:

[38.1] the Earth can support only a limited number of people, at a certain level of affluence, in a sustainable manner; and [38.2] [39]

Population and Consumption must be reduced to below carrying capacity.

Masculine Insecurity Patriarchy‟s Breeding & Consumption War: ―We must all understand that the most potent weapons of war are the penis and the womb. Therefore, if you cannot convince a group to control its population by discussion, debate, intelligent analysis etc., you must consider their action in using the penis and the womb to increase population an act of war.‖ - Former Municipal Court Judge Jason G. Brent, Humans: An Endangered Species25

[40] Insecure Male World Leader‘s advocacy/endorsement of the Control of the Means of Reproduction as a Weapon of War include President of Algeria: Houari Boumediene‗s ―wombs of our women will give us victory‖, PLO Leader: Yasser Arafat‗s ‗Palestinian womb is our greatest asset and weapon‘; ANC Leader: Nelson Mandela‗s ―Operation Production‖ forced sex and forbidden contraceptives policy;

www.jgbrent.com

New Black Panther Party Member: Dr. Khalid Muhammad ―kill the women as they are the military manufacturing center‖; Nazi Party: Adolf Hitler‗s ―importance of fertility to breed an above average number of children‖. [40.1]

Houari Boumediene, President of Algeria:

―The wombs of our women will give us victory.‖

―One day, millions of men will leave the Southern Hemisphere to go to the Northern Hemisphere. And they will not go there as friends. Because they will go there to conquer it. And they will conquer it with their sons. The wombs of our women will give us victory.‖ – Houri Boumediene, President of Algeria, at the United Nations, 1974 (Boumediene was an ardent supporter of the ANC and SWAPO)]

[40.2]

Yasser Arafat: Palestine Liberation Organisation:

Palestinian Womb is his people‗s greatest asset. Arnon Soffer, a geography professor at Israel's Haifa University and a lecturer at the Israeli Army's Staff and Command college, first warned of the impending Jewish demographic minority in the 1980s, but was widely dismissed. He predicted Arabs would outnumber Jews in both Israel proper and the occupied territories by 2010. In February 2001, the night of his election, Sharon sent an aide to ask Soffer for a copy of his 1987 treatise about the demographic threat to Israel; it was the same study that had led Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat to declare in the late 1980s that the "Palestinian womb" was his people's greatest weapon.

―Arafat had said that the womb of the Palestinian woman was a "biological weapon," which he could use to create Palestine state by crowding people into the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.‖ ― Yasser Arafat [Goodreads]

"The womb of the Arab woman is my strongest weapon" - Yasser Arafat

[40.3] A.

Nelson Mandela‘s African National Congress (ANC): ANC ―Operation Production‖ Policy: During the ANC‗s ―liberation struggle‖ African women were forced (1) to have sex with ANC cadres, & (2) not allowed to use contraception. Any woman who refused sex from an ANC cadre or was caught using contraception was detained, accused of being an 'Apartheid agent', given a People‗s Court trial, the sentence was usually Necklacing, incl. broken bottles shoved up their vagina26.

Maki Skosana was an ANC comrade who was accused – for no observable reasons – of being an apartheid spy, given a people‗s court trial and publicly executed by necklacing in July 1985. The TRC made no effort whatsoever to investigate the motives for shoving broken glass bottles up women‗s vagina‗s who were necklaced. TRC Report: ―Moloko said her sister was burned to death with a tyre around her neck while 26

[40.4] A.

[40.5] A.

Johannes Harnischfeger, Witchcraft and the State in South Africa27: ―Especially evening assemblies girls had to attend as well: ―They would come into the house and tell us we should go. They didn't ask your mother they just said ―come let's go.‖ You would just have to go with them. They would threaten you with their belts and ultimately you would think that if you refused, they would beat you. Our parents were afraid of them‖ (quoted by Delius 1996:189). All those opposing the wishes of the young men were reminded, that it was every woman‗s obligation to give birth to new ―soldiers‖, in order to replace those warriors killed in the liberation struggle. The idiom of the adolescents referred to these patriotic efforts as ―operation production‖. Because of exactly this reason it was forbidden for the girls to use contraceptives. (Delius 1996:18928; Niehaus 1999:25029)‖ New Black Panther Party: Dr. Khalid Muhammad: Kill the White Woman as the White Man‗s Military Manufacturing Center rolling out reinforcement from between her legs: In Dr. Khalid Abdul Muhammad‗s 1993 'Kill the White Man' speech, at Kean College in Union Township, New Jersey, he stated among others: ―Kill the women cause the women are the military manufacturing center; cause every nine months they lay down on their backs and reinforcement rolls out from between their legs. So shut down the military manufacturing center, by killing the white woman.‖30 Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party: ―The selection of a racially highly worthy wife in itself still does not necessarily mean an improvement of the race. That only comes when the right mate selection is followed by the breeding of an above-average number of children. For what would the elimination of bad hereditary factors from the folk help, if simultaneously a reproduction of the good hereditary factors was not preserved and expanded? ... The birth rate will determine the future of our folk. The number of cribs must be much larger than the number of coffins. Only then can we offer successful resistance against all arising dangers and turn into deed our right, which is due us on the basis of our leading position in Europe. … Two weapons are at the

attending the funeral of one of the youths. Her body had been scorched by fire and some broken pieces of glass had been inserted into her vagina, Moloko told the committee. Moloko added that a big rock had been thrown on her face after she had been killed.‖ www.doj.gov.za/trc/hrvtrans/duduza/moloko.htm 27 Dr. Johannes Harnischfeger, Goethe University Frankfurt M., Frankfurt; German version of published in Anthropopos, 95/2000, S. 99-112 28 Delius, P. 1996. A Lion amongst the Cattle: Reconstruction and Resistance in the Northern Transvaal. 29 Niehaus, Isak. 1999. Witchcraft, Power and Politics: Exploring the Occult in the South African Lowfeld 30 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_Abdul_Muhammad www.metacafe.com/watch/456363/khallid_muhammads_speech_kill_the_white_man

disposal of each folk in the struggle for survival: Its ability to fight and its fertility. Never forget that the ability to fight of a folk alone can never make it possible for a folk to survive into the far future, rather that the inexhaustible fountain of its fertility is also necessary."31 [40.6] Prof Jose Angel Gutierrez, University of Texas, Founder and former party national chair of Raza Unida Party: A.

―We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. The explosion is in our population... I love it. They are shitting in their pants with fear. I love it. We have to eliminate the gringo, and what I mean by that is if the worst comes to the worst, we have got to kill him.‖ - Professor Jose Angel Gutierrez, University of Texas, founder and former party national chair of Raza Unida Party

Sustainable RNR Carrying Capacity: Mosuo: Ecocentric Gender-Balanced Culture with no murder, rape, war, jealousy, jails or unemployment: [41] The Mosuo language is rendered not in writing, but in Dongba, the only pictographic language used in the world today. The Mosuo language has no words for murder, war, rape, or jealousy, and the Mosuo have no jails and no unemployment.32 [42] Although the Mosuo culture is most frequently described as a matriarchal culture; in fact, its more accurate to refer to it as ―matrilineal‖, but still doesn't reflect the full truth. Accurately speaking have aspects of matriarchal culture, in that women are the head of the house, property is passed through the female line, and women tend to make the business decisions. Political power, however, remains in the hands of males, creating a gender-balanced society. [43] Mosuo women carry on the family name and run the households, which are usually made up of several families, with one woman elected as the head. The head matriarchs of each village govern the region by committee. [44] As an agrarian culture, much of the Mosuo daily life centers around tending to crops and livestock, with villages and households bartering between them for basic needs. [45] A typical Mosuo house is divided in to four separate structures around an open courtyard. Traditionally, families share the building with livestock, and the living and sleeping areas are communal.

SS Race Theory and Mate Selection Guidelines, translated from Original SS Publications by Libertarian National Socialist Green Party; original SS publication Glauben und Kampfen ("Faith and Struggle") 32 Tami Blumenfield (May 2009): The Na of Southwest China: Debunking the Myths; Washington Univ http://web.pdx.edu/~tblu2/Na/myths.pdf 31

[46] Mosuo families have an incredible internal cohesiveness and stability; and Mosuo women do not (within their culture) face many of the struggles and barriers that women in many other cultures do. [47] Probably the most famous – and most misunderstood – aspect of Mosuo culture is their practice of ―walking marriages‖ (or ―zou hun‖ in Chinese), so called because the men will walk to the house of their ‗partner' at night, but return to their own home, within their own tribal family, in the morning. [48] The Mosuo generally live in large extended families, with many generations (great grandparents, grandparents, parents, children, grandchildren, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, etc.) all living together within the same house. For the most part, everyone lives within communal quarters, without private bedrooms or living areas. However, women between certain ages, after ―coming of age‖, can have their own private bedrooms. [49] Traditionally, a Mosuo woman who is interested in a particular man will invite him to come and spend the night with her in her room. The man will walk to her house after dark (thus the description of ―walking marriage‖), spend the night with her, and return home early the next morning. [50] Although it is possible for a Mosuo woman to change partners as often as she likes – and in fact, having only one sexual partner would be neither expected nor common – the majority of such couplings are actually more long term. In fact, few Mosuo women have more than one partner at a time, described by some anthropologists as ―serial monogamy‖. [51] Even when a pairing may be long term, however, the man will never go to live with the woman's family, or vice versa. He will continue to live with and be responsible to his family, and the children of his sisters and nieces; she will continue to live with and be responsible to her family. There will be no sharing of property. [52] Significantly, when children are born, the father may have little or no responsibility for his offspring (in fact, some children may not even know who their father is). If a father does want to be involved with the upbringing of his children, he will bring gifts to the mother's family, and state his intention to do so. This gives him a kind of official status within that family, but does not actually make him part of the family. Regardless of whether the father is involved or not, the child will be raised in the mother's family, and take on her family name. [53] This does not mean, however, that the men get of scot-free, with no responsibilities for children. Quite the opposite, in fact. Every man will share responsibilities in caring for all children born to women within their own family, be they a sister, niece, aunt, etc. In fact, children will grow up with many ―aunts‖ and ―uncles‖, as all members of the extended family share in the duties of supporting and raising the children.

[54] The result – as different as it may be from other systems – is a family structure which is, in fact, extremely stable. Divorce does not exist …there are no questions over child custody (the child belongs to the mother's family), splitting of property (property is never shared), etc. If a parent dies, there is still a large extended family to provide care. [55] One particularly important result is the lack of preference for a particular gender. For example, in most Chinese and patriarchal cultures, the female will join the male's family when she gets married. The result is that if a couple has a lot of female children, they will lose them after marriage, and have no one to care for them in old age; but if they have male children, their sons (and their sons' wives) will care for them. So, in poorer populations in particular, there will be a strong preference for male children. [56] However, among the Mosuo, since neither male nor female children will ever leave home, there is no particular preference for one gender over the other. The focus instead tends to be on maintaining some degree of gender balance, having roughly the same proportion of male to female within a household. In situations where this becomes unbalanced, it is not uncommon for Mosuo to adopt children of the appropriate gender (or even for two households to ‗swap' male/female children). [57] Additionally the other focus is population control, avoiding overpopulation of the family, since the family is unable to kick the children out of the home, and wash their hands, as to the sustainable future of those children. The family matriarch has the responsibility to make sure that the family does not procreate beyond its capacity to support the entire family through difficult times. [58] Children are also raised with a gender neutral focus, where all the children dress the same and are treated in a gender neutral manner. At around the age of 12-14 years, the important event known as their coming of age ceremony occurs, where girls are given skirts, and men are given their pants; thus called the ―skirt ceremony‖ for girls, and the ―pants ceremony‖ for boys. [59] After coming of age, Mosuo females are entitled to their own private bedroom; and, once past puberty, can begin to invite partners for ―walking marriages‖. [60] According to patriarchal macho Argentinean writer Ricardo Coler33, who decided to find out what it was like to live in a non-patriarchal culture, and spent two months with the Mosuo in southern China: ―Men live better where women are in charge‖ and ―Women have a different way of dominating.‖ [61] Coler asserts that while he expected an inverse patriarchy, he experienced something totally different, because women have a different way of dominating: ―When women rule, it's part of their work. They like it when everything functions and the family is doing well. Amassing wealth or earning lots of money doesn't cross their minds. Capital accumulation seems to be a male thing. It's not for Ricardo Coler (28 May 2009): The Mosuo Matriarchy: 'Men Live Better Where Women Are In Charge'; Der Spiegel http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/the-mosuo-matriarchy-men-live-better-where-women-arein-charge-a-627363.html 33

nothing that popular wisdom says that the difference between a man and a boy is the price of his toys.â&#x20AC;&#x2013; [62] What astonished Coler the most, was that there was no violence in the Mosuo culture: â&#x20AC;&#x2022;I know that quickly slips into idealization -- every human society has its problems. But it simply doesn't make sense to the Mosuo women to solve conflicts with violence. Because they are in charge, nobody fights. They don't know feelings of guilt or vengeance -- it is simply shameful to fight. They are ashamed if they do and it even can threaten their social standing. [If there is an altercation] The women decide what happens. Some of them do it more strictly and others in a friendlier way. They are strong women who give clear orders. When a man hasn't finished a task he's been given, he is expected to admit it. He is not scolded or punished, but instead he is treated like a little boy who was not up to the task.â&#x20AC;&#x2013; [63] The Mosuo economy is largely agrarian, and they are capable of producing most of what they need for daily living; and consequently are by and large selfsufficient. In the past, Mosuo men would take trading caravans to other parts of China, to buy/trade products they could not produce locally. [64] The traditional Mosuo religion worships nature, is called Daba, with Lugu Lake regarded as the Mother Goddess and the mountain overlooking it venerated as the Goddess of Love. The Mosuo also practice Lamaism, a Tibetan variation of Buddhism. Most Mosuo homes dedicate a room specifically for Buddhist worship and for sheltering traveling lamas, or monks. Their focus is their close relationship to the land that supports them and with their neighbors, who also support them.

2013 Templeton Prize: Fraud, Corruption & Discrimination Fraud, Corruption & Discrimination: The nomination of the 2013 Templeton Prize was corrupt and fraudulent. Archbishop Desmond Tutu was nominated for the prize by his own biographer, who censored information from the Judges about Tutu’s involvement in, and endorsement of, South Africa’s TRC Fraud, and discrimination against non-patriarchal Ecocentric Primitivist cultures. Tutu’s biographer refused to withdraw the nomination. Templeton Prize Judges also refused to withdraw the award, endorsing Tutu’s TRC Fraud and discrimination against Ecocentric, non-Patriarchal, Primitivist Leaver cultures.

Annex A: 04 April 2013 letter submitted to Archbishop Desmond Tutu, copied to Templeton Prize admin and Judges: Questions to Archbishop Tutu; or if unanswered by Tutu and Prize Upheld by Templeton Prize Judges; (ii) Congratulations on Receipt of the Multinational Corporate Resource and Cultural Imperialists Templeton Prize for excellence in House Nigger subservience to getting rid of Boer Anti-Imperialists, and making SA safe for ‘Compulsive Developmentism’ Imperialists (i) cultural colonization of indigenous cultures, and (ii) resource plundering. Annex B: 05 April 2013 letter submitted to Archbishop Tutu and Templeton Prize Judges: President Zuma urges Archbishop Tutu to continue ANC, Anti-Apartheid Movements Censorship of their TRC Fraud.; Tutu’s Ultimate Spiritual Test. Annex C: 11 April 2013 letter submitted to Prof. Steven Gish, Archbishop Tutu and Templeton Prize Judges: Radical Honoursty Culture and TYGAE Request for Withdrawal of your Nomination of Desmond Tutu as Recipient of Templeton Prize, due to your (a) biographer conflict of interest, and (b) failure to provide the evidence of Archbishop Tutu’s involvement in the cover-up and censorship of South Africa’s TRC Fraud.

Annexure “A”

Radical Honoursty Culture Yshmael Guerrylla Law Party CommonSism: Common Sense Guerrylla Laws for a Sustainable Commons AEquilibriaex: balanced Eco/Anthropocentric law www.guerrylla -law.co.nr

04 April 2013 Desmond Tutu c/o: Nomfundo Walaza Desmond Tutu Peace Center 42 Hans Strijdom Ave, Capetown, 8001 Tel: (21) 443 6760 | Fax: (21) 443 6768 E: info@tutu.org, vivian@tutu.org.za

CC: Templeton Prize Judges c/o: Ms. Judith Marchand, Director John Templeton Foundation 300 Conshohocken State Road, Suite 500 West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania 19428 Tel: 610.941.2828 | Fax: 610.825.1730 info@templetonprize.org

Transparency CC: SA Political Parties

Transparency CC: SA Media Editors

Archbishop Desmond Tutu, RE: Questions to Archbishop Tutu; or if unanswered by Tutu and Prize Upheld by Templeton Prize Judges; (ii) Congratulations on Receipt of the Multinational Corporate Resource and Cultural Imperialists Templeton Prize for excellence in House Nigger subservience to getting rid of Boer Anti-Imperialists, and making SA safe for „Compulsive Developmentism‟ Imperialists (i) cultural colonization of indigenous cultures, and (ii) resource plundering. I am constantly amazed at the Liberal Supremacy establishment‟s ability to totally and utterly ignore reality by imposing their Bullshit the Public Relations „Perception Management‟ as their own subjective substitute for reality. As you are aware, from my past correspondence over the past ten years, which you have and continue to ignore, as if I do not exist: 1. I am not a Liberal Supremacy house nigger, and most certainly psychologically, spiritually, emotionally prefer to side with Nat Turner, and physically I side with Harriett Tubman.

PO Box 5042 * George East, 6539 * Tel: (044) 870 7239 * Cel: (071) 170 1954

2. I do not practice or endorse Bullshit the Public Relations Image Management, but 100% transparency and radical honesty, to everyone, friend and enemy. 3. I give everyone – as I did you – the benefit of the doubt, and provide them with my honest criticism of their actions, to their face, to enable them to make an impartial transparent enquiry into the criticisms (which you refused to do, insisting on ignoring the TRC Fraud evidence I repeatedly sent you). 4. Finally, I have a Radical Honoursty communication values, which manifests as: (i) I have never ever ignored any individual contacting me with criticism of my actions; I always, and I mean always, provide every critic of mine with a brutal honest response to their criticism, and engage them in dialogue, of the evidence. (ii) I always provide every person whom I do criticize with an honourable copy of such criticism to their faces, for their response, should they have the honour or integrity to respond. It is the absolute minimum of what I consider „honourable communications‟. Questions to Archbishop Desmond Tutu: 1. Please clarify in writing whether you believe the Templeton Judges are aware of the following Radical Honoursty TRC Fraud Fact Censored by Mandela, Tutu, ANC and Anti-Apartheid Movement? 2. If the Templeton Judges are not aware of the following Radical Honoursty TRC Fraud Fact Censored by Mandela, Tutu, ANC and AntiApartheid Movement, why are they ignorant of them? 3. If you (a) continue your policy of endorsing the censorship of the Radical Honoursty TRC Fraud Fact Censored by Mandela, Tutu, ANC and Anti-Apartheid Movement, by refusing to transparently inform the Templeton Judges why you endorse the Anti-Apartheid movement and Constitutional Courts censorship of Radical Honoursty culture allegations of TRC Fraud; and (b) the Templeton Judges endorse your lack of honour and actions of censorship of your involvement in TRC Fraud; we could fairly conclude that (c) You have been awarded the Multinational Corporate Resource and Cultural Imperialists Templeton Prize for excellence in House Nigger subservience to getting rid of Boer Anti-Imperialists, and making SA safe for „Compulsive Developmentism‟ Imperialists (i) cultural colonization of indigenous cultures, and (ii) resource plundering? Radical Honoursty TRC Fraud Fact Censored by Mandela, Tutu, ANC and Anti-Apartheid Movement: Corrupt Censorship by SA Constitutional

Court of Radical Honoursty culture‟s Application for Review of South Africa‟s TRC Fraud: Mandela, Tutu, the ANC & Anti-Apartheid movement have censored and silenced the only South African who – for the past 12 years – has exposed South Africa‟s Anthropocentric and Ideologically biased TRC Fraud, and advocated on behalf of a brutally honest sincere and ecologically and scientifically credible Truth and Reconciliation Commission, focussed on exposing the underlying psychological, cultural, racial, Compulsive Development and Scarcity induced factors contributing to Apartheid‟s Political violence.

The Bigotry and Treason of the Liberal Supremacist Elite: “The white liberal differs from the white conservative only in one way: the liberal is more deceitful than the conservative. The liberal is more hypocritical than the conservative. Both want power, but the white liberal is the one who has perfected the art of posing as the Negro’s friend and benefactor; and by winning the friendship, allegiance, and support of the Negro, the white liberal is able to use the Negro as a pawn or tool in this political “football game” that is constantly raging between the white liberals and white conservatives…. Once the Negro learns to think for himself, he will no longer allow the white liberal to use him as a helpless football in the white man’s crooked game of “power politics.” The white conservatives aren’t friends of the Negro either, but they at least don’t try to hide it. They are like wolves; they show their teeth in a snarl that keeps the Negro always aware of where he stands with them. But the white liberals are foxes, who also show their teeth to the Negro but pretend that they are smiling. The white liberals are more dangerous than the conservatives; they lure the Negro, and as the Negro runs from the growling wolf, he flees into the open jaws of the “smiling” fox.” -- Excerpts from 1963 speech by Malcolm X: “God’s Judgement of White America.”

Excerpts from Chris Hedges, The Treason of the Intellectuals1: "The power elite, especially the liberal elite, has always been willing to sacrifice integrity and truth for power, personal advancement, foundation grants, awards, tenured professorships, columns, book contracts, television appearances, generous lecture fees and social status. They know what they need to say. They know which ideology they have to serve. They know what lies must be told—the biggest being that they take moral stances on issues 1

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_treason_of_the_intellectuals_20130331

that aren’t safe and anodyne. They have been at this game a long time. And they will, should their careers require it, happily sell us out again." “Nothing in my view is more reprehensible than those habits of mind in the intellectual that induce avoidance, that characteristic turning away from a difficult and principled position, which you know to be the right one, but which you decide not to take,” wrote the late Edward Said. “You do not want to appear too political; you are afraid of seeming controversial; you want to keep a reputation for being balanced, objective, moderate; your hope is to be asked back, to consult, to be on a board or prestigious committee, and so to remain within the responsible mainstream; someday you hope to get an honorary degree, a big prize, perhaps even an ambassadorship.” Julien Benda argued in his 1927 book “The Treason of Intellectuals”—“La Trahison des Clercs”—that it is only when we are not in pursuit of practical aims or material advantages that we can serve as a conscience and a corrective. Those who transfer their allegiance to the practical aims of power and material advantage emasculate themselves intellectually and morally. Benda wrote that intellectuals were once supposed to be indifferent to popular passions. They “set an example of attachment to the purely disinterested activity of the mind and created a belief in the supreme value of this form of existence.” “The desire to tell the truth,” wrote Paul Baran, the brilliant Marxist economist and author of “The Political Economy of Growth,” is “only one condition for being an intellectual. The other is courage, readiness to carry on rational inquiry to wherever it may lead … to withstand … comfortable and lucrative conformity.” Those who doggedly challenge the orthodoxy of belief, who question the reigning political passions, who refuse to sacrifice their integrity to serve the cult of power, are pushed to the margins. They are denounced by the very people who, years later, will often claim these moral battles as their own. It is only the outcasts and the rebels who keep truth and intellectual inquiry alive. They alone name the crimes of the state. They alone give a voice to the victims of oppression. They alone ask the difficult questions. Most important, they expose the powerful, along with their liberal apologists, for what they are.

Questions for Anthropocentric Liberal Supremacist Anti-Apartheid, Pro-Imperialist Bigots:

A. 1.

Human Rights: Deaths in Police Custody: Deaths in Police Custody: Apartheid 2.4 per year (1963-1994: 75) a.

Apartheid: 1963 – 1994: 75 Deaths in 31 Years = 2.4 Deaths per year

Throughout the entire apartheid-era up to 75 people died in policecustody throughout the period between 1963 and 1994. [The South African Police: Manager of Conflict or Party to the Conflict 2, Dr. Johan Olivier, Center for Study of Violence and Reconciliation; A Crime Against Humanity - Analysing the Repression of the Apartheid State3, Edited by Max Coleman, a publication of the Human Rights Committee in South Africa: The Detention Weapon.]

ANC 'Freedumb': 2010: 566 Deaths in 11 months: increase of 25,725% a.

"Political parties yesterday called for a swift investigation into the deaths of 566 people at the hands of police in the current year. The call comes after the Independent Complaints Directorate (ICD) revealed yesterday that out of this overall national figure, 16 of those killed by police were innocent people. Many of the policemen involved have not even been suspended, let alone charged!" [Parties urge probe into 566 deaths, Canaan Mdletshe, Mhlaba Memela & Sibongile Mashaba, The Sowetan, 23 November 2010]

ANC 'Freedumb': 2011: 932 Deaths: increase of 38,833% a.

Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID) has revealed a report that about 932 people died in police custody in South Africa in 2011/12. [City Press: Police Stations of Death, 04 March 2013; Al Jazeera: Who Polices the Police?4]

Boer Human Rights: Farm Murders:

Farm Murders rise 3,095% in ANC‟s “TRC Rainbow Democracy”:

Political Climate of Farm Murders: According to (2.5 per year x 52 weeks x 16 years)5 Eugene Ney Terreblanche was murdered farmer number 2080 since the April 1994 TRC social contract brought S. Africans “peace and human rights” (sic). By way of comparison:

http://www.csvr.org.za/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=671&Itemid=200 http://www.sahistory.org.za/pages/library-resources/online%20books/crime-humanity/detention%20weapon.htm 4 http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/south2north/2013/03/2013314105953174623.html 5 Anatomy of a farm murder, by Vuvu Vena, Mail and Guardian, Apr 08 2010: “AgriSA, the South African Agricultural Union, recorded 1 541 murders and 10 151 attacks in the period from 1994 to 2008 -- an average of 0,3 murders a day. The Transvaal Agricultural Union (TAU) recorded 1 266 murders and 2070 attacks in the period from 1991 to 2009 -- an average of 0.2 murders a day. The Institute for Security Studies of the University of Pretoria, using statistics provided by TAU in June last year, reported 1 073 murders and 1 813 attacks in the period from 1993 to 2009 -- an average of 0,2 murders a day.” 3

In the 1950„s Mau Mau War in Kenya, the official number of “European settlers” killed was 326, of which a dozen were said to be farmers.

During the 15 year Rhodesian war, 260 white farmers were murdered7.

Human Rights Questions for Anthropocentric Liberal Supremacist Bigots: 1.

If 2.4 deaths in custody per year by the Apartheid government, were „crimes against humanity‟; what type of „crimes against humanity‟ do you call an increase of 38,833 percent?

If the ANC was „at war‟ with Boers, when 2.5 Boer farmers were being killed per year; what Tutu Spiritual traditions considers the murder of 73 farmers per year, to be „reconciliation‟ and „peace‟?

If Liberal Supremacists care enough about Africans to be honest with them; instead of using them as your token vote fodder; wouldn‟t your policy be: “Take Note Dumb Kaffirs: Liberal Supremacists do not give a fuck about Africans „human rights‟ if you are killed by an ANC African cop. African ANC cops can kill as many of you African fucks as they wish… cause you are not human, unless you are killed by a white Boer”?

If Anthropocentric Liberal Supremacists cared enough about their spirituality to give a fuck about their enemies human rights, including Boer Farmers to be honest with them; wouldn‟t your policy be: “Take Note Dumb Boer Farmers: Liberal Supremacist Bigots do not give a fuck about Boer Farmers „human rights‟; we support Mandela‟s Frantz Fanon definition of „reconciliation‟, that the „African‟s colonized mind can only be liberated by violence on the rotting corpse of your boer settler bodies‟?

Radical Honoursty TRC Fraud Fact Censored by Mandela, Tutu, ANC and Anti-Apartheid Movement: Corrupt Censorship by SA Constitutional Court of Radical Honoursty culture‟s Application for Review of South Africa‟s TRC Fraud. Mandela, Tutu, the ANC & Anti-Apartheid movement have censored and silenced the only South African who – for the past 12 years – has exposed South Africa‟s Anthropocentric and Ideologically biased TRC Fraud, and advocated on behalf of a brutally honest sincere and ecologically and scientifically credible Truth and Reconciliation 6

Anderson, D. (2005). Histories of the Hanged: The Dirty War in Kenya & the End of Empire. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. (p.4) 7 The Farmer At War, Trevor Grundy and Bernard Miller, Modern Farming Publ., Salisbury 1979

Commission, focussed on exposing the underlying psychological, cultural, racial, Compulsive Development and Scarcity induced factors contributing to Apartheid‟s Political violence. There are dozens of letters written to Mandela, Tutu, the ANC and Anti-Apartheid movement, providing them with evidence of the Anti-Apartheid movement/ANC‟s TRC Fraud, and requesting that they investigate the matter, and provide answers. I shall provide only one here, the final one, but am happy to provide copies of all the others, if requested. After ten years, of letters ignored, legal applications ignored, suppressed and silenced, I finally filed an application with the South African Constitutional Court, for a Radical Honoursty culture review of South Africa‟s TRC Fraud. The South African Constitutional Court Justices continue to refuse to process the application, for a hearing as to its admissibility, or to respond to an appeal of their refusal to process the application. Archbishop Tutu, Nelson Mandela, the ANC and Anti-Apartheid movement have, so far, endorsed the Concourt‟s corruption and denial of access to a court to investigate the matter of South Africa‟s TRC Fraud.

Overview of Radical Honoursty Constitutional Court Application: [1] On 27 November 2012, I filed a Pro Se application8 with the Constitutional Court Registrar, for an EcoFeminist Radical Honesty culture Review of the „Kill Boer‟ Hate Speech Negotiated Agreement between Afriforum/TAU-SA and Julius Malema/ANC, wherein I specifically requested an order from the court, for the “Permission to invoke9 cultural law10 in S. 15(3), 30, 31, and 18; to enable the Applicant to honour the duty and responsibility to uphold the principles upon

http://sqswans.weebly.com/cct-alien-v-afriforum.html Ex parte Minister of Native Affairs: In re Yako v Beyi 1948 (1) SA 388 (A) at 397: Appellate Division held that neither common nor customary law was prima facie applicable. Courts had to consider all the circumstances of a case, and, without any preconceived view about the applicability of one or other legal system, select the appropriate law on the basis of its inquiry. 10 SALC, Sept 1999: Report on Conflicts of law: P.22: „1.58. The Constitution now provides an entitlement for invoking customary law in legal suits. Because ss 30 and 31 specifically guarantee an individual and a group's right to pursue a culture of choice, it could be argued that application of customary law has become a constitutional right. Previously, the state had assumed complete discretion in deciding whether and to what extent customary law should be recognized, an attitude typical of colonial thinking, for Africans were subject to whatever policies the conquering state chose to impose on them. Now, however, the state has a duty to allow people to participate in the culture they choose, implicit in this duty is a responsibility to uphold the institutions on which that culture is based.‟ 8 9

which her Radical Honesty culture is based; and Psychological Integrity in Section 1211; the former which may require the application of choice of law rules.” [2] Invocation of Cultural Law: The South African Constitution is founded on the Apartheid premise that South Africa is a multicultural country, hence neither common law, nor cultural customary law are prima facie applicable in any dispute before any court. The Constitution provides for all citizens rights to invoke12 cultural law13 in S. 15(3)14, 3015, 3116, and 1817. When any party invokes cultural law, the court is required to proceed in terms of application of choice of law rules, to determine the applicability of one or other legal system, or combination thereof, on the basis of its inquiry into the relevant parties particular cultures, as determined from their lifestyles18. [3] The invocation of Cultural Law automatically invokes a Conflict between Common/Dominant & Cultural/Minority Law; requiring the court to enquire into the appropriate balancing of „dominant‟ law vs „minority law‟, through an investigation of the relevant cultural law and cultural lifestyle of the minority culture applicant vs the dominant cultural law and cultural lifestyle of the dominant legal culture. [4] The Registrar refused to process my application, demanding that I get legal representation, and demanding various „dominant‟ cultural rules of court. I filed an appeal of her decision to the Concourt Justices, in that I had invoked cultural law, and that various Dominant Culture „Rules of Court‟ violated my Ecocentric cultural values. Additionally I had been unable to find any lawyer in South Africa, willing to represent the Radical Honoursty culture. The Registrar refused to submit my

12. Freedom and security of the person: (2) Everyone has the right to bodily and psychological integrity.. Ex parte Minister of Native Affairs: In re Yako v Beyi 1948 (1) SA 388 (A) at 397: Appellate Division held that neither common nor customary law was prima facie applicable. Courts had to consider all the circumstances of a case, and, without any preconceived view about the applicability of one or other legal system, select the appropriate law on the basis of its inquiry. 13 SALC, Sept 1999: Report on Conflicts of law: P.22: „1.58. The Constitution now provides an entitlement for invoking customary law in legal suits. Because ss 30 and 31 specifically guarantee an individual and a group's right to pursue a culture of choice, it could be argued that application of customary law has become a constitutional right. Previously, the state had assumed complete discretion in deciding whether and to what extent customary law should be recognized, an attitude typical of colonial thinking, for Africans were subject to whatever policies the conquering state chose to impose on them. Now, however, the state has a duty to allow people to participate in the culture they choose, implicit in this duty is a responsibility to uphold the institutions on which that culture is based.‟ 14 Freedom of Religion, Belief and Opinion http://www.info.gov.za/documents/constitution/1996/96cons2.htm#15 15 Language and Culture http://www.info.gov.za/documents/constitution/1996/96cons2.htm#30 16 Culture, Religious & Linguistic Comm: http://www.info.gov.za/documents/constitution/1996/96cons2.htm#31 17 Freedom of Association http://www.info.gov.za/documents/constitution/1996/96cons2.htm#18 18 In Ex Parte Minister of Native Affairs in re: Yako v Beyi 1948 (1) SA 388 (A) Schreiner J.A. said lifestyle of is a choice of law factor. “Aside from an express choice of laws all connecting factors with conflict of personal laws are designed to determine, in an objective manner, the cultural orientation of the parties. Because the laws involved are conceived in terms of culture .... the connecting factors must be conceived in like terms. The most direct access to a person‟s cultural leanings would clearly be his or her lifestyle.” 11 12

appeal to the Concourt Justices, again citing obedience to the dominant culture‟s „Rules of Court‟, as being the Supreme Law of the land. [5] I filed two complaints to the Commission for the Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities19: one against the Concourt Registrar, and the other against SAPA and 11 mainstream media editors (for refusing to publish a Radical Honoursty culture press release to find out if any SA lawyers were willing to represent the Radical Honoursty culture). [6]

The CRL Rights Commission denied both complaints endorsing :

[6.1] the denial of cultural legal representation, and access to courts, to members of the Radical Honesty culture, and (b) the South African Media‟s discrimination against Members of the Radical Honesty culture, by refusing to report the fact that a South African citizen member of the Radical Honesty culture, has been unable to find a lawyer to represent her, as a member of the Radical Honesty culture, for the past ten years, and in a current case before the Constitutional Court. (Ref: 9/1/1/1/46) [6.2] 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). (Ref: 9/1/1/1/49) [7] I filed appeals of both decisions to the CRL Rights Commission Chairperson: Reverent Mabuza20, who has not acknowledged receipt, nor responded to the appeals. Radical Honoursty Ecocentric Cultural and Gender Values: [8] I am an adult Radical Honoursty Ecofeminist Guerrylla Law Sustainable Security practicing paralegal EcoFeminist, member of Friend of Wikileaks (FoWL) and the Radical Honourty culture21; resident in George, Southern Cape, South Africa; where I run a small EcoFeminist pedal-powered wormery business. [9] I am married to African American prisoner Demian Emile Johnson, who has been incarcerated in the California Dept. of Corrections, on a sentence of 15-to-life 19 20

http://sqswans.weebly.com/cct-alien-v-afriforum.html http://sqswans.weebly.com/cct-alien-v-afriforum.html

SA Constitutional Court ruling of 03 May 2012 in CCT 23-10, reads as follows: “Ms. Lara Johnstone, Member of Radical Honesty Culture and Religion, is admitted as an amicus curiae” 21

for felony murder, since 1982. They met while she was working on providing educational information on rehabilitation issues to prisoners. (Sacramento County: Licence & Certificate of Marriage: Demian Emile Johnson and Lara Johnstone (PDF22); 31 May 1998: Sunday Times: US convict wins love and support in SA town (PDF23); 24 Sep 1998: YOU: Volksrust Farmgirl Doomed for Love of Black Convict)(PDF24). [10] Radical Honoursty Culture: I am a member of the Radical Honoursty culture, based upon Radical Honesty25 dispute resolution principles, which is (a) a minority culture, (b) an Ecocentric culture, (c) practices Brutal Honesty Authentic Multiculturalism endorsing authentic diversity of cultures, and (d) does not endorse the homogenizing AnthroCorpocentric Egotist Consumptionism effects of Multinational GlobalCorp induced Globalization of cultures. [11] Mosuo EcoFeminist: The Mosuo are a small Gender Balanced culture who live in South West China, and have no murder, rape, war, suicide, jails or unemployment. I endorse the Mosuo cultural worldview on (a) gender balance, (b) family/tribal living and entrepreneurial arrangements and co-responsibility for all family members, (c) root cause transparency problem solving, (d) familial responsibility for population procreation and resource utilization issues, etc. [11.1] The Mosuo language is rendered not in writing, but in Dongba, the only pictographic language used in the world today. The Mosuo language has no words for murder, war, rape, or jealousy, and the Mosuo have no jails and no unemployment.26 [11.2] Although the Mosuo culture is most frequently described as a matriarchal culture; in fact, its more accurate to refer to it as â&#x20AC;&#x153;matrilinealâ&#x20AC;?, but still doesn't reflect the full truth. Accurately speaking have aspects of matriarchal culture, in that women are the head of the house, property is passed through the female line, and women tend to make the business decisions. Political power, however, remains in the hands of males, creating a gender-balanced society. [11.3] Mosuo women carry on the family name and run the households, which are usually made up of several families, with one woman elected as the head. The head matriarchs of each village govern the region by committee.

http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/090922_hc-ifp http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/980513_stimes 24 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/980924_you 25 www.radicalhonesty.com 26 Tami Blumenfield (May 2009): The Na of Southwest China: Debunking the Myths; Washington Univ http://web.pdx.edu/~tblu2/Na/myths.pdf 22 23

[11.4] The Mosuo generally live in large extended families, with many generations (great grandparents, grandparents, parents, children, grandchildren, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, etc.) all living together within the same house. For the most part, everyone lives within communal quarters, without private bedrooms or living areas. However, women between certain ages, after “coming of age”, can have their own private bedrooms. [11.5] The result – as different as it may be from other systems – is a family structure which is, in fact, extremely stable. Divorce does not exist …there are no questions over child custody (the child belongs to the mother's family), splitting of property (property is never shared), etc. If a parent dies, there is still a large extended family to provide care. [11.6] According to patriarchal macho Argentinean writer Ricardo Coler27, who decided to find out and spent two months with the Mosuo in southern China: “Men live better where women are in charge” and “Women have a different way of dominating.” Coler asserts that while he expected an inverse patriarchy, he experienced something totally different, because women have a different way of dominating: “When women rule, it's part of their work. They like it when everything functions and the family is doing well. Amassing wealth or earning lots of money doesn't cross their minds. Capital accumulation seems to be a male thing. It's not for nothing that popular wisdom says that the difference between a man and a boy is the price of his toys.” [12] I am neither anthropocentrically liberal nor conservative, nor an endorser of AnthroCorpocentric Legislative or Juristic Jurisprudence which only grants Humans and Corporations legal personhood, while denying legal personhood to all other animal and plant species and ecological rights to nature. [13] I am the founder of CommonSism28 ideology -- Common Sense Guerrylla Laws for a Sustainable Commons -- and the unregistered Yshmael Guerrylla Law Political Party, the aim of which is to establish a Green License to Vote, to elect a Green President, to transition South Africa into a Sustainable Voluntaryist (Honourable Free Society of Men and Women capable of ruling themselves) Green Republic. [14] The Yshmael Guerrylla Law (YGL) Political Party‟s platform is based upon Guerrylla Law -- or CommonSism (Common Sense Laws for a Sustainable Commons) -- inspired by -- among others -- the Taker vs. Leaver ideas of the gorilla Ricardo Coler (28 May 2009): The Mosuo Matriarchy: 'Men Live Better Where Women Are In Charge'; Der Spiegel http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/the-mosuo-matriarchy-men-live-better-where-women-arein-charge-a-627363.html 28 http://sqswans.weebly.com/guerrylla-law.html 27

Ishmael, in Daniel Quinn's books: Ishmael and My Ishmael; and the Tragedy of the Commons ideas, as expressed by Garrett Hardin. [15] CommonSism Guerrylla Laws regulate human procreation and resource utilization behaviour, by means of legally defining the procreation and consumption difference, and consequent related Sustainable Rights/Penalties, between a Leaver and a Taker, to ensure sustainability. [16] CommonSism asserts that a majority of society's problems - crime, violence, unemployment, poverty, inflation, food shortages, political instability, vanishing species, garbage and pollution urban sprawl, traffic jams, toxic waste, energy and non-renewable resources (NNR) depletion and scarcity are symptoms of Ecological Overshoot, resulting from the AnthroCorpoCentric Consumptionist Left and Right Wing's war against nature, and the failures of AnthroCorpocentric Jurisprudence. [17] Ecological Overshoot is a consequence of all other ideologies and their adherents failure to legally (a) define the difference between sustainable and unsustainable procreation and consumption behaviour; and (b) provide legal rights to sustainable practices, and legal penalties to unsustainable individuals, corporations and organisations. [18] Guerrylla Laws (A) simply and very specifically clarify the difference between the consumption and procreation behaviour of an Unsustainable Taker (Scarcity Combatant) vs a Sustainable Leaver (Eco-Innocent); and are (B) used in courts to (a) provide legal rights and socio-political rewards of recognition to Sustainable Leaver's for their Heroic lifestyle choices and practices; (b) confront Taker Scarcity Combatants of their Breeding / Consumption combatant behaviours aggravation of Scarcity induced socio-economic problems, by means of aggravated legal penalties, in accordance to their 'Taker Scarcity Combatant' status. [19] Guerrylla Laws define the Eco/Ego Footprint29 procreation and consumption behaviour of an individual as a Sustainable Leaver (aka Eco-Innocent) or Unsustainable Taker (aka Scarcity-Combatant), based upon a sustainable consumption bio-capacity of 1 global hectare (gha)30 (60 % of 1.8 gha)31 in EcoFootprint: The difference between the biocapacity and Ecological Footprint of a region or country. A biocapacity deficit occurs when the Footprint of a population exceeds the biocapacity of the area available to that population. If there is a regional or national biocapacity deficit, it means that the region is importing biocapacity through trade or liquidating regional ecological assets. Global biocapacity deficit cannot be compensated through trade, and is overshoot. 30 Sustainable Footprint Biocapacity: A biocapacity of 1 gha assumes that 40% of land is set aside for other species. 1 gha is 60 % of 1.8 gha, therefore .8 hectares is set aside for other species. 31 International Biocapacity: In 2006, the average biologically productive area (biocapacity) per person worldwide was approximately 1.8 global hectares (gha) per capita. In 2008, there were ~ 12 billion hectares of biologically productive land and water on Earth. Dividing by the number of people alive in that year (6.7 billion) gives 1.79 global hectares per person. This assumes that no land is set aside for other species that consume the same biological material as humans. If for example, there were only 3.5 billion people alive that 29

accordance with the proactive conservation policies of Bhutan32; multiplied by an individuals Breeding footprint factor of 20 per child. [20] Sustainable Leaver / Eco-Innocent: 0 children, consumption < 20 gha (Intn'l Biocapacity (1 gha) x 20); or 1 child, consumption < 1 gha. [21] Unsustainable Taker / Scarcity-Combatant: 0 children, consumption > 20 gha; or 1 child, consumption > 1 gha. [22] For example: Complainant‟s Consumption Footprint33 using Sustainable Economy's Myfootprint.org quiz, is 12.75 global hectares (gha). South Africa's average consumption footprint is 38.59 gha. Amici has no children, consequently my procreation factor is 0 x 20* = 0. [(Each Child increases a parents footprint by factor of 2034)]. My Consumption (12.75) x Procreation (0) = Eco Footprint of 12.75/0 gha. If accurate, if everyone consumed and procreated like me, we would need 0.81 earths.35 Conversely, if everyone consumed and procreated like President Jacob Zuma, we would need 2090 earths36. [23] Sustainable Security: Sustainability is Security: “There is no security without sustainability”37: In the absence of an international new moral order38 year, that would have provided everyone with 3.5 gha. If there were only 1 billion people, their would be 12gha biocapacity for each persons needs. 32 Bhutan Proactive Conservation: Bhutan is seen as a model for proactive conservation initiatives. The Kingdom has received international acclaim for its commitment to the maintenance of its biodiversity. This is reflected in the decision to maintain at least sixty percent of the land area under forest cover, to designate more than 40% of its territory as national parks, reserves and other protected areas, and most recently to identify a further nine percent of land area as biodiversity corridors linking the protected areas. Environmental conservation has been placed at the core of the nation's development strategy, the middle path. It is not treated as a sector but rather as a set of concerns that must be mainstreamed in Bhutan's overall approach to development planning and to be buttressed by the force of law. - "Parks of Bhutan". Bhutan Trust Fund for Environmental Conservation online. Bhutan Trust Fund. 33 http://myfootprint.org/en/your_results/?id=2559685 34 Paul Murtaugh (7-31-09): Family Planning: A Major Environmental Emphasis, Oregon University http://sqswans.weebly.com/child--ecofootprint-x-20.html 35 http://sqworms.weebly.com/lara-johnstone-eco-081.html 36 President Zuma‟s consumption footprint using Sustainable Economy's Myfootprint.org quiz, is 65.66 global hectares (gha). President Zuma‟s Procreation Factor is 500 [President Zuma has 25 children. His procreation footprint factor is 25 x 20* = 500. (Each Child increases a parents footprint by factor of 20 )]. President Zuma‟s Net Consumption & Procreation Footprint is 33280 gha [Consumption (65.66) x Procreation (500) = Net Footprint of 33280 gha]. If accurate, if everyone consumed and procreated like President Zuma, we would need 2,090 earths. http://sqworms.weebly.com/jacob-zuma-ego-2090.html 37 Murphy, R (2006/10/24): US Army Strategy of the Environment, Office of the Dep. Asst. Sec. of the Army, Environment, Safety & Occup. Health: Assistant for Sustainability; Linkola, P (2009): Can Life Prevail? A Radical Approach to the Environmental Crisis (Integral Tradition Publishing) 38 Hardin (1968/12/13); 1996: US Army War College: Parameters: The Culture of Future Conflict: Overpopulation & Resource Scarcity will be the Direct Cause of Confrontation, Conflict, and War: Major Ralph Peters | US Army War College: Parameters | Winter 1995-96, pp. 18-27.: “Resource scarcity will be a direct cause of confrontation, conflict, and war. The struggle to maintain access to critical resources will spark local and regional conflicts that will evolve into the most frequent conventional wars of the next century. Gross overpopulation will destroy fragile possibilities for progress in much of the non-Western world, and much of this problem is the West's fault. .. Basic resources will prove inadequate for populations exploding beyond natural limits, and we may discover truths about ourselves that we do not wish to know. In the end, the greatest challenge may be to our moral order.”

where Ecocentric laws are implemented to regulate and reduce human procreation and resource utilization behaviour, towards a sustainable, pre-industrial lifestyle paradigm; “overpopulation”39 and resource scarcity40 will result in conflict and war41 (perhaps nuclear42) confronting regions at an accelerated pace43, and “collapse of the global economic system and every market-oriented national economy”44 by 205045.

CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS: [24] On 27 November 2012, I filed a Pro Se application46 with the Constitutional Court Registrar, for Radical Honesty culture Review of the „Kill Boer‟ Hate Speech Negotiated Agreement between Afriforum/TAU-SA and Julius Malema/ANC, wherein I specifically an order from the court, for the “Permission to invoke47 cultural law48 in S. 15(3), 30, 31, and 18; to enable the Applicant to honour the duty and responsibility to uphold the principles upon which her Radical Honesty culture is based; and Psychological Integrity in Section 1249; the former which may require the application of choice of law rules.”

Hardin G (1991): Carrying Capacity and Quality of Life, Environmental Science: Sustaining the Earth; Simmons, M (2000/09/30): Revisiting the Limits to Growth: Could the Club of Rome Have Been Correct, After All? 40 Koppel, T (2000): CIA and Pentagon on Overpopulation and Resource Wars, Nightline; United States Joint Forces Command (2010/02/18): The Joint Operating Environment - 2010 (The JOE – 2010); Parthemore, C & Nagl, J (2010/09/27): Fueling the Future Force: Preparing the Department of Defense for a Post-Petroleum Environment, Center for a New American Security (CNAS); United States Army & TRADOC (2012): US Army Unified Quest 2012 Fact Sheet, Unified Quest 2012 is the Army Chief of Staff's annual Title 10 Future Study Plan (FSP); Brent, JG (2012): Humans: An Endangered Species Jason Brent; Heinberg, R (2006/04/30): Population, Resources, and Human Idealism, Energy Bulletin; Peters (1996) 41 Peters (1996); Bush, GW Snr (1986/02): Public Report of the Vice-President‟s Task Force on Combatting Terrorism; Homer-Dixon, T, & Boutwell, J, & Rathjens, G (1993): Environmental change and violent conflict: Growing scarcities of renewable resources can contribute to social instability and civil strife. Scientific American, 268(2), pp. 38-45 42 Hardin (1968/12/13) 43 United States Army & TRADOC (2012) 44 Schultz, S (2010/09/01): [German] Military Study Warns of Potentially Drastic Oil Crisis, Der Spiegel 45 Clugston, C (2012): Scarcity: Humanity‟s Final Chapter (Booklocker.com Inc): Preface, pg. ix 46 http://sqswans.weebly.com/cct-alien-v-afriforum.html 47 Ex parte Minister of Native Affairs: In re Yako v Beyi 1948 (1) SA 388 (A) at 397: Appellate Division held that neither common nor customary law was prima facie applicable. Courts had to consider all the circumstances of a case, and, without any preconceived view about the applicability of one or other legal system, select the appropriate law on the basis of its inquiry. 48 SALC, Sept 1999: Report on Conflicts of law: P.22: „1.58. The Constitution now provides an entitlement for invoking customary law in legal suits. Because ss 30 and 31 specifically guarantee an individual and a group's right to pursue a culture of choice, it could be argued that application of customary law has become a constitutional right. Previously, the state had assumed complete discretion in deciding whether and to what extent customary law should be recognized, an attitude typical of colonial thinking, for Africans were subject to whatever policies the conquering state chose to impose on them. Now, however, the state has a duty to allow people to participate in the culture they choose, implicit in this duty is a responsibility to uphold the institutions on which that culture is based.‟ 49 12. Freedom and security of the person: (2) Everyone has the right to bodily and psychological integrity.. 39

[25] The Respondents are: (1) Afriforum, (2) Transvaal Agricultural Union, (3) Julius Malema, (4) African National Congress, (5) Archbishop Desmond Tutu, (6) Former Presidents Nelson Mandela and (7) FW de Klerk, (8) CRL Rights Commission, (9) Norwegian Nobel Committee: Chair, (10) Central Intelligence Agency: Director, and (11) David Petraeus. [26]

The application – and related evidence for orders requested -- argues that:

[26.1] The 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. [26.2] The 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‟50, and the TRC‟s “failure to investigate demographic

Declaring the Truth and Reconciliation Report‟s failure to provide clear and concise cultural/religious definition of „reconciliation‟ -- i.e. whether Lutheran Christian, African, Boer Afrikaner, Kairos Black Liberation Theology, Frantz Fanon Liberation, Radical Honesty, etc -- to be (a) a failure of the requirements of the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act, 34 of 1995, Section 2 (3)(1) “The objectives of the Commission shall be to promote national unity and reconciliation in a spirit of understanding which transcends the conflicts and divisions of the past.. “; and (b) an example of Archbishop Tutu‟s description of how vague definitions (in this case not even a vague definition) enable legal tyranny. For example: [1] War is Peace Whores consider „reconciliation‟ to be a tool of pretend problem solving manipulation, which can be used as a great PR publicity stunt to colonize ignorant minds into blind subservient belief in the „reconciliation‟ moral supremacy narrative. Reconciliation is achieved for as long as the subservient followers are in a state of moral supremacy cognitive dissonance, where objective or subjective enquiry is suspended, but if applied would reveal their belief in their state of moral supremacy reconciliation to be false, but lack the integrity and courage to admit they are addicted to being „morally superior‟, due to censoring all evidence exposing their two faced hypocrisy. [2] Lutheran Christians consider „reconciliation‟ to be a voluntary inner spiritual process, whereby reconciliation is achieved via sincere dialogue and a change of heart and perspective. [3] Kairos / Black Liberation Theology Christians consider „reconciliation‟ to be a socialist economic process, whereby reconciliation is only achieved once socialism is forcefully implemented. [4] Frantz Fanon Liberation Theologists consider „reconciliation‟ to be a physically violent process of „liberating‟ the „colonized mind‟ by violence „on the rotting corpse of the settler‟. Reconciliation occurs once all the settlers corpses are dead and rotting. [5] Radical Honesty is a non-violent Fanon process, where reconciliation is a psychological and sensate physical experience of releasing of anger and resentments. It is the liberation of both the settler and the colonized minds, by release of both of their suppressed violence, not physically, but verbally: face to face, through expressions of their resentments and appreciations, until all suppressed sensate anger is released. Radical Honesty forgiveness occurs when two former enemies sit across from each other, and have verbally liberated their pent up sensate anger and rage, the body is in a state of released sensate tension, similar to the emotions released in a sexual orgasm, irrespective of however long it takes. Reconciliation occurs when the fragile ego mind is no longer colonized by the suppressed anger in the body. 50

youth bulge51 and „population production‟ breeding war52 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.” [26.3] 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. [26.4] Alternatively, to order all South African‟s to prepare for SA‟s Race War in the impending Peak NNR Crisis of Conflict: If South Africa‟s TRC Fraud Fragile Egos are more important than confronting the „Scarcity as Cause of Violent Conflict‟ factor; all South African‟s should prepare themselves for the impending Race and Class War Consequences of the Peak NNR Crisis of Conflict. [27] On 29 November 2012, Concourt Registrar refused53 to issue my application a case number, or process it, unless I met certain „Rules of the Court‟ (PDF 54), which include filing 25 printed hard copies via land mail (I filed one hardcopy as a Pro Se, and in accordance to my Ecocentric anti-resource waste values), and finding legal representation. [28] On 06 December 2012, I filed “Appeal of Concourt Registrar’s Refusal to Process My Concourt Application: Alien on Pale Blue Dot v Afriforum et al” (PDF55), to the Concourt Justices, via the Registrar56; requesting a Constitutional Court declaratory order confirming that: (A) I am unable to find a lawyer to represent me as member of the Radical Honesty culture.

Demographics & Violence: Youth Bulges: Numerous reports provide details how population age structures have significant impacts on a countries stability, governance, economic development and social well-being. Put differently, countries with large populations of idle young men, known as youth bulges, account for 70 – 90 percent of all civil conflicts. Additionally a wealth of historical studies indicates that cycles of rebellion and military campaigns in the early modern and modern world tended to coincide with periods when young adults comprised an unusually large proportion of the population. Youth Bulge Reports: (1) The Shape of Things to Come: Why Age Structure Matters to a Safer More Equitable World, by Population Action International; (2) YouthQuake: Population, fertility and environment in the 21st Century, by Optimum Population Trust. 52 “We must all understand that the most potent weapons of war are the penis and the womb. Therefore, if you cannot convince a group to control its population by discussion, debate, intelligent analysis etc., you must consider their action in using the penis and the womb to increase population an act of war.” - Former Municipal Court Judge Jason G. Brent 51

http://sqswans.weebly.com/cct-alien-v-afriforum.html

http://sqswans.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/12-11-29_concourtregistrar_letter_to_lara_johnstone.pdf 55 sqswans.weebly.com/06-dec-app-reg.html 54

http://sqswans.weebly.com/cct-alien-v-afriforum.html

[29] Put simply my appeal can be stated as An Appeal of AnthroCorpocentric Patriarchal Dominant Cultures „Rules of Court‟, which violate the cultural practices of an Ecocentric Gender Balanced Minority culture. [30] Therein I request leniency from the Justices for these „Rules of Court‟, in that I am a Pro Se Radical Honesty PP4PP culture applicant, and I cannot find any lawyer to represent me, I have not been able to find any lawyer to represent me for the past ten years, because there are no lawyers or Advocates in South Africa who are willing to represent me, as a member of the Radical Honesty culture. As proof, I I contacted the following Law Societies and Bar Associations to enquire whether they knew of any lawyer willing to represent a member of the Radical Honesty culture: Legal Aid: Chair Vidhu Vedalankar (PDF57) | Jhb Bar Ass: Pro Bono Chair: (PDF58) | Cape Law Society (PDF59) | Cape Bar Council (PDF60) | Free State Law Society (PDF61) | Free State Soc of Advocates (PDF62) | General Counsel of Bar of SA (PDF63) | KwaZulu Natal Law Society (PDF64) | Law Society of South Africa (PDF65) | Pretoria Society of Advocates (PDF66) | Soc of Adv KwaZulu Natal - Dbn (PDF67) | Soc of Adv KwaZulu Natal - Pmb (PDF68) | Northern Province Law Society: M van Niekerk (PDF69). [31] I also submitted a Press Release to the SAPA Press Wire70, wherein I attempt to find a Radical Honesty lawyer. SAPA published the Press Release to their „wire‟, did not write a SAPA news story about it, which they generally do. [32] The Press Release attempts to determine whether there are any South African lawyers who are willing to represent an individual from the Radical Honoursty culture. The lawyers do not read the „SAPA press wire‟, they read the newspapers. The press release is pointless simply published to the Press Wire, if no media publications publish the information in the Press Release. [33] I telephoned SAPA to find out why they did not write a story about it, whereupon the SAPA Journalist informed me that it was „not news‟. When I asked why other SA media publications did not publish it, she said she thought, they also probably think it is „not news‟. sqswans.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/12-11-29_legal_aid-vidhu_vedalankar.pdf sqswans.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/12-12-06_concourt_justices_encl_g_jhb_bar_assoc__pf_louw.pdf 59 sqswans.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/12-11-30_cape_law_society.pdf 60 sqswans.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/_12-11-30_cape_bar_council.pdf 61 sqswans.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/12-11-30_free_state_law_society.pdf 62 sqswans.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/12-11-30_free_state_soc_of_advocates.pdf 63 sqswans.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/12-11-30_general_counsel_of_bar_of_sa_-_exec_sec.pdf 64 sqswans.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/12-12-06_concourt_justices_encl_h_kzn_law_society.pdf 65 sqswans.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/12-11-30_law_society_of_south_africa.pdf 66 sqswans.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/12-11-30_pretoria_society_of_advocates.pdf 67 sqswans.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/12-12-06_concourt_justices_encl_c_adv-soc-kzn-dbn.pdf 68 sqswans.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/12-12-06_concourt_justices_encl_b_adv-soc-kzn-pmb.pdf 69 sqswans.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/12-1206_concourt_justices_encl_i_law_soc_of_n_prov_m_van_niekerk.pdf 57 58

http://sqswans.weebly.com/cct-alien-v-afriforum.html

[34] I then wrote an email to all of the Editors71, asking them whether they “believe that the fact that a South African citizen member of the Radical Honesty culture, has been unable to find a lawyer to represent her, as a member of the Radical Honesty culture, for the past ten years, and in a current case before the Constitutional Court, is “not news”?” [35] None of them responded and none of them published a story to inform SA lawyers that a South African citizen member of the Radical Honesty culture, has been unable to find a lawyer to represent her, as a member of the Radical Honesty culture, for the past ten years, and in a current case before the Constitutional Court. [36] On 10 December, I enquired from Concourt Registrar: Ms Stander, when the Justices would be responding to my appeal. [37] She responded “I shall place your matter before the Justices for their consideration when you adhere to the Rules of Court. Kindly find the Rules of court attached hereto. I have marked the most important issues for your convenience.” [38] I responded: “I shall be happy to adhere to the 'War is Peace Whore' Rules of Court, once the Justices provide me with such an order. Have you provided the "Appeal of Concourt Registrar's Refusal to Process My Concourt Application: Alien on Pale Blue Dot v Afriforum et al." to the Justices? If so: Do they intend responding? If not: When do you intend informing the Justices of the "Appeal of Concourt Registrar's Refusal to Process My Concourt Application: Alien on Pale Blue Dot v Afriforum et al."? [39] She did not respond. So I submitted a request to the Concourt Director: Mr. Vic Misser: “On Thursday 06 November I filed an appeal of Ms. Stander's Refusal to process my application, to the Justices. … Can you please ask Ms. Stander if she is also refusing to provide the Justices with a copy of the appeal of her refusal to process the application? If so, to provide such refusal on court letterhead?” [40] There has been no response from the Constitutional Court Registrar, or the Justices to my Radical Honesty culture appeal of the Registrar‟s decisions. [41] On 11 December 2012, I filed two complaints with the CRL Rights Commission (Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities) against the SA Constitutional Court Registrar

http://sqswans.weebly.com/cct-alien-v-afriforum.html

(PDF72) and a dozen media Editors (PDF73) in that they discriminate against the – Tourette Syndrome like – Radical Honesty culture74. [42] On 12 December 2012, I wrote a letter to Mark Ellis, the Executive Director of the International Bar Association; requesting the IBA to 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. [43] On 04 February, I sent a reminder to the CRL Rights Commission authorities requesting a status report as to my aforementioned complaints, in terms of CRL Rights Commission's procedures for 'ensuring that the rights of a community are protected', as detailed under: 4.1. Screening of Complaint, and 4.2 Complaints handling. [44] I also telephoned the CRL Rights Commission, and was informed by the receptionist to speak to a lady named Baqlolile (spelling?). I called at least 5 times, and every time the receptionist put me through to Baqlolile, I would ask to confirm whether I was speaking to the right person, and she would refuse to confirm her name, and put down the phone. [45] On 06 February 2013, I received an acknowledgement of receipt for my SAPA and SA Media Editors, discrimination complaint, from Mrs. Makgoba. [46] On 07 February 2013, Ms Makgoba ruled75 that “the commission has taken strive to analyse your complaint with regard to the above subject matter. Based on the fact that you have been unable to state cultural or religious or linguistic right that has been violated, except for quoting the constitutional provisions, the commission has concluded therefore that your matter falls outside the commission's mandate. Accordingly the commision has dismissed your matter and proceed to close the file.” [47] On 07 February 2013, I filed an appeal76 of CRL Rights Commission, Mrs. Makgoba‟s ruling, to Rev. Dr. Wesley Mabuza, the CRL Rights Commission Chair: Ref: 9/1/1/1/46: Lara Johnstone, Radical Honesty culture v. SAPA & SA Media: Appeal of CRL Rights Comm: Mrs. Makgoba 07 February ruling http://sqswans.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/12-1211_crlrightscomm_complaint_concourt_registrar.pdf 73 http://sqswans.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/12-12-11_crlrightscomm_complaint_sapa__sa_media_encla.pdf 74 SA Media, Concourt & Lawyers Discriminate Against – Tourette Syndrome like -- Radical Honesty Culture http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-894174 72

75 76

http://sqswans.weebly.com/cct-alien-v-afriforum.html http://sqswans.weebly.com/cct-alien-v-afriforum.html

(PDF77): “Request Confirmation CRL Rights Commission Chairperson: Mr. Mabuza endorses Mrs. K. Makgoba‟s Ruling authorizing (a) the CRL Rights Commission‟s and SA Legal establishment‟s endorsement of the denial of cultural legal representation, and access to courts, to members of the Radical Honesty culture, and (b) the South African Media‟s discrimination against Members of the Radical Honesty culture, by refusing to report the fact that a South African citizen member of the Radical Honesty culture, has been unable to find a lawyer to represent her, as a member of the Radical Honesty culture, for the past ten years, and in a current case before the Constitutional Court. [There has, as yet, been no response to the Appeal from the CRL Rights Commissioner] [48] On 07 February 2013, I also filed requests to Amnesty International (PDF78) and Human Rights Watch (PDF79), to “Take Notice & Provide Independent Observation of my Radical Honesty culture appeal of South African Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities (CRL Rights Comm) Ruling to Endorse Denying me Access to Legal Representation & Courts, as a member of the Radical Honesty culture, for the past ten years, and in current Concourt case: Alien v. Afriforum et al (CRL Ref: 9/1/1/1/46: RH v SAPA & SA Editors)”. [49] On 18 February 2013, CRL Rights Commission, Mrs. Makgoba issued her ruling80: Ref: 9/1/1/1/49: Lara Johnstone, Radical Honesty culture v Constitutional Court Registrar: Refusal by the Constitutional Court Registrar to process your application for Review, stating: “The Commission would like to advise you that your complaint does not fall under the mandate of the Commission. Be advised further that, following our investigation on the above matter, the Commission found that the Constitutional Court registrar's refusal to process your application for review was based on your non-adherence to the rules of the constitutional court. The refusal has no affliction on any cultural, religious or linguistic rights of communities which fall under the mandate of the commission.” [50] On 19 February 2013, I filed an Appeal81 of CRL Rights Commission: Mrs. Makgoba‟s Ruling: Ref: 9/1/1/1/49: Lara Johnstone, Radical Honesty culture v. SA Concourt Registrar: Appeal of CRL Rights Comm: Mrs. Makgoba 18 February ruling: 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 sqswans.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/13-02-07_crl-rights-comm_ref_9-1-1-1-46_rh-v-sapasamedia_enclabc.pdf 78 sqswans.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/13-02-07_amnesty-international_ind-monitor-observ_crlrcomp_encl.pdf 79 sqswans.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/13-02-07_human-rights-watch_ind-monitorobserv_crlrc_enc.pdf 77

80 81

http://sqswans.weebly.com/cct-alien-v-afriforum.html http://sqswans.weebly.com/cct-alien-v-afriforum.html

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). [51] On 19 February 2013, I also filed requests82 to the International Network for Cultural Diversity (INCD) International Secretariat: Garry Neil, Executive Director & Philosopher Mr. Slavoj Zizek, as well as International Society for Reform of Criminal Law (ISRCL) President: The Hon. Chief Justice Lance S. G. Finch: Request INCD/ISRCL Take Notice & Provide Independent Observation and monitoring of Ref: 9/1/1/1/49: Lara Johnstone, Radical Honesty culture v. SA Concourt Registrar. [52] There has been no response from the CRL Rights Commission: Chairman: Reverend Mabuza, to my appeals, nor from the Constitutional Court Registrar or the SA Media editors. [53] On 28 February 2013, complaints were submitted83 to (i) SA Gender Commission; (ii) SA Human Rights Council [WC/1213/0873] ; (iii) Public Protector [7/2-003999/13]: Complaints of AnthroCorpocentric Patriarchal Dominant culture/s Cultural and Gender discrimination, by: (1) SA Concourt Registrar & Director; (2) SAPA & SA Media Editors; (3) CRL Rights Commission: Chair, against Ecocentric Gender Balanced Radical Honoursty culture. Dated at George, South Africa: 04 April 2013

Free Former Field Nigger: Natalie Turner Lara Johnstone, aka Harriet Tubman Member: Radical Honesty Culture Founder: Radical Honoursty Culture Founder: Yshmael Guerrylla Law Party Founder: CommonSism: Common Sense Laws for a Sustainable Commons Founder: Æquilibriæx Jurisprudence: Equal & Balanced Eco/Anthropocentric Law

http://sqswans.weebly.com/1/post/2013/02/130219_incd-crl1.html

http://sqswans.weebly.com/cct-alien-v-afriforum.html

Annexure “B”

Radical Honoursty Culture Yshmael Guerrylla Law Party CommonSism: Common Sense Guerrylla Laws for a Sustainable Commons AEquilibriaex: balanced Eco/Anthropocentric law www.guerrylla -law.co.nr

05 April 2013 Desmond Tutu c/o: Nomfundo Walaza Desmond Tutu Peace Center 42 Hans Strijdom Ave, Capetown, 8001 Tel: (21) 443 6760 | Fax: (21) 443 6768 E: info@tutu.org, vivian@tutu.org.za CC: Templeton Prize Judges c/o: Ms. Judith Marchand, Director John Templeton Foundation 300 Conshohocken State Road, Suite 500 West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania 19428 Tel: 610.941.2828 | Fax: 610.825.1730 info@templetonprize.org

President Jacob Zuma SA Presidency Union Buildings Private Bag X1000, Pretoria, 0001 president@po.gov.za Transparency CC: SA Media Editors Transparency CC: SA Political Parties

Archbishop Desmond Tutu, RE: President Zuma urges Archbishop Tutu to continue ANC, AntiApartheid Movements Censorship of their TRC Fraud. [Ref1] President Zuma urges you, the ANC and Anti-Apartheid Movement to continue your sterling House Nigga work in support of the bigotry and treason of the Liberal Supremacist Elite2, censoring, ignoring and covering up the Radical Honoursty 04 April 2013: RE: Questions to Archbishop Tutu; or if unanswered by Tutu and Prize Upheld by Templeton Prize Judges; (ii) Congratulations on Receipt of the Multinational Corporate Resource and Cultural Imperialists Templeton Prize for excellence in House Nigger subservience to getting rid of Boer AntiImperialists, and making SA safe for ‘Compulsive Developmentism’ Imperialists (i) cultural colonization of indigenous cultures, and (ii) resource plundering. http://sqswans.weebly.com/1/post/2013/04/130404_tututempleton1.html 2 "The power elite, especially the liberal elite, has always been willing to sacrifice integrity and truth for power, personal advancement, foundation grants, awards, tenured professorships, columns, book contracts, television appearances, generous lecture fees and social status. They know what they need to say. They know which ideology they have to serve. They know what lies must be told—the biggest being that they take moral stances on issues that aren’t safe and anodyne. They have been at this game a long time. And they will, should their careers require it, happily sell us out again." - Chris Hedges, The Treason of the Intellectuals 1

PO Box 5042 * George East, 6539 * Tel: (044) 870 7239 * Cel: (071) 170 1954

evidence of TRC Fraud Censored by Mandela, Tutu, ANC and AntiApartheid Movement. Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2013 1:26 PM To: Rev. Kenneth Meshoe - ACDP (president@acdp.org.za); ANC - Presidency (president@po.gov.za); COPE HQ (info@congressofthepeople.org.za); HQ DA (headoffice@da.org.za); Dagga Party: Jeremy Acton (jeremyacton@gmail.com); Col. Piet Uys FFHQ (hk@vf.co.za); HNP: (info@hnp.org.za); Chief Mangosuthu Buthelezi (lyndithw@ifp.co.za); Cape Party (cape@capeparty.com); SACP: Jeremy Cronin (jcronin@anc.org.za); Humphrey Nogobonza - UDM (sg@udm.org.za) Subject: SA Pol Parties: Re: Q's for Desmond Tutu & Templeton Prize Judges: RE: Tutu's & SA's Censorship of TRC Fraud Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2013 1:34 PM To: Pheladi Gwangwa - 702 (pheladi@primedia.co.za); Peter Bruce - BDay (brucep@bdfm.co.za); Nuus - Beeld (nuus@beeld.com); Nuus - Burger (nuus@dieburger.com); Chris Witfield - CArgus (chris.whitfield@inl.co.za); Martin Williams - Citizen (martinw@citizen.co.za); Ferial Haffajee City Press (ferial.haffajee@citypress.co.za); Allen Dunn - DNews (alan.dunn@inl.co.za); Dan Roodt - PRAAG (dan@praag.co.za); Debora Patta - ETV (deborap@etv.co.za); Barney Mthombothi - FM (mthombothib@fm.co.za); Mandi Botha - GHerald (mandi@groupeditors.co.za); Nic Dawes - M&G (nicd@mg.co.za); Piet Coertze - Leadership (piet.coetzer@capemedia.co.za); New Age (info@thenewage.co.za); (newsed@witness.co.za); Redakteur - Rapport (redakteur@rapport.co.za); Politicsweb (letters@politicsweb.co.za); Chris Swanepoel - RSG (chris@rsg.co.za); News - SAPA (news@sapa.org.za); Brendan Seery - SStar (brendan.seery@inl.co.za); Sunday Times (suntimes@sundaytimes.co.za); Makhaudu Sesara SunInd (makhudu.sefara@inl.co.za) Subject: SA Media Editors: Q's for Desmond Tutu & Templeton Prize Judges: RE: Tutu's & SA's Censorship of TRC Fraud

SABC: Zuma, ANC laud Tutu for major award3 President Jacob Zuma has congratulated Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu for being awarded the 2013 Templeton Prize. "We are extremely proud of this recognition to one of our own, the revered Archbishop Tutu, even in his retirement, the Archbishop continues to inspire our country and its people to do more every day to realise the universal goal of a better life for all. This honour is therefore well-deserved indeed," says Zuma in statement.

The Ultimate Opportunity to Test your House Nigga Commitment to Jesus vs. Pharisee Values of â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Love and Forgivenessâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;.

http://www.sabc.co.za/news/a/efa9a2804f2574458855e83fdb56b4e8/Zuma,-ANC-laud-Tutu-for-major-award20130504 3



Should you stand for Truth, Transparency and scientific based root cause problem solving?



Should you find yourself a spiritual backbone to examine the evidence for South Africa’s Anthropocentric and Ideologically biased TRC Fraud?



Should you advocate on behalf of a brutally honest sincere and ecologically and scientifically credible Truth and Reconciliation Commission, focussed on exposing the underlying psychological, cultural, racial, Compulsive Development and Scarcity induced factors contributing to Apartheid’s Political violence?

Only if your Spiritual convictions are an unswerving commitment to unbiased and unequivocal truth, 100 % transparency with fuck all concern about whose skeletons are being exposed, and scientific based root cause problem solving! If you are unable to find yourself a spiritual backbone, I doubt you need to worry that you shall be publicly exposed by the corporate media, or the left or right wing corporatist political establishment. Both the left or right wing, political or media establishment in South Africa, would much prefer it if you would continue the TRC Fraud charade, so that they can continue the left vs right wing hate blame game, focussed on parasitical emotional manipulation of the black-white or white-black covert or over hatred of their respective fan clubs, while doing sweet fuck all about the root causes of the problems. Generally speaking, the left don’t want to confront their African fanclubs with taking personal responsibility for their masculine insecurity breeding war behaviour, and the right don’t want to confront their Boer fanclub with their masculine insecurity overconsumption behaviour. So, I seriously doubt you have to worry about your lack of a spine being exposed by any of South Africa’s political or media establishment Left vs. Right wing corporate political whores. They don’t give a flying fuck about honesty, transparency and root cause problem solving, only about the endless perpetuation of their little parasitic blame game left vs right/white vs black/black vs white empires. It does not matter that their parasitism is intellectually, emotionally, psychologically, and spiritually corrupting their entire beings, identities and relationships. So, you know that you will get sweet fuck all support from the left or right wing, from the white or the black blame game wings, if you do decide to find yourself a spiritual backbone. What shall your decision be????? Jacob Zuma and the ANC would like you to be a Pharisee House Nigga!!! 3

Do you have the spiritual backbone to be a Nat Turner / Harriet Tubman / Frederick Douglass Free Nigga????? Dated at George, South Africa: 05 April 2013

Free Former Field Nigger: Natalie Turner Lara Johnstone, aka Harriet Tubman Member: Radical Honesty Culture Founder: Radical Honoursty Culture Founder: Yshmael Guerrylla Law Party Founder: CommonSism: Common Sense Laws for a Sustainable Commons Founder: Ă&#x2020;quilibriĂŚx Jurisprudence: Equal & Balanced Eco/Anthropocentric Law

Annexure “C”

10 April 2013 Professor Steven Gish Dept: History & International Studies Auburn University at Montgomery P.O. Box 244023 · Montgomery, AL 36124-4023 Tel: 334-244-3958 | Fax: 334-244-3740 Email sgish@aum.edu

CC: Dr. Joe M. King Office of the Provost Auburn University at Montgomery Email: askaum@aum.edu

CC: Desmond Tutu c/o: Nomfundo Walaza Desmond Tutu Peace Center E: info@tutu.org, vivian@tutu.org.za

Radical Honoursty Culture and TYGAE Request for Withdrawal of your Nomination of Desmond Tutu as Recipient of Templeton Prize, due to your (a) biographer conflict of interest, and (b) failure to provide the evidence of Archbishop Tutu’s involvement in the cover-up and censorship of South Africa’s TRC Fraud. [1]

Radical Honoursty Culture & TYGAE gender and ecological bias:

[1.1] 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 Jurisprudence1 and fake Multiculturalism2: 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. [1.2] I am an adult Radical Honoursty Ecofeminist Guerrylla Law Sustainable Security practicing paralegal EcoFeminist, member of Friend of Wikileaks (FoWL)

1 2

http://sqswans.weebly.com/anthrocorpocentric-jurisprudence.html http://sqswans.weebly.com/multicorpcultural-colonialism.html

PO Box 5042 * George East, 6539 * Tel: (044) 870 7239 * Cel: (071) 170 1954

and the Radical Honourty culture3; resident in George, Southern Cape, South Africa; where I run a small EcoFeminist pedal-powered wormery business. [1.3] I am married to African American prisoner Demian Emile Johnson, who has been incarcerated in the California Dept. of Corrections, on a sentence of 15-tolife for felony murder, since 1982. We met while I was working on providing educational information on rehabilitation issues to prisoners. (Sacramento County: Licence & Certificate of Marriage: Demian Emile Johnson and Lara Johnstone (PDF4); 31 May 1998: Sunday Times: US convict wins love and support in SA town (PDF5); 24 Sep 1998: YOU: Volksrust Farmgirl Doomed for Love of Black Convict)(PDF6). [1.4] Radical Honoursty Culture: I am a member of the Radical Honoursty culture, based upon Radical Honesty7 dispute resolution principles, which is (a) a minority culture, (b) an Ecocentric culture, (c) practices Brutal Honesty Authentic Multiculturalism (Zizek: 'The one measure of true love is: you can insult the other'8) endorsing authentic diversity of cultures, and (d) does not endorse the homogenizing AnthroCorpocentric Egotist Consumptionism effects of Multinational Globalization of cultures (Multiculturalism: The Cultural Logic of Multinational Capitalism - Zizek9). [1.5] I am neither anthropocentrically liberal nor conservative, nor an endorser of AnthroCorpocentric Legislative or Juristic Jurisprudence which only grants Humans and Corporations legal personhood, while denying legal personhood to all other animal and plant species and ecological rights to nature. I identify as a CommonSism Primitivist. [1.6] CommonSism: I am the founder of CommonSism10 -- Common Sense Guerrylla Laws for a Sustainable Commons – which is inspired by among others: the Taker vs. Leaver ideas of the gorilla Ishmael, in Daniel Quinn's books: Ishmael and My Ishmael; Garrett Hardin‟s Tragedy of the Commons, and the Order of Melchizedek ideas of Yakov Rabinovich, as expressed in Stairway to Nowhere: Chapter 8: Melchizedek — Ecological War. [1.7] I am also the founder of the concept of Æquilibriæx Jurisprudence, which is Equal & balanced -- Eco/Anthropocentric – law, based upon: æquus (equal), lībra/æ (balance), libri (books), and lex (law). Equilibriæx Jurisprudence adheres to the laws of nature / ecology, which manifests as all species living in carry capacity harmony with another. Aquilibriæx Jurisprudence adheres to laws of human nature, which manifests as fully informed consent harmony between all human SA Constitutional Court ruling of 03 May 2012 in CCT 23-10, reads as follows: “Ms. Lara Johnstone, Member of Radical Honesty Culture and Religion, is admitted as an amicus curiae” 4 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/090922_hc-ifp 5 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/980513_stimes 6 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/980924_you 7 www.radicalhonesty.com 8 www.spiked-online.com/Articles/00000002D2C4.htm 9 Slavoj Žižek: Multiculturalism or the cultural logic of multinational capitalism, in: Razpol 10 - glasilo Freudovskega polja, Ljubljana 1997 http://www.soc.aau.dk/fileadmin/user_upload/kbm/VoF/ Kurser/2011/Multiculturalism/slavoj_zizek-multiculturalism-or-the-cultural-logic-of-multinational-capitalism.pdf 10 http://sqswans.weebly.com/guerrylla-law.html 3

members of society. Æquilibriæx Jurisprudence Anthropocentric and Ecocentric Jurisprudence.

equal

and

balanced

[1.8] TYGÆ: Tsedaqah Yshmael Guerrylla Æquilibriæx11: TYGÆ‟s Political Party‟s platform is based upon Æquilibriæx Jurisprudence, Guerrylla Law and CommonSism. [1.9] CommonSism‟s Guerrylla Laws – based upon Aquilibriæx Jurisprudence – regulate human procreation and resource utilization behaviour, by means of legally defining the procreation and consumption difference, and consequent related Sustainable Rights/Penalties, between a Leaver and a Taker, to ensure sustainability. [1.10] CommonSism asserts that a majority of society's problems - crime, violence, unemployment, poverty, inflation, food shortages, political instability, vanishing species, garbage and pollution urban sprawl, traffic jams, toxic waste, energy and non-renewable resources (NNR) depletion and scarcity are symptoms of Ecological Overshoot, resulting from the AnthroCorpoCentric Consumptionist Left and Right Wing's war against nature, and the absence of Ecocentric Jurisprudence combined with the failures of AnthroCorpocentric Jurisprudence. [1.11] Ecological Overshoot is a consequence of all other ideologies and their AnthroCorpocentric adherents failure to legally (a) define the difference between sustainable and unsustainable procreation and consumption behaviour; and (b) provide legal rights to sustainable practices, and legal penalties to unsustainable individuals, corporations and organisations. [1.12] Guerrylla Laws (A) simply and very specifically clarify the difference between the consumption and procreation behaviour of an Unsustainable Taker (Scarcity Combatant) vs a Sustainable Leaver (Eco-Innocent); and are (B) used in courts to (a) provide legal rights and socio-political rewards of recognition to Sustainable Leaver's for their Heroic lifestyle choices and practices; (b) confront Taker Scarcity Combatants of their Breeding / Consumption combatant behaviours aggravation of Scarcity induced socio-economic problems, by means of aggravated legal penalties, in accordance to their 'Taker Scarcity Combatant' status. [1.13] Guerrylla Laws define the Eco/Ego Footprint12 procreation and consumption behaviour of an individual as a Sustainable Leaver (aka Eco-Innocent) or Unsustainable Taker (aka Scarcity-Combatant), based upon a sustainable consumption bio-capacity of 1 global hectare (gha)13 (60 % of 1.8 gha)14 in http://tygae.weebly.com EcoFootprint: The difference between the biocapacity and Ecological Footprint of a region or country. A biocapacity deficit occurs when the Footprint of a population exceeds the biocapacity of the area available to that population. If there is a regional or national biocapacity deficit, it means that the region is importing biocapacity through trade or liquidating regional ecological assets. Global biocapacity deficit cannot be compensated through trade, and is overshoot. 13 Sustainable Footprint Biocapacity: A biocapacity of 1 gha assumes that 40% of land is set aside for other species. 1 gha is 60 % of 1.8 gha, therefore .8 hectares is set aside for other species. 14 International Biocapacity: In 2006, the average biologically productive area (biocapacity) per person worldwide was approximately 1.8 global hectares (gha) per capita. In 2008, there were ~ 12 billion hectares of biologically productive land and water on Earth. Dividing by the number of people alive in that year (6.7 billion) gives 1.79 global hectares per person. This assumes that no land is set aside for other species that consume the same biological material as 11 12

accordance with the proactive conservation policies of Bhutan15; multiplied by an individuals Breeding footprint factor of 20 per child. [(Each Child increases a parents footprint by factor of 2016)] A.

Sustainable Leaver / Eco-Innocent: 0 children, consumption < 20 gha (Intn'l Biocapacity (1 gha) x 20); or 1 child, consumption < 1 gha.

Unsustainable Taker / Scarcity-Combatant: 0 children, consumption > 20 gha; or 1 child, consumption > 1 gha.

For example: My Consumption Footprint17 using Sustainable Economy's Myfootprint.org quiz, is 12.75 global hectares (gha). South Africa's average consumption footprint is 38.59 gha. I have no children, consequently my procreation factor is 0 x 20* = 0. My Consumption (12.75) x Procreation (0) = Eco Footprint of 12.75/0 gha. If accurate, if everyone consumed and procreated like me, we would need 0.81 earths.18 Conversely, if everyone consumed and procreated like President Jacob Zuma, we would need 2090 earths19.

[1.14] TYGÆ’s Purpose: (A) Tsedaqah: ecological, political, gender, cultural and religious balance; (B) Yshmael creation of a Leaver society, by means of practice and legislation of CommonSism‟s Guerrylla Laws which regulate human procreation and resource utilization behaviour, by means of legally defining the procreation and consumption difference, and consequent related Sustainable Rights/Penalties, between a Leaver and a Taker, to ensure sustainability; (C) Guerryllæ warriors engage in Guerrylla Law practice and socio-political support for Leaver Ecological, Animal Rights, Indigenous Rights, Separatist Multiculturalism, Decentralization, Relocalization, De-Industrialization, Primitivization, Radical Honesty and Transparency Activism; against Taker Individuals and Corporations, working for a low/no tech relocalized and decentralized Agrarian or Primitivist separatist ethno/cultural homogenous tribal society; (D) Æquilibriæx Jurisprudence: recognizes all animal, plant and human species rights to legal personhood, and the importance of all decisions and actions being evaluated in humans. If for example, there were only 3.5 billion people alive that year, that would have provided everyone with 3.5 gha. If there were only 1 billion people, their would be 12gha biocapacity for each persons needs. 15 Bhutan Proactive Conservation: Bhutan is seen as a model for proactive conservation initiatives. The Kingdom has received international acclaim for its commitment to the maintenance of its biodiversity. This is reflected in the decision to maintain at least sixty percent of the land area under forest cover, to designate more than 40% of its territory as national parks, reserves and other protected areas, and most recently to identify a further nine percent of land area as biodiversity corridors linking the protected areas. Environmental conservation has been placed at the core of the nation's development strategy, the middle path. It is not treated as a sector but rather as a set of concerns that must be mainstreamed in Bhutan's overall approach to development planning and to be buttressed by the force of law. - "Parks of Bhutan". Bhutan Trust Fund for Environmental Conservation online. Bhutan Trust Fund. 16 Paul Murtaugh (7-31-09): Family Planning: A Major Environmental Emphasis, Oregon University http://sqswans.weebly.com/child--ecofootprint-x-20.html 17 http://myfootprint.org/en/your_results/?id=2559685 18 http://sqworms.weebly.com/lara-johnstone-eco-081.html 19 President Zuma‟s consumption footprint using Sustainable Economy's Myfootprint.org quiz, is 65.66 global hectares (gha). President Zuma‟s Procreation Factor is 500 [President Zuma has 25 children. His procreation footprint factor is 25 x 20* = 500. (Each Child increases a parents footprint by factor of 20)]. President Zuma‟s Net Consumption & Procreation Footprint is 33280 gha [Consumption (65.66) x Procreation (500) = Net Footprint of 33280 gha]. If accurate, if everyone consumed and procreated like President Zuma, we would need 2,090 earths. http://sqworms.weebly.com/jacob-zuma-ego-2090.html

terms of their contribution to Æquilibriæx balance; (E) Sustainable Security: There is no security without Sustainability. Sustainability is impossible without a return to a Leaver society. [1.15] Primitivism: Civilization, very fundamentally, is the history of the domination of nature and of women20. [1.16] Capitalism and Communism are simply two different battalions in Patriarchal Civilization‟s War (a) against nature, (b) for nature‟s resources, (c) against indigenous „Leaver‟ people‟s, (d) against Leaver Pagan and environmentally based religions, (e) against Ecological Leaver Consciousness, (f) against Gender Balanced environmentally sustainable cultures such as the Mosuo, etc. [1.17] A gender balanced culture based on logic and reason concludes that we live on a finite resource earth, and hence if we wish to avoid conflict from resource scarcity, then we must consume and reproduce at a level below carrying capacity. Put differently we do not have the right to „fuck‟ and „consume‟ to our hearts content. No patriarchal culture on planet earth has ever been based on logic and reason and required their tribe to breed and consume below carrying capacity. In a gender balanced culture the ultimate status symbols are honesty, honour, integrity, as values which co-create problem solving. For example: the Gender Balanced Mosuo culture in South West China have no police, no courts, no prison guards, no psychiatrists, no homeless, no mentally ill, no prisons, no mental institutions, no murder, no rape, no suicide! Their gender balanced cultural „logic and reason‟ foundation is built upon the premise of procreating and consuming below carrying capacity. [1.18] Patriarchal societies/cultures occur where men suffer from fragile ego's and are incapable of resolving issues related to their masculinity, by means of logic and reason. Put differently, they do not want to take control of their penis, either physically, by breeding below carrying capacity, or psychologically, by consuming below carrying capacity (social status symbols which psychologically are equivalent to their belief in an extension of their penis/virility). A patriarchal culture‟s status symbols are related to their phallic-identity breeding war and consumption wars, where women and nature are sexualized as objects for plunder, with the final status symbol of superiority being physical violence. [1.19] To test whether a man or woman consciously or unconsciously endorse Patriarchal violent problem solving or rule of law/reason and logic (root cause) problem solving, ask them whether they procreate and consume below carrying capacity. If they do, they „practice what they preach‟ in terms of their support for rule of law/reason and logic. If they consume or procreate above carrying capacity, they may verbally pretend to support „reason and logic‟, but in terms of their actions and lifestyle, they physically support – consciously or unconsciously – patriarchy‟s preference for problem solving: violence! Whether it is the violence of John Zerzan: Patriarchy, Civilization, And The Origins Of Gender http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/john-zerzan-patriarchy-civilization-and-the-origins-of-gender 20

individuals, tribes, or the AnthroCorpocentric Jurisprudence‟s police, courts, and prisons. [1.20] Colonialism is a product and symptom of Patriarchy‟s addiction to breeding and consumption wars. Colonialism, whether it is the colonialism of Europeans conquering African tribes, or the colonialism of African tribes who conquered other African tribes, or the colonialism of both Europeans and Africans who conquered the gender balanced Bushmen tribes. [1.21] All Colonialism, whether it resulted from the conquering wars of Columbus, or Shaka Zulu, or Mohammed, were a product and symptom of Patriarchy. [1.22] A patriarchal society, or a society which does not address the causes of masculine insecurity, cannot and will not ever be sustainable. Any ideology, whether political or religious, founded upon masculine insecurity (patriarchy) will result in (a) breeding and consumption war concepts of power and domination (to provide insecure males with social/psychological penis extension status symbols, their fragile ego's lack). [1.23] Consumption wars require exponential expropriation of land, natural resources and knowledge. Breeding wars require a war against sustainable consciousness (ecological and political balance) and a human factory farming war economy racket culling. Colonialism is a symptom of Patriarch‟s addiction to breeding and consumption wars; i.e. consuming above carrying capacity, and then using the surplus population as cannon fodder to conquer another culture‟s resources. [1.24] The argument that Apartheid and European colonialism was morally reprehensible, and had massive destructive psychological and physical consequences for the Bushmen and African tribes conquered; is a very valid argument; if those making such an argument, hold all other African, Chinese, etc cultures to the same standard, by condemning those culture‟s patriarchal conquering and colonization of other tribes resources. [1.25] An honourable impartial argument against European Colonialism, including apartheid, must also admit that all Patriarchal colonialism is morally reprehensible, irrespective of who the patriarchal colonialists were who were doing the breeding war, consumption war conquering! [1.26] When an individual argues that only European and Boer colonialism is morally reprehensible, while ignoring the patriarchal reprehensible colonialism of African Tribes conquering and colonizing other tribes, including African tribes, then the implication of that argument is that African Patriarchy and Colonialism and African Patriarch‟s are morally inferior and incapable of criticism of their Patriarchal Colonizing behaviour. [1.27] Put differently, when European or Africans argue that only European and Boer Colonialists should be considered morally reprehensible, they effectively

agree with European and Boer Colonialists that Europeans/Boers are superior to Africans, and that Africans are inferior and incapable of being held to the same Patriarchal colonialists standards as white men. [1.28] If you object to Colonialism and Apartheid (the symptom of Patriarchal culture‟s) and want a world where one group of people are not constantly being colonized by another group of people, anywhere and everywhere on the planet; then you must be consistent and object to all patriarchy (the root cause of colonialism). [1.29] I am the only South African who – for the past 10 years – has exposed South Africa‟s Anthropocentric, Patriarchal and Ideologically biased TRC Fraud, and advocated on behalf of a brutally honest sincere and ecologically and scientifically credible Truth and Reconciliation Commission, focussed on exposing the underlying psychological, cultural, racial and Scarcity induced factors contributing to Apartheid‟s Political violence.

[2]

Your Biographer Conflict of Interest:

[2.1] The Templeton Foundation have not publicized your letter of recommendation, or any of the individuals who provided references for your recommendation of Archbishop Tutu for the Templeton Prize. [2.2] Neither are the Templeton Foundation transparently publicizing the reality that it was Archbishop Tutu‟s personal biographer (yourself) who nominated Tutu, perhaps because that is clearly a conflict of interest? [2.3] The only article I could find which mentions that you are both Tutu‟s biographer, as well as his nominator for the Templeton Prize, was from a newspaper in Alabama: Auburn University prof's nomination hands Bishop Desmond Tutu the Templeton Prize21: “HUNTSVILLE, Alabama – Auburn University Professor Steven Gish, who has written a biography of Bishop Desmond Tutu, successfully nominated Tutu for the $1.7 million Templeton Prize.”

[3] Censorship of TRC Fraud from Tutu Biography & Templeton Prize Nomination Info: [3.1] Your biography of Desmond Tutu: Desmond Tutu: A Biography, makes no reference to the volumes of documentation, alleging fraud and bias of Tutu‟s Truth and Reconciliation Commission. I would imagine if you did not include evidence of TRC Fraud in Tutu‟s biography, you also did not include it in your recommendation letter of Tutu for the Templeton Prize. [3.2] I submit that Archbishop Tutu‟s Truth and Reconciliation Commission was anthropocentrically and Ecocentrically biased, and that his cover-up and 21

http://www.al.com/living/index.ssf/2013/04/desmond_tutu_templeton.html

censorship of the failures of the TRC Commission, indicate that his motivations were not negligently biased but intentional, and fraudulent.

[4]

Notification to Archbishop Desmond Tutu of TRC Fraud evidence:

[4.1] Besides at least a dozen letters and complaints to Archbishop Tutu, evidence of the anthropocentric and Ecocentric failures of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission have also been submitted to Archbishop Tutu, South African and international Anti-Apartheid organisations and South African and International courts. [4.2]

Request for evidence to SA & International Anti-Apartheid Org’s:

[4.3] In April 2011, I submitted requests for information to dozens of South African and International Anti-Apartheid Organisations: Request for Information: Prior, or subsequent to, the ANC’s M-Plan declaration of War against Apartheid: Did any EU Anti-Apartheid Organisation advise the ANC or any SA Anti-Apartheid Organisation to avoid/suspend the violent ‘liberation struggle ’campaign against the Apartheid Goverment, and to launch a non-violent cultural and political campaign to stop the African ‘swart gevaar’ breeding-war population explosion, to demonstrate the ANC’s honourable Just War Just Cause Intentions?. (PDF22) [4.4] The evidence – to me as a Primitivist, observing two Anthropocentric Patriarchal armies waging war against each other, Leavers and nature – appeared to be that the TRC was a fraud, because it did not enquire into evidence to determine whether the ANC (a) had just cause war to declare war on Apartheid, (b) declared war on Apartheid as a last resort, (c) the ANC‟s war against apartheid was not declared by proper authority; (d) whether the ANC possessed right intention, (e) whether the ANC had – honourably – a reasonable chance of success, (f) whether the ANC used proportional force; and (g) Post Bellum: whether the ANC has kept or repeatedly reneged upon its promises of Amnesty destroying all trust in future political agreements. [4.5] One particular issue the TRC failed to make an impartial enquiry into were the population policy motives and causes for Afrikaners implementing the political policy of Apartheid as an act of Just War Self Defense against African cultures population explosion breeding war. [4.6] In fact when it comes to population policy issues, the TRC made no effort whatsoever to enquire into any population policy related matters, as causal political, economic or psychological factors for Apartheids political violence; even

http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/110509_aap-za_trc-fraud-icc?mode=window&viewMode=singlePage

though it is common knowledge that countries with large populations of idle young men, known as youth bulges23, account for 70 – 90 % of all civil conflicts.24 [4.7]

The TRC Fraud specific questions were:

What role did the ANC play in contributing to the Population Explosion of Cannon Fodder and Resource War Violence? Why did the TRC not require the ANC to take responsibility for their population production of poverty stricken cannon fodder?

What objections and protests, if any, have former Anti-Apartheid Organisations organized in the European Union to object to the ANC‟s Zimbabwefication of South Africa; Deaths in Police custody increase 25,725% under ANC25. Why do the Anti-Apartheid movement hold white governments in Africa to different standards than black governments?

[4.8]

South African Constitutional Court (CCT#23-10):

YouthQuake: Population, fertility and environment in the 21st Century, by John Guillebaud, Optimum Population Trust, 2007 24 The Shape of Things to Come: Why Age Structure Matters to a Safer More Equitable World; by E. Leahy with R. Engelman, C. Gibb Vogel, S. Haddock and T.Preston, Population Action International 25 http://www.jussanguinis.com/BP/C_RI-TRC-Fraud.htm 23

[4.9] Radical Honesty SA TRC Fraud allegations filed with SA Constitutional Court, supported by expert witness affidavit and statements from Dr. Brad Blanton, founder of the Radical Honesty culture, and Dr. Michael Maher: A.

Application to Chief Justice to proceed as In Forma Pauperis Amicus Curiae, by Lara Johnstone, Member of the Radical Honesty culture and religion (PDF26)

03 May 2010: Concourt Directions dated 03 May 2010: “Ms. Lara Johnstone, Member of Radical Honesty Culture and Religion, is admitted as an Amicus Curiae.” (PDF27)

18 July 2010: Heads of Argument: Radical Honesty SA Amicus Curiae in Support of a Population Policy Common Sense Interpretation of the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act (PDF28)

Written Statement by Consent of Brad Blanton, Ph.D, to testify as expert witness to: Practicing Radical Honesty and Futilitarianism; i.e. Radical Honesty about Anger and Forgiveness; and Paradigms and Contexts: The Revolution of Consciousness (PDF29); and Affidavit of Brad Blanton, Ph.D, evidencing the legal, psychological, and socio-political „citizens privilege‟, Nuremberg Principles skills and competencies of Individual Responsibility, required for acts of civil disobedience to perceived illegitimate authority; and their application to the common law „reasonableness test‟; in terms of Criminal Procedure Act 51, of 1977: § 213: Proof of Written Statement by Consent; & § 171 & 172: Evidence on Commission (PDF30)].

Written Statement of Consent by T. Michael Maher, Ph.D, to testify as expert witness for How and Why Journalists Avoid the PopulationEnvironment Connection and Media Framing and Salience of the Population Issue (PDF31) and Study: How and Why Journalists Avoid the Population-Environment Connection (PDF32)

[4.10]

International Criminal Court:

[4.11] Communication and Complaint (PDF34) under Art.15 of the Rome Statute: Charges of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity, in terms of Art 5(1)(a) & (b), http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/100326_rhapplic2concourt-amicus?mode=a_p http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/100718_rhwr-concourt-amicus?mode=a_p 28 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/100718_rhwr-concourt-amicus?mode=a_p 29 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/100518_cc2310_affid-bblanton?mode=a_p 30 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/091202_affid-bblanton-reasonablenesstest?mode=a_p 31 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/100522_cct2310_affid-dr-t-m-maher?mode=a_p 32 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/mahertm_journo-env-pop-connection?mode=a_p 33 beforeitsnews.com/story/112/406/Archbishop_Tutu_announces_retirement_after_TRC_fraud_allegations.html 34 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/110406_aap-notice?mode=window&viewMode=singlePage 26 27

6(c) and 7(1)(h) of the Rome Statute, against Archbishop Tutu, Nelson Mandela, FW de Klerk, et al. [4.12]

The Complainants Request the ICC: Prosecutor‟s Office to:

Initiate an investigation into the allegations that the respondents are to be held criminally culpable for their endorsement and concealment of TRC FRAUD, the consequences of which are genocide and crimes against humanity against white South Africans, and ethno-cultural legal and political persecution of Afrikaner/Boer and Radical Honesty cultures. Complainants allege the Defendants cover up and censorship of the ANC and Anti-Apartheid Movements (i) Frantz Fanon/Black Consciousness („liberation by violence on the rotting corpse of the settlers‟) (ii) Black Liberation Theology („violent elimination of „whiteness‟); and (iii) Houari Boumediene/Black Power Breeding War (“The wombs of our women will give us victory”)35 inspired TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION FRAUD (“TRC FRAUD”) perpetrated against citizens of South Africa, and predominantly against white Afrikaner/Boer/Settlers; is committed in the context of endorsing the ANC‟s institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by Africans over other racial groups, particularly Boer/Afrikaners and committed with the intention of maintaining the ANC regime.

[4.13]

South African Constitutional Court:

[4.14] Johnstone v. Afriforum et al Review of Afriforum v. Malema et al: Equality Court (07-2010 EQ JHB) & Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA 815/11) and TRC Fraud: [4.15] 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. [4.16] 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. A.

“One day, millions of men will leave the Southern Hemisphere to go to the Northern Hemisphere. And they will not go there as friends. Because they will go there to conquer it. And they will conquer it with their sons. The wombs of our women will give us victory.” -- Houari Boumediene, President of Algeria, at the United Nations, 1974 (Boumediene was an ardent supporter of the ANC and SWAPO) 35

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‟36, and the TRC‟s “failure to investigate demographic youth bulge37 and „population production‟ breeding war38 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.”

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. D.

[4.17] From 29 November 2012, to present, the Concourt Registrar have refused to issue my application a case number, or process it. [4.18] On 11 December 2012, I filed two complaints with the CRL Rights Commission (Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities) against the SA Constitutional Court Registrar (PDF39) and a dozen media Editors (PDF40) in that they discriminate against the – Tourette Syndrome like – Radical Honesty culture41. [4.19] On 28 February 2013, complaints were also submitted to: SA Gender Commission (PDF42); SA Human Rights Council (PDF43) [WC/1213/0873]; Public Protector (PDF44) [7/2-003999/13]: Complaints of AnthroCorpocentric Patriarchal Dominant culture/s Cultural and Gender discrimination, by: (1) SA Concourt Registrar & Director; (2) SAPA & SA Media Editors; (3) CRL Rights Commission: Chair, against Ecocentric Gender Balanced Radical Honoursty culture.

[5]

Correspondence to Templeton Prize Judges & Archbishop Tutu:

[5.1] Upon hearing that Tutu had been awarded the Templeton Prize, I wrote the following letters to Archbishop Tutu and the Templeton Prize Judges: A.

04 April 2013: Questions to Archbishop Tutu; or if unanswered by Tutu and Prize Upheld by Templeton Prize Judges; (ii) Congratulations on Receipt of the Multinational Corporate Resource and Cultural Imperialists Templeton Prize for excellence in House Nigger subservience to getting rid of Boer AntiImperialists, and making SA safe for ‘Compulsive Developmentism’

http://sqswans.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/12-12-11_crlrightscomm_complaint_concourt_registrar.pdf http://sqswans.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/7/13878165/12-12-11_crlrightscomm_complaint_sapa_-_sa_media_encla.pdf 41 SA Media, Concourt & Lawyers Discriminate Against – Tourette Syndrome like -- Radical Honesty Culture http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-894174 42 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/130228_gcomm?mode=window&viewMode=singlePage 43 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/130228_sahrc_discrimination_encl_aa-ii?mode=window&viewMode=singlePage 44 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/130228_pprotector?mode=window&viewMode=singlePage 39 40

Imperialists (i) cultural colonization of indigenous cultures, and (ii) resource plundering.45 B.

05 April 2013: President Zuma urges Archbishop Tutu to continue ANC, Anti-Apartheid Movements Censorship of their TRC Fraud.46

[5.2] There has been no response from the Templeton Prize Judges or Archishop Tutu. Their „spirituality‟ of „love‟ and „forgiveness‟ does not appear to include honourable commitment to responding to brutal honest sinners evidentiary feedback regarding flaws and errors in their adjudication and decision-making, nor the ability to to resist their Masculine Insecurity addictions for Pharisee like Bullshit the Public Relations Image Management.

[6]

Honourable Request:

[6.1] Withdraw your Nomination of Desmond Tutu to the Templeton Prize, due to your (a) biographer conflict of interest, and (b) failure to provide the Judges with an impartial overview of Archbishop Tutu’s involvement in the cover-up and censorship of South Africa’s TRC Fraud. Dated at George, South Africa: 11 April 2013

Lara Johnstone, Member: Radical Honoursty Culture Founder: Yshmael Guerrylla Law Party Founder: CommonSism: Common Sense Laws for a Sustainable Commons Founder: Æquilibriæx Jurisprudence: Equal & Balanced Eco/Anthropocentric Law

45 46

http://sqswans.weebly.com/1/post/2013/04/130404_tutu-templeton1.html http://sqswans.weebly.com/1/post/2013/04/130405_zumatrcfraud1.html