Redleg V artists

Robert Raymond Cripps

sues artists for defamation:

Redleg Museum Services (ACN 105 986 829) sues

Demetrios Vakras (artist)
Lee-Anne Raymond (artist)

Supreme Court of Victoria
SCI 01484/2011

Cripps' crack legal team: Christopher Dibb & Buddy Low (Efron & Associates, Melbourne) Tao Jiang (replaced)

1. Redleg Museum Services now runs RUBY'S MUSIC ROOM , Registration number:    B2409701A, ASIC;
2. Cripps' Redleg Museum Services Pty Ltd was the respondent to objections raised in VCAT regarding his Ruby's Music Room
3."The team behind one of Melbourne’s much loved galleries and performance spaces, Guildford Lane Gallery are very proud to present Ruby’s Music Room."

Note: Redleg runs Ruby's Music Room, and in the past ran Guildford Lane Gallery. That is a simple fact. But to mention it, and make sure that we are not sued for some reason on grounds we are not aware of and have not anticipated, entails that we have to make "a bigger deal of it" than we otherwise would. It would have been simpler to just mention the fact, but by leaving it at that might be said to have been done by us out of "malice", or that it may have been wrong in fact; hence we need to show where the relationship lies between Redleg and Ruby's Music Room. Indeed, it becomes MANIFESTLY obvious that we could avoid mention of the fact and avoid any legal repercussions; self-censor; which is precisely the the outcome achieved by Australia's 2005 Defamation Act, though the act itself asserts categorically that it is not designed to "unreasonably" impinge on the right to freely impart (and receive) information (though not necessarily expressed by these exact words).

manifesting sentiments of antisemitism - racism

December 2013
Published: 14/12/2013

"Antisemitism" is a form of racism; the expression of it manifests itself many forms including the various expressions of hatred against Jews and "entire Jewish communities".

fig. 1 The inbuilt Mac dictionary includes results from the Thesaurus and the Wikipedia. Wikipedia is a ubiquitous source of information and is edited by "ordinary" and "reasonable" readersIt is accessible to anyone and everyone with an internet connection. THE PAGES I AM BEING SUED OVER are, like the Wikipedia, only accessible via a computer with an internet connection. As such, the "ordinary" or "reasonable" reader has access to not only what I write, but to the Wikipedia as well. Any "reasonable" or "ordinary" reader who has access to my pages also has access to online dictionaries. That a reader, who has these resources available to them, would instead deliberately misread what is written, belies that this reader has an ulterior intention by their misreading of what is written. Such a reader who seeks to deliberately misread other meanings into what I have written is simply doing this so that they might profit from this deliberate action. It is patently malicious and vexatious.

*antisemitism = hatred of Jews

Cripps expressed a hostility or prejudice against Jews, and that Jews are responsible for harms committed against them by others simply because they are Jews.

*is a form of racism

Cripps' hostility to Jews is racist (& he admitted to this being so);

Cripps acknowledged his hostility towards Jews was racist - obviously for him this was a justified racism of an acceptable kind;

*is manifested in "expressions" of such hate

"Expression" of such hate was made by Hitler, and this hate is manifested by the left, and by people like Cripps who is a manifestation of the left:

*manifestations of such racism are multiform

Manifestations of racism against Jews take the form of "academic" racism, "Arab" racism, "Boycotts", "Christian" racism, "Gaza War", "Islamic" racism, "Holocaust denial". Another manifestation of hatred of Jews is Hitler's Mein Kampf. It is not as if the word "manifestation" can be confused to mean "something else". Apparently my use of the word "manifestation" means "adopted the failed theories".

Blaming Jews IS RACIST - Cripps blamed Jews:

Adolf Hitler expressed such sentiments - hatred toward Jews - in Mein Kampf. Hitler blamed Jews for cultural decay, "moral" corruption, for economic problems. Hitler blamed Jews for war (including blaming Jews for the Franco-Prussian War, WW1, and the "forthcoming" war, WW2).

