First Correct Human Rights Declaration - ARTICLE TWO and Preamble - {HRD-02 20100102-V1.2}
Koos Nolst Trenite
2 January 2010
{HRD-02 20100102-V1.2}
(Version 1.2
on 5 Jan 2010)
'
'
Preamble and Article Two
'
ARTICLE TWO is, summarized:
Everyone has the right, audibly or visually to communicate
constructively, and in an educated, or informed, or observing
way, to others and to the society - and doing so, will by its
very nature offend some individuals and some, possibly even
large, groups.
'
Preamble:
Human Rights have to be well enough connected to Life itself,
in order to have any real value, in order to be followed and to
be enforceable and enforced.
Luck has it, for you, now, that - though YOU do not anymore
understand Life itself, I still do, or rather - I have regained
that understanding and knowledge,
due to my being gifted in Love, in Beauty and in Truth, above
all.
So much so and solely because of that, it came about that
I desired and then could and then did, in two-third of a
life time, pull myself out of your very poor, and mostly
false and destructive "understanding" of Life.
'
While Ms Roosevelt may have played an active and admirable role,
to have the old 'Universal Declaration of Human Rights' ready
and adopted globally,
exactly at my day of birth, on 10 December 1948,
she, Ms Roosevelt, had no clue about Life nor about her famous
husband, 'World War Two president' "FDR" Roosevelt, to any
amount required,
but, one can run, one can speak, and one can love, without
knowing anything about how or why running, or speaking, or
loving, works as it does - and some even prefer not to know.
She, the 'mother of the old Universal Declaration of Human
Rights,' and her helpers of that time, are, in any case, very
warmly thanked for their enthusiasm and for their strong efforts
- they gave all they could, and they gave it with the best of
their intentions - which are appreciated.
But again:
'
Human Rights have to be well enough connected to Life itself,
in order to have any real value so that they can be followed,
and so that they are also naturally enforceable, and enforced.
So here we go (as I promised some time ago, I would write these
for you), with Article Two.
'
'
2. ARTICLE TWO {HRD-02} of the First Correct Human Rights Declaration
'
ARTICLE TWO
2.a. Everyone has the right to communicate audibly or visually,
in a constructive way and while being either educated or
informed or observing on the matter communicated, to those
around him and to the society, and regardless about what
matter or about which person - and whether that offends
anybody in any position, has no bearing on the action
whatsoever, because it is a natural part of this Human
Right, to point out especially those truths that are likely
to make some feel offended.
Any such communication will ALWAYS be offensive to SOME
individuals or groups, and occasionally even to a large
group.
2.b. In particular those, whose thinking and feeling and
perception is strongly dominated and blinded by Criminal
Minds, and who thus admire, defend or even work for
Criminal Minds, will feel most intensely offended by any
communication of truth to them or to others - truth, which
Criminal Minds by definition want to have kept hidden, or
not observed, or not understood.
2.c. Those who are deceived into fighting for the lies of
others, are most easily offended by any truthful statement,
and are most likely to express their feelings with Hate
(Energetic violence) or also with (Hate materialized as)
physical violence.
2.d. Also Criminal Minds themselves, will pretend to be heavily
offended, or will encourage others to feel very offended
(and then to express it, by means of Hate or physical
violence), as long as those Criminal Minds believe,
that such a display or an attitude of 'being personally
or collectively offended,' will aid them in continuing
to dominate the perception and the feelings of others.
2.e. Nobody is free of any lies from others in ALL subjects and
regarding ALL people; and those lies from others he is not
aware of, he will fight for, and he will thus initially
oppose and feel offended by constructive - and educated, or
informed or observing - communications about it.
2.f. While destructive, un-educated and un-informed and
un-observing communications, may be ignored or tolerated,
or may be taken as data about the originator himself, such
communication however, is NOT a Human Right, and one can
thus NOT claim, or demand or enforce it as "being one's
Human Right" - or "someone else's Human Right," not even
when some local or national "law," or a tribal custom
demands it, which is in fact the demand, that "others
must not see the (in this case destructive) intention of
a person's communication," or that "others must not act
upon their knowledge of the true intention of a person's
communication."
2.g. A considerable number of social customs are designed and
enforced by Criminal Minds, in order to prevent, to smother
or crush, the necessary and vital exchange of constructive
- and educated or informed or observing - communications
between people:
The most vital communications, including your most compel-
ling feelings and your most fundamental thoughts and your
most emotional observations - are PREVENTED or SMOTHERED or
RIDICULED, by means of the social customs that Criminal
Minds have introduced into the society, or inside a family
or group, in which they enforce such crushing (destructive)
customs.
2.h. Criminal Minds use "being offended" as a tool, to dominate
others into not looking at them, and at people generally,
as these actually are; and to prevent the exchange of
observations between people.
This (looking at people, and exchanging those observations
with each other) IS BY DEFINITION offensive to Criminal
Minds and to their supporters.
Giving in to and complying with that 'tool' of Criminal
Minds, causes maybe the most damage to yourself and to the
society.
2.i. You know this Human Right very well - the right to talk in
a constructive manner, with knowledge or observation, and
regardless of subject or person - you know this right very
well because it is anchored in your soul.
And you know equally, in your soul, that Criminal Minds
will REVERSE it to intend and bring about, that "you have
NO right to observe or to talk about your observations to
others;" and that on the other hand, they are insisting,
that "they and their 'friends' DO have 'the right' - or
must be given the 'equal' right," to give FALSE data and
MALICIOUS viewpoints.
2.j. Criminal Minds will create, build up, and organize
opposition to this Human Right - they will enforce a
DENIAL of this Human Right - and they do so always by
painting 'an "outside" world' of "hostile people,"
of "opponents," who "therefore must NOT be informed"
- neither of constructive viewpoints, nor of truthful data:
Others "must NOT be informed correctly" - not correctly
about Criminal Minds, not correctly about decent people -
"because people will use such knowledge against us," and
instead "people should be informed falsely, to give them
the illusion of 'being informed', as a way of 'governing'
or 'handling' them."
2.k. Criminal Minds also for that purpose demand secrecy
agreements or secrecy laws to be abusively applied; and
otherwise, they abuse emotional bonds of friendship or of
a common profession, or of family, or of 'belonging to the
same religion;' they abuse emotional bonds to demand or to
enforce secrecy: for the purpose of DENYING this Human
Right of constructive exchange of information with others
and with the society, about what one knows or sees or
feels.
2.l. And Criminal Minds go past merely demanding secrecy, and
devise and command activities that create and communicate
FALSE and MALICIOUS data, in order thus effectively to hide
or to negate (to deny, to oppose) truthful and constructive
data:
They oppose this Human Right by demanding the creation and
exchange of false data.
'
ARTICLE TWO can therefore be summarized, as:
Everyone has the right, audibly or visually to communicate
constructively and in an educated, or informed or observing
way, to others and to the society, about any matter or person
- a Human Right which naturally will offend those individuals
and those groups, that wish others or themselves NOT to be
educated or well-informed about, or observing, a subject or
person or themselves, constructively.
'
Koos Nolst Trenite 'Cause Trinity'
human rights philosopher and poet
'Men of all nations came
to listen to Solomon's wisdom,
sent by all the kings of the world,
who had heard of his wisdom.'
1 Kings 4:34
_______________
Background note:
The First Correct Human Rights Declaration (HRD),
is the result of all the work given to you
as the Human Rights Issues (HRI's) and
as Fine Particle Physics (FPP).
_________
Footnotes:
(to be added as the text indicates)
__________
References:
'First Correct Human Rights Declaration - ARTICLE ONE and
Preamble'
{HRD-01 20091223-V1.1}
(23 December 2009 - Version 1.1 on 25 Dec 2009)
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.military.naval/msg/d4670b441b9bbf91
(more references as applicable)
____________
Verification:
http://www.angelfire.com/space/platoworld
Copyright 2010 by Koos Nolst Trenite - human rights philosopher
and poet
This is 'learnware' - it may not be altered, and it is free for
anyone who learns from it and (even if he can not learn from it)
who passes it on unaltered, and with this message included,
to others who might be able to learn from it (but not to sociopaths
specifically, because these vehemently oppose any true knowledge
of life and about themselves).
None of my writings may be used, ever, to support any political
or religious or scientific or artistic "agenda," but only to educate,
and to encourage people to judge un-dominated and for themselves,
about any organizations or individuals.
Send free-of-Envy and free-of-Hate, Beautiful e-mails to:
PlatoWorld at Lycos.com
SFTV_troy
> understand Life itself, I still do, or rather - I have regained
> that understanding and knowledge, due to my
> being gifted in Love, in Beauty and in Truth, above all.
Am I supposed to read all this? Why? Does it have any legal standing
in any court? And why does it read like a foreign language instead of
English? Bah. I prefer a simpler amendment that would prevent
central governments (EU, US) from becoming dictatorial and having
virtually no limit on their powers:
Amendment XXVIII
Section 1. After a Bill has become Law, if one-fourth of the States
declare the Law to be "unconstitutional" it shall be null and void.
It shall be as if the Law never existed.
Section 2. This article shall be inoperative, unless it shall have
been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures
of three-fourths of the several States by the date January 1, 2050.
Zerkon
> Everyone has the right, audibly or visually to communicate
> constructively, and in an educated, or informed, or observing way,
> to others and to the society - and doing so, will by its very
> nature offend some individuals and some, possibly even large,
> groups.
Objection, Mr Chairman. 'constructively' 'educated' and 'informed' are
too vague and leaves the possibility of state censorship as probable.
Determining such qualities are a personal responsibility, not that of law
or edict.
Example: The title "The First Correct Human Rights Declaration" can be
argued as logically uninformed by the use of 'first' (ie: it is not) and
'correct' (ie: unreasonable self-evidence).
I motion the Chair for revision.
Plato Been
2.b.
2.f.
2.i.
2.j.
below.
'
On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 11:33:01 +0100, Koos Nolst Trenite wrote: