Redleg V artists
The
Nature of the Complaint against Australia – bias
|
Kyrou presided over a trial of our surrealist (and therefore atheist) art exhibition. He should not have done so. Our
exhibition directly and unapologetically showed how
passages from Deuteronomy (and other Biblical
passages) relate to Mein Kampf and Hitler. [more:
unbowedatheist.com]
[ more:
Petition
to Geneva ]. We declare that
we have the right to be atheists and surrealists
and express our ideas regardless of frontiers. It is in the essay accompanying Pythia between χαός and χασμός, in which the "offending" Greek words written in Greek script (that Redleg objected to) appear. And it is in the essays in which Greek script is used that the the Biblical basis for Mein Kampf was shown in our exhibition. Kyrou found the use of "foreign words" (Greek) expressed "potentially offensive statements" and that this gave Redleg the right to attack the integrity of our exhibition, and attack our ideas and our person, with the posting of disclaimers and a "WARNING!". The
entire publication Humanist Transhumanist (being the
exhibition content) appears as Annexure 11 in the
Geneva Petition. The
portion reproduced in the graphic below (pp. 30-32
of the publication) can be found here.
Kyrou's adverse finding against us – which Warren, Ashley and Digby with regard to the Hitler element overturned – proclaimed "the mere mention of Hitler's name" is defamatory in any association. As our exhibition already included Hitler as the subject, we had already committed a "pre-defamation". And, the association made with Hitler in our exhibition was with Christianity.
Below, a photograph of Kyrou posted by the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese shown delivering a sermon on his belief of the religious basis of "the Law" from the pulpit at Saint Eustathios Church. Kyrou attributes to the Bible the principles of law that underpin his role and duty as judge – while our exhibition showed that those very same Biblical edicts on "the Law" were the basis for the intolerance of Hitler that ended in genocide.
The
Biblical passages which in Humanist Transhumanist
are shown to be the foundation of Mein Kampf, are
extolled by the church as giving rise to the
principles that govern law, and that the
rejection of Christ is a rejection of law.
The Church publishes its views on "the Law" in
"Vema" (The Stride, Το Βήμα), which can be found
here: Kyrou
advocates the literal Biblical propositions
promulgated by the church. This can be seen in what
Kyrou has written in the Greek
Orthodox Fundamentalist website "Mode Of Life"
which proclaims its antipathy to "apostasy", and
presents itself as an "alternative to atheism"
(Annexure 26 of Geneva Petition). In Mode of
Life Kyrou
proclaims that the "doxology" given to the court
"seek[s] guidance of the Holy Spirit and blessings
of strength, wisdom, truth and justice for the
legal system" (Annexure 25 of Geneva Petition). During the trial it proved impossible for Kyrou to conceal his disdain for us, and impossible for us not to have noticed. This complaint was not responded to by the Supreme Court – instead the court removed its complaints procedures page and the associated pdf from its website within 10 days. A subsequent complaint against the court was made by us to the Victorian Attorney General. All subsequent court hearings have been poisoned by the bias of Αιμίλιος Κύρου. His findings were in contradiction to evidentiary material, in disregard of law, in contempt of law and scandalous. Nevertheless, Kyrou's findings have, in the form of the High Court's affirmations (by Keane, Edelman and Nettle), overturned Australian statutes based on international covenants that had been enacted to protect human rights, and this has gone unremarked by Australia's Human Rights Commission – hence our petition to Geneva. A separate complaint has been made to the Australian Human Rights Commission, regarding its failures that have ended with the legitimisation per Nettle's decision of July 2017 of race discrimination in Australia which is breach of the ICERD. That complaint to the Human Rights Commission can be found here. Judicial corruption is entrenched in Australia and is permitted by its highest court, the High Court of Australia. Though Australia is a signatory to, and has obligations under Article 11 of the United Nations Convention against Corruption, it has yet to enact any law that would curb judicial corruption. |
|
We
are petitioning the Australian government to amend the
Defamation Act of 2005 to make Australian law
consistent with its international obligations. |