That Hitler blamed Jews for conflict, and that the Nazis blamed Jews for conflict (and world ills) is "universally" known. So "universal" is this knowledge that a USA school teacher was suspended for asking students to write an essay using arguments from Nazi propaganda which blamed Jews as "the source of our problems".

From the New York Times, 12 April 2013:
“The students were instructed to imagine that their teacher was a Nazi and to construct an argument that Jews were 'the source of our problems' using historical propaganda and, of course, a traditional high school essay structure.
'Your essay must be five paragraphs long, with an introduction, three body paragraphs containing your strongest arguments, and a conclusion,' the assignment read. 'You do not have a choice in your position: you must argue that Jews are evil, and use solid rationale from government propaganda to convince me of your loyalty to the Third Reich!'”


From the Guardian, 14/4/2013:
"For the assignment, the teacher asked students to research Nazi propaganda, then write a letter trying to convince an official of the Third Reich 'that Jews are evil and the source of our problems.'"

fig. 2 The Nazis blamed Jews for "problems" including war. Knowledge of this is "universal". In commenting on my painting Attempting the Destruction of the Secular Muse, Robert Cripps objected to what I had written claiming that Jews were responsible.

Hitler and the Nazis blamed Jews for conflict. Astonishingly, this is a claim still made today in Australia.

Australian publishers make the same accusation against Jews that were made by Hitler (in his speeches and in Mein Kampf), claims that were made by the Nazis, and also made in the Protocols of the Wise Men of Zion.

Australian publishers claim that conflict (WAR) is a reaction by others to what Jews do!! On 18/6/2009 & 24/6/2009 Cripps said that the violence Muslims commit is a reaction to Jews!

This is racist.

It was racist for Cripps to make this claim and it is racist for the publishers, Cambridge University Press, to do so too:

fig. 3 Australian publishers blame "much world conflict" on the reaction by various peoples to Jews!

On p. 25 of Humanist Transhumanist I write:

"This muse is in the middle of a bomb–cratered landscape. The figure attached to mechanical devices is assailed by war. The war is that of religion against a secular society. The religion that assails secular society today is Islam." (highlighted text)

fig. 4 Pp. 24-25 of Humanist Transhumanist.

Robert Cripps objected to the quotes from the Koran with regards to what I have written above. Cripps claimed that this was "too complex" for him to understand.

Cripps was ignorant of the Koran and ignorant of history, and the quotes conflicted with his racism (prejudice against Jews). Cripps sought to protect his sentiments, being his hatred of Jews, so that he could continue to hate Jews. He did this by calling me "racist" back in 2009, and continues to protect this idea from criticism by suing me to protect it now.

In Australia if someone holds an idea such as the ideas held by Robert Cripps, and if another points out that the same ideas have been expressed by Adolf Hitler (an historical fact), this will cause others to think less of the person, such as Robert Cripps, for holding such ideas. In Australia someone like Cripps can therefore sue to protect the ideas that they hold from being criticised, because, since they hold such ideas, having it pointed out to another that such ideas have already been expressed by someone like Hitler will "defame" them.

The quotes from the Koran urge Muslims to kill and to die in the process of killing others; that doing so leads to instant Martyrdom; and that the objective of Muslims is to convert all of us to Islam, or reduce us to "paying tribute out of hand". These quotes were in conflict with Cripps' SENTIMENTS, because they showed that Muslims advocate war against non-Muslims which includes Jews which means it is likely that "Jewish" actions against Muslims "in Palestine" are a reaction to Islamic violence and not Jewish violence.

Cripps believed that any audience exposed to these quotes would come to blame Muslims for violence in Palestine instead of Jews. Cripps claimed violence was caused by Jews, and claimed that quotes from the Koran were "opinion", and that this "opinion" was racist. Palestine, to reiterate, was not mentioned or relevant to any part of our exhibition.

The political left consistently label critics of Islam racist, equate criticism of Islam with "pro-Israel", and advocate for "Palestine".

Cripps' declaration that quoting the Koran is racist is de rigueur leftism and is the subject of this blog:

(Most recently the equating of criticism of Islam with being racist was leveled against the atheist biologist Richard Dawkins.)

While calling critics of Islam "racist", the political left also support Islamic terrorism:

"Why is the left so blinkered to Islamic extremism?"
"A report calls out the left for embracing fundamentalists" by James Bloodworth, Independant (UK)

William Houghton: ignorant of history?

Houghton introduced the idiotic claim that what I wrote meant that Cripps was a "dangerous racist" and that he had "adopted the failed theories of the National Socialists" simply because I wrote of the historical fact that the sentiments adopted by the Left against Jews were sentiments that had already been expressed by Hitler in Mein Kampf.


1) Robert Cripps is a self-confessed racist.
2) Robert Cripps is:

"a manifestation of the new-left who have adopted the sentiments Hitler expressed in his Mein Kampf, but who believe that, though theirs and Hitler's sentiments are the same, their racism is a 'justifiable' one"


I apparently still have to defend myself against this idiotic claim in court.

Apparently, if one is ignorant of history (as I must conclude Houghton is) then the stating of an historical fact makes stating that fact an OUTRAGE!

That Hitler had stated his sentiments on Jews in Mein Kampf, as a matter of history, is OUTRAGEOUS!

That those sentiments, expressed by Hitler (as a matter of history in Mein Kampf), are sentiments adopted by the political Left, is OUTRAGEOUS!

That Cripps is a manifestation of the Left, simply another OUTRAGE!



The Milgram experiment: "conducted by Yale University psychologist Stanley Milgram... measured the willingness of study participants to obey an authority figure who instructed them to perform acts that conflicted with their personal conscience."


Before the Nazis became the government of Germany, universities had made hatred of Jews respectable. This is the subject of my blog

Hitler "expressed" that hatred of Jews, being his "sentiments", in Mein Kampf. Again, this is the subject of my blog

However, history is being re-visioned, (fig. 5). Re-visioning Hitler intends to make what occurred in Germany an invention of the Nazis and of Hitler. And for Cripps and his crack legal team this revisionism aids in claiming how great an OUTRAGE it is that has been suffered by Cripps. The revisionism that has been occurring regarding this particular period of history is very well known (fig. 5):

fig. 5 The manifestations of antisemitic sentiments. Same words used to write about historic revisionism regarding anti-Jewish racism.

The above example (fig. 5) of one page from an article on the historic revisionism even uses the same words that I use, words such as "manifestation" and "sentiment", words whose meaning I have to prove in court because their meaning when I use these words is different from the meanings these words have when used by others, or how these words are understood by others.

The above page (fig. 5) writing on the historic revisionism that seeks to blame Hitler and the Nazis for the rise of German racism is from a Holocaust Memorial website (fig. 6):

fig. 6 Holocaust memorial site that discusses the historical revisionism that has sought to eliminate the manifestations of Germany's pre-existing racist sentiments regarding Jews.

Historical revisionism has amounted to an attempt to re-define "antisemitism" in such a way that it is now being claimed to be a Nazi phenomenon or invention. That is, the historical account is being re-written to make the following claim: that without the Nazis "antisemitism" would never have happened. And, "antisemitism" is claimed to have been introduced by the Nazis as if the Nazis, specifically Adolf Hitler, invented it, and that it first appeared in Mein Kampf.

Therefore to write about adopting the sentiments expressed by Hitler in Mein Kampf, can be made to mean, according to such an historical revisionism, something that it cannot possibly mean: that being that, since Hitler invented these sentiments, by writing such a thing can be said to mean adopting the theories advocated by Adolf Hitler. Nothing is further from the truth.

Accepting this revisionism in which pre-Nazi German antisemitism has been erased, makes it mean that the sentiments of "antisemitism" expressed by Hitler (sentiments which were not Hitler's creation, as these were the sentiments of antisemitism of Germany) that were expressed by Hitler in Mein Kampf, are Hitler's own personal sentiments even though this is historically false - Hitler never had a hand in creating them.


fig. 7d, al Husseini, a Muslim Nazi greets Bosniacs. From the Bundesarchiv. Al Husseini is the subject of NEW LEFT NAZIS.

Cripps' Crack legal team, below:

Dibb, the "notoriously short-winded" joker in the pack. Cripps is hoping that Dibb's fedora really does have a rabbit in it. Dibb is a self-proclaimed champion for the victims of "cyberbullying". Dibb however supports other types of bullying such as unconscionable conduct undertaken by the clients he represents, such as Cripps.

fig. 8 screenshot of as it appeared on 24 June 2013 (it has since gone). Dibb specialises in defamation law and advocates against "cyberbullying". He claims to be currently representing clients who are "being harassed in ways that are very distressing". Cripps is one such client represented by Dibb, and we are being sued for writing ("cyber-writing"?) about what his client did to us and to others on the internet.



The concept of "Defamation of Religion", so vigorously supported by Australia's Human Rights watch-dog, was rejected in 2011 by the "Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights" in Geneva because it it was antithetic and in contradiction to Human Rights.

48 ABOUT "defamation of religion"
from the 
"Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights" in Geneva:

"48. Prohibitions of displays of lack of respect for a religion or other belief system, including blasphemy laws, are incompatible with the Covenant, except in the specific circumstances envisaged in article 20, paragraph 2, of the Covenant. Such prohibitions must also comply with the strict requirements of article 19, paragraph 3, as well as such articles as 2, 5, 17, 18 and 26. Thus, for instance, it would be impermissible for any such laws to discriminate in favour of or against one or certain religions or belief systems, or their adherents over another, or religious believers over non-believers. Nor would it be permissible for such prohibitions to be used to prevent or punish criticism of religious leaders or commentary on religious doctrine and tenets of faith."

(further information can be found on  Wikipedia:
Defamation of religion and the United Nations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This idea was initiated by Pakistan on behalf of the OIC (Organisation of Islamic Cooperation)Organisation of Islamic Cooperation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia  )

"Islamic Human Rights" are sought for by bodies such as the OIC. One such "right" is the enforcement of Sharia. For the OIC any country in which Sharia is not practiced is of itself a denial of Human Rights to Muslims living in that country. The concept of "Muslim human rights" is known as the Cairo Declaration (on Human Rights in Islam). The Cairo Declaration is a declaration in which human rights are superseded by rights Muslims have over non-Muslims and in which the goals of these "rights" is to allow Muslims to pursue religious obligations unencumbered by the rights of others - rights such as, one supposes, a Muslim's " right" to seek the genocide of the Jews The OIC is renown for the racism which it manifests in the form of people such as Malaysia's Mahatir.

fig. 9 screenshot of the Muslim concept of Human Rights. There is no freedom of religion, and everyone is bound by religious laws and punishments (Sharia).

Returning to fig.1: One of the multiform MANIFESTATIONS of the racism against Jews is Islam (which seeks the genocide of the Jews in the hadith, where the hadith constitute Sunna, whose legal enforcement is Sharia).


Robert Cripps, far left, who ran the failed GLG, realised and accepted he was racist to hate Jews ("self-confessed racist" means just that). He preferred to call me "racist" in my critique of Islamic doctrine (the Koran) because he preferred to blame "the Jews and their state in Palestine" for a conflict that was not mentioned in my criticism of religions. Supporters of the "Palestinian cause" call "racist" any critic of Islam - as they did recently in Melbourne, Australia, when they organised pro-"Palestine" protests against a critic of Islamic doctrine.

 Author: Demetrios Vakras 14 December 2013

Edited 16/12/2013 at 9:35 AM to correct typos, "for" replaces "ofr"; [---]; Dibb is now a "champion for the 'victims' of 'cyberbullying'", instead of "champion against 'cyberbullying'"; and the HREOC "recommended" using, instead of "cited using" the particular criminal code against people it describes as "cyber-racists".


We are petitioning the Australian government to amend the Defamation Act of 2005 to make Australian law consistent with its international obligations.

Support our petition here: