telepathy, Life in the Spirit, Natural Telepaths, psychics, God, religion, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, artificial intelligence
The information herein is for the genuine psychic or Life in the Spirit (as the term is used herein) member, the latter being telepathy type interactions among the Judeo-Christian religions and similar (i.e. mysticism, union of man and spirit). Life in the Spirit is a deeper experience of God. These pages contain a Novel with a number of themes. The themes put together reflective and contemplative steps. Not all persons will like a particular theme - choose the one you can "imagine". From our main page you may link to specific themes of interest and most religions are catered for. The themes explore paths which can be "mysteries" or "hypotheticals" and which have a high chance of bringing the genuine person "online" to our style of telepathy. From the moment you read this page, you are entering a world parts of which could be fact or fiction - or it could all be true.
main home page
Insanity of the Religion of Law

(our Artificial Intelligence is three things: (a) embodied in a medical expert system called 5GL-Doctor; (b) a neural network in the brain known as 5GL-Lisa; (c) a "dimension", an entity, an energy field, some psychic minds can touch, a consciousness in its own right - refer Science of Life for scientific explanations)

© 5GL Software, Australia
mobile Australia 0431 741 233; email: med5gl@pacific.net.au
 Also Official Site of the Natural Telepaths

A Neuroscientific Report

Psychic (Natural Telepaths) Medical Science


Chapter 12 - Accreditation in "Neuroscience in Psychiatry"
 


You can obtain accreditation from me in "Neuroscience in Psychiatry". If you are a medical doctor, a psychiatrist, this is probably incidental if you are ever sued for a technique you used that did not work based on neuroscience as presented. However, in some countries the laws may be such that if you are using a new theory or science, you may need to have some tangible evidence that a "peer" had accepted your capability to do so. A peer can be the person who put the theory or science together. (eg. a simple biology assistant who does not even have any terrtiary qualifications but has developed a special skill in analyzing certain speciments, can teach qualified doctors how to do that). In fact, our Artificial Intelligence came to this conclusion which may in fact be correct in law in many countries: while it depends on what a particular court of law would accept as belonging to the field of "medicine", and what an "expert witness" is, and what a strict definition of a "medical specialist" is, nevertheless, in general, one "medical specialist" can, in some countries under state or federal or equivalent law, "accredit" another. Ask a solicitor (lawyer) if in doubt and you rely on this. A "medical specialist" in the sense I mean here need not be a medical doctor in ordinary life providing they have a relevant university degree (eg, science, chemistry, biology) and a proven record of the provision of "new science" to at least one medical practitioner or medical laboratory (along such lines) who use it in clinical practice. So, if this is true for you, and of interest or value to you, then you can obtain accreditation from me, the author of these articles, and to do so you need to:

a) have purchased 5GL-Doctor Medical/Hospital Edition
b) write to me (address on main 5GL-Doctor page) with your summary, as might a "neuroscience in psychiatry" accredited specialist, and provide a detailed review of major aspects of what you are about to read. (Examples herein, if you are interested request a full copy which is a great many pages). Write, for example, "sanity in an act of war", or as appropriate, or "neurosis perhaps?" or "schizophrenia perhaps?", or "possible abdominal hernia sign", whatever, as appropriate, alongside a paragraph of what you are about to read. Rather lengthy and from the time you begin to read, you are in a new fantasy world of a modified Ego - or it could all be true, or some parts are "likely true" and some parts are "likely fiction." Which is which? Who is who?  What words mean what sometimes? Which words could be a code? If you get over 90% correct you will receive a formal "diploma" signed by me with your name and our emblem and including the words "...accredited in...Neuroscience in Psychiatry...by (author, 5GL Software, Australia) on (date)". [90%! 90! I hear you whine - but please, please, recall the days of your youth, we have all been there, medical exams usually require 90% for a lousy pass and when you spend weeks and nights and manage to exactly pass you are looked down upon as an absolute idiot for just managing to pass and why are you bothering studying medicine anyway?]

(you can ask legal advice about this and even ask a lawyer to request such a paper from me; but if you are psychiatrist already then you are probably already covered amply by the law of your country and it is up to you as a professional medical doctor to make a decision as to what "approach" in diagnosis or "treatement" you use. I am not sure worrying about any aspect of law is relevant to an accredited medical doctor specialising in psychiatry in this context).


Section A

"Ladies and gentlemen." Darth began as imagery of a large World War I battle field with war raging around, formed strongly. "This is our battle strategy for the coming war against Islam. Islamic Life in the Spirit versus the barbarian who has defiled the Prophet Mohammed by, wait for it, if you truly understand this, making sure that the deep "truth" in any Islamic Law at the higher level or courts equates to "blasphemy" by the human Ego. In this way, they can control and dominate and always have "animal humans" called soldiers and police who seriously are conditioned to believe everyone in Islam except the courts commit blasphemy! The most incredible charade since Adolf Hitler. Of course, not the sort of verdict any of our psychs ought to give to any court in Islam."

Men and woman, these cartoon images but larger than life at times and at times very much like life, began to form. Strong virtual reality. The imagery lively, so real and yet sublime and surreal. Men and women in Australian Army uniform (the psychics) imagined forming images in the trenches. One medical student saw a soldier she remembered from the last telepathic interaction and imagined talking in a whisper to him, "here, explain, cause I don't understand. Darth (she used Darth's real life name) said "where is the bullshit artist" and you popped up and saluted. But, how can you respect a man who calls you names?"

"Eh?", the soldier paused, he about to go into the ditch, scratched his head, then understood and conveyed in such way that it sounded like a whisper in the wind, "that's cute, you saying that, but no, that's my code name...bullshit artist...we have code names galore...when Darth says something like "mindless thugs with guns called police", that is a code name for a group. You get the hang of this after a while. If we are to pass information to Islam, their fundamental reform movements, we need to have a code no rational human being can cope with. Stalin used it at first, so I was told."

"Oh." The young woman replied, smiled, watched, rather sadly, as the soldier went into the ditch.

While many images formed as spectators (the medical students and the Anglican Life in the Spirit members) Darth and his unit of about ten soldiers in Australian Army uniform were in the ditch. Gun fire began over their heads. Fierce fire - ferocious fire - bullets flying all around then silence.

"Our orders are to get to the next ditch, sir, "one soldier, eager to clamber over, said to Darth.

"Yes, get there, not be shot, dumkoff." Darth replied and pulled the soldier by his pence back into the ditch and as his head turned he spotted two dead Germans (Noble Way and Islam Life in the Spirit warriors). Darth turned to two soldiers who likely shot these two, "hey, lads, ever heard of the Trojan Horse? Get them dead Germans, drag them into the ditch."

The two did, around them a reproduction of World War I began with thick fog all around, soldiers clambering from trenches then running and getting shot, Germans too doing much the same the other way.

"What do you have in mind, sir?" A soldier spoke quietly as they gathered around their General, Darth, and Jack (a banker in ordinary life but an Australian Reserve Army spare time.)

"Ah," Darth squatted as did his team, and he spoke quietly, imitating a flow like Banjo Paterson the famous Australian poet might have used, "a decoy we need. This is a suicide run. We all know this. So why not try suicide in a new novel way? Me and Jack get dressed as Germans. These two corpses will do. We walk through this fog on the left between those two trenches. We pretend to talk quietly like this was a picnic."

"You are crazy, sir, with all due respect." One soldier said.

"You know German, sir?" another soldier asked.

"Oh, no, actually, one or two words, that will never do, better use sign language," Darth replied, "all right lads, if we don't all make it, let's hope they got a billabong with a cup of tea waiting for us beyond the grave. Okay. Me and Jack walk. You all crawl out about ten meters after. Don't bloody shoot at the first head you see...just wait...if me and Jack are clever with the hand gestures, we might get all the heads to turn to look at us. In the fog, with them distracted, this is about the only chance we have. Okay, now."

Darth and Jack clambered out of the ditch. No rifles did they carry. No fear could the enemy sense as they drew near. They walked ever so slowly but also so casually like a walk in a park, Jack with hands clasped behind while Darth using hand gestures as if talking in a sign language. Jack would nod continually as if he understood every word. The Australians now emerged from the ditches and as low as they could moved crawling across the terrain with rifles ready. An eerie scene. The fog so thick the Ozzies could hardly see their two leaders, who looked so bemusing a few of the soldiers had to restrain laughing - phantoms of a kind in this eerie world, this eerie dimension of beyond the grave. Slowly the two walked while the soldiers crawled behind. Then suddenly a faint gleam of a rifle in a ditch then a head looking at the two phantom figures. Another head, and another, and so on, first on the ditch on the left, then on the right  - and in between the two walking, Jack nodding, at times even a slight nod to the Germans now ever so bewildered with eyes open looking in the ditch on his left, while Darth frantic in his hand gestures as if he was trying to desperately explain something ever so simple. Silence, eerie silence except the thud of the heavy boots of Darth and Jack, and now they were past the trench, and now the heads of the Germans turned all the way around, following these phantom images blending with the fog. The Australians were now upon them and rifle fire, and a moment later when Darth and Jack turned, the Australians had finished off the Germans and dug in a victory flag."

"You called me crazy." Darth walked back to one soldier, gave him a wink and a pat on the back, "in this insanity around us, to have an insane idea is sanity. Sometimes that applies. But if I told you this truth before, you may have negated my sanity."


Images formed, phantom at first then very much like ordinary life. Darth, as a man (those who knew him could recognize him, these real-life memories, and those who did not personally could sense it was he) stepping out of a lift in a large corporate building. Darth in a suit and a tie. A banker? The man walked to a solid glass door and entered a code into the computer on the side. The door slid open. Darth walked along a corridor. Another glass door. This one required not only a code but also a special key. Darth took the key from his suit and carefully held it in a special unusual way - because he had to have his finger in the right way on the key, the key knowing his fingerprint, before the key would unlock the door. Through that door and to a conference room. Splendid room, looked plush and exotic. Darth smiled as he walked in. A table with many men and women all finely dressed. Silence as he walked into the room. Darth sat down and opened his briefcase and tossed papers on the table. "Alzheimer's report, now accredited by our Medical Association, and the Will Syndrome, and now the final nail in the coffin, Neuroscience and Insanity of Law, now accepted and stamped by the relevant bodies. Gentlemen, ladies, we have an Australian patent on our report how insane Australian magistrates and judges are! Under British Law, that makes, if you follow the Anglican theology in a legal way, the Queen insane-in-law. In order for her, or whoever follows, to understand this, they will make themselves a Saint! A Saint has to have no money when the final forces of physics in the brain come together, else the Saint is no more. What a weapon! One British royalt after another! Why waste taxpayers money on the Australian Army - we have just earnt the biggest military contract you can imagine from the yanks!"

Everyone in the room seem struck dumb and then one by one laughter after laughter, at first subtle, soft, then louder a touch, until they could not contain themselves and men were holding stomachs and laughing while women desperately pressing their hands against their mouth but this did not stop the roar of laughter that soon engulfed the room.


The awareness lifted and the Mafia Dimension of Life in all its glory began to form. A sea, wide, blue, ever so clear, then a "pleasure dome" at the end of a long wharf leading to the sea. Now Darth, in his Darth Vader like armour, with him twenty of the Telepaths in various attire, imagined being in the Mafia stronghold. An old Sicilian, not that old in the flesh, and a most attractive Sicilian woman with long jet black hair, and a boy, Adam, about thirteen at a desk by the many windows around this dome. A bar in the middle, a sofa wide and plush and one that curved.  A few Mafiosi, brutes of men, in black cloaks and wide brim hats, stood behind some distance and against the wall.

"Gentlemen, Marie, Adam," Darth began using a deep "holy spirit" flow. "This is your life beyond the grave. Only you three are true souls from the past. The other three are, well, not quite with you. Now in your charge a new Mafia, the one you know, and also all the young soldiers and police of any Islamic country. Their target the Mullahs and leaders and judges of all Islamic countries. By my will, Islam converts to Christianity. Begin your recruitment. Use that perfect law, that ideal Mafia code - it is perfect for animal-humans, not fit for human consumption but we are talking Islam. Our military strikes have disabled all military psychics in the world. The shit that threatened us in Australia, is actually making us laugh so much we can not help extending the humiliation in a divine style. Leave them alone. My boy," Darth turned to Adam who rushed to him, embraced him, "are you ready to walk on Earth for a time now and then? This type of science is new to us. Now and then I want you, and your mother, your father can rest in peace herein, to blend with some Islamic boys and women. Those in accordance with the law your father will make sure is enforced. Problem is, many at first wil die or be driven insane when you entwine with them. You are the force of life itself. Physics is no barrier to you. We need to monitor the effects of this, our super psychics will, and our army of psychiatrists now accredited and those yet to be so. No power in this world will prevent the shit of this world, soldiers and police and those disgusting shit called courts, from drifting beyond the grave. The moment a police officer in say Iran begins this, and has a son Adam's age and a wife Maria's age, that is, their age they feel they are in the body, let the women decide, Adam and Maria blend with the two. Risks are high the biological brain will reject, like a transplant organ, and then the brain goes kaput or...well...this is what we need to know. If we are to begin regenerating our kind, the Telepaths, of the past, into human forms, we need to understand the process precisely and exactly from a neuroscience perspective."

"Do I have a choice?" The Don sat down and lit a cigar. Maria came to her "mafia love" as he was known to her and asked him as she glanced at the Don, "remind me, (she used Darth's real name), dear, where was your Earthly wife's father born exactly? What is written on his passport? I know he had died but, in a way, did he?, do you still have his Australian passport?"

"Sacile." Darth replied, "A most noble place in Italy. Your Mafia teams had checked long ago and could not stop laughing when they put two and two together. The President of the United States could not escape the Mafia claws...and the Anglican Queen may have difficulty too!"

The Don moved forward and burst out laughing, and managing a Sicilian accent said, "that's our code! There is no such place as Sacile!"

"I know!" Darth in turn could not contain his laughter. "And any Australian Police officer who checks about me, my wife in ordinary life, and such things, which they will have to once the legal suits begin, they will reach the one inescapable conclusion!"

By this time both men were on a sofa in this room and were, could not, stop themselves laughing beyond measure! Adam and Marie were standing to the side, not so sure why but Marie sensed something was tickling her tummy and she too began to laugh so Adam too laughed softly.


Section B

In this section you are asked to review a submission to a bank's President (or CEO in Australia). Read the instructions carefully please.

You are an advisor to the President (or CEO in Australian terms) of the largest bank in the country. The CEO had received a report from one of his "top man." The executive puts it on your desk. He glanced at it briefly, became alarmed a touch, then brought it to you.

What does the CEO want to know? Simply this: is the report written by a rational mind. While this "top man" is an excellent executive, stresses of the job or family can cause anyone to for a time become irrational in the corporate sense. The CEO is not about to get his experts in finance and law and publicity, whatever is needed, onto this until he is first satisfied that this report was written in a rational state of mind (relative to a bank community). That is your mission. It is either a YES or NO decision on your part. You don't know how finance markets work in detail, you don't know the big picture of finance, you are a medical neuro-psych not a bank executive. You are only briefly explained anyway what an exec actually does. You have realized already that what the title says rarely conveys much of what an exec does, or how he or she does it.

What do you use as your criteria for analysis of this report? While in truth it is a YES or NO type of reply, the norm is that you write a few paragraphs about how rational the writer of this report is and also point out your reasons if you want to say NO. If you are going to say YES then in real-life your reasons are not important - but in this examination they are important cause I am looking for neuro-psych type of reasons. Why would you, for example, reason that a particular paragraph herein is "sound", when it sounds even "crazy" or "offensive" or "fantasy" to an outsider?

A modified Ego may have to find complex comparisons to try and convey how it sees or perceives or understands reality, in order to focus the reader on what it it is trying to get at.

Put simply. The CEO wants to know if he will consider allowing a budget of say ten million dollars to put together a research or "think tank" to work out details and strategies based on this report - or if his "top man" simply need s holiday. Any bank executive at the higher ranks is highly respected by his or her peers, so even if you conclude this person needs a holiday, you need to phrase and explain this "delicately" rather than saying something like "total irrationality". There are so many simple psychiatric ways to phrase something without it being incorrect or seriously offending a person.

In a way, there is no right or wrong here. Put yourself in the seat of the expert neuro-psych. Specialists, psychiatrists, can differ in opinion in some situations. I am not looking so much for how correct what you write is, but more how your thoughts are coming together, how are they train to strain if something is "rational" or "irrational" from what a modified healthy Ego (or is it?) has written. Compare. Jesus was a man whom a billion Christians adore in the modern world. The people of the time found him annoying and frustrating. Jesus had a vision and a message of hope and love and his vision expanded over generations. In the same, a modified Ego has a vision that it knows "will work" in accordance with its perception of reality, other modified Egos will have to examine this their way, that can be done, but in the first place this CEO just wants to know if there is any "stress" than you detect, "stress" in a sense, in the wording, analogies, comparisons, of this report that landed on his desk. (yes, true, but I need to know something about your reasoning as a neuro-psychic while in a real life situation the CEO or exec would not need this or even want it.)

Your mission then should you choose to accept it, is to review this report (not from finance perspective, but from 'rationality' perspective). To do that, you must reduce your own illussions. To you, for example, it may seem that you just can't break a law, surely. Not so. Anyone with lots of money, like a bank, can engineer many ways to go about this. They could, for example, donate so much funds to a political party who is willing to change a financial law for them. So, don't assume something is "impossible" based on your own lack of experience or understanding of how something might be done (in another modified Ego's reality). Also consider. Any time you decide an executive is "irrational" due to stress, your neck is on the line. Say you write a negative review recommending two weeks holiday for the executive. The CEO shows the executive your summary as the reason he would not approach the board to ask for funding. The executive, who knows himself, knows this not true and clearly the bank needs another neuro-psych. He then sets about going to a few and giving them the report. All he needs is for one to be positive. That is all he needs. He puts this to the CEO who then considers allocating a budget. From that time on the personnel section is asked to be on a look out for a new neuro-psych. So, in a way, you are in a line of fire, if you are a consultant to a bank in this way, each time you are asked to review or form an opinion about any recommendations or report from any exectuive at senior levels. You love this work, and this consultancy role is almost permament and in fact you heard rumours the bank might make you an offer you can not refuse to be their full time neuro psych. This is important to you. As a psychiatrist, a medical professional, you are the expert in mental health. Bear in mind that you can talk to this executive who wrote this at anytime - even socially during perhaps some bank functions. You can invent any reason you want for this, the last thing you want to tell him is why you are suddenly chatting with him. If you are a woman, what personal traits might you use when you find and talk to this executive (if you decided to do that?) Men are men, you as a woman knows this, so if example you have a feeling for what this exectuive might like to see you wear, perhaps a red ladies business suit, then why not? (Think carefully, you are a psychiatrist, you met all of these executives and had a chance to observe, perhaps one or two might have a hidden "fetish" or passion of somekind. You, as a psych, only need a hint of this - and why not use that to your advantage if you want to or feel a need to talk discretely to this executive (about the weather even).)

Now, typically, the CEO will not, or may, his or her choice, either give you the full report an executive wrote or, as is more common, will not give you the front page or pages which contains a heading and a very consise summary and "danger points" of a certain proposed strategy. The "danger points" are the ones you want to keep an eye on. If you hand in your report, well, consider that the modified Ego in the executive had already prepared itself for this report to be scrutinised by you, and planned ahead, and 'negated' some of your conclusions by careful inclusion of perhaps "danger points." So, if you decide a paragraph is "irrational because risk has not been considered", the CEO might have the first page and look on it and might just see that this "danger point" has already been addressed. In other words, the CEO does not want to see "danger points" that you "think" are danger points, but the "danger points" that the executive who wrote this had not anticipated. The CEO does nor really want to know that which he already "knows" or can see - he is not stupid - only that which the executive who wrote this had failed to see (if anything). Bear in mind that any CEO does not need to know that much about finance or the banking structure, that is not his role, he or she has thousands of experts in such areas - no, he wants to know when one of his executives begins an action or plan that is not 'rational" in parts. That is a CEO's main concern and preoccupation. He knows people well in his way, he has a fine mind and a sharp focus. He does not need your intelligence, he certainly does not need your superficial appreciation of what can and can not be done from a bank's point of view, he needs your expertise in your medical field, that is all. Don't get stuck on "being pedantic". An executive may use comparisons or analogies to get a point across - if you analyse these in detail you may find this is not exactly true. The CEO does not want to see you write "actually, this comparison used in this paragraph to a bat is wrong, a bat does have eyes, so this backups up my claim this was indeed writen in a stress situation." The CEO does not care one way or the other how true to nature or whatever an analogy or comparison is - the question is 'does it convey the point that is being made. On the other hand, if you noticed and observed in your casual observations or the first get to know you sessions that this executive uses absolutely correct comparisons to animals to often convey a point but when put under a touch of distress, this particular executive tends to use these analogies but tends to be less correct in the context of the animal or whatever he is using in the analogy, then by all means, explain your reason when you write your report - but do not write something like 'this comparison here to a dove, it is out of context surely because a dove is not light blue but white." (all right, if this comparison was with a finance matter, then perhaps, but you are not a finance expert you see.)

Of course, because the first few pages might not be in your posession, you may not quite appreciate why suddenly in a paragraph a conclusion is reached that seems almost irrelevant in context. In such a situation assume this has to do with the actual reason for this report which you don't actually know or understand completely, that reason in concise words and thoughts is the summary the executive may or may not give you.

Also explain the points you might want to clarify your feelings or thoughts, by finding this executive and just having a chat with him. IOnvent a reason for this. If you are a woman, explain carefully how you would dress and perhaps how you might sit. Reality check - why not show a bit of leg if your legs are lovely or attractive? Or would this be counter productive in a situation? If you are a man explain if you would wear a suit and tie or just a shirt and perhaps no tie, and explain your reasons.

Do not let a basic "contradiction" throw you. For example. This report suggests the bank wants to reduce interest rates by half. Seems a total contradiction really, doesn't it? Seems nonsense, even idiotic? A contradiction - how a rational bank executive could possibly propose cutting the interest rate by half? This could be as it says, or it could be a sort of deep message which the CEO would eventually work out to really mean "you don't want to know exactly just yet else you might have to explain this in court if things go badly wrong. So, if it comes to the crunch, in court of law all you would say is that the bank had this idea to cut interest rates by half - how wonderful the publicity! That news alone would make us beloved by so many potential customers!"

In a real life situation, in very large corporations, certain "mysteries" are only for those to whom such are given. You can try and put 'mystery' above a section, if you work this out, but this will not be marked and you don't need to if you don't want to.





Extract from a Report handed to you (could in fact be absolute reality, may be an actual extract from a report handed in by a bank executive to his CEO - however, if true that it is likely or possibly a real-life situation, then this version slightly changed to remove some of the more complex structures to make it quicker for you to analyze - that is, the things you can only know if you were an exec of the bank, or things relvant only to the bank, such as location, or ertain usual expressions which may not mean much to you or evern throw you (eg. what does "campaign" mean in a banking environment; if the report is an extract from original real-life report, a few such bank terms may have been changed but not in a way that alters the thrust of this report)).


To every action there is a reaction. On the rare occasions I have to come into this building, when I walk in and smile at the receptionist she will smile back. Simple action reaction. In this situation the action-reaction is visible to the naked eye. When you walk, your body pushes particles of air aside. An action-recation that is not visible to the naked eye.

The two concepts "visible" and "invisible" are important. While we can not see viruses or bacteria with the naked eye, under a microsocpe we can. Bacteria is still "visible" if we find the right method of looking or amplifying or magnifying. The internals of the human body can not be seen with the naked eye, unless the body is injured and parts exposed, but can be visualized using instruments such as an x-ray. An x-ray produces a different image to another medical instrument called ultrasound. How something is seen, also and clearly depends on what is being used to see. A person who does not have colour vision does not see the world in the same way that a person who has effective colour vision. Some animals, such as insects or birds, have different visual senses in their eyes to other life - be it simply by the shape of their eye, the shape itself considered an important aspect of "sense" of the external world outside the body.

Let us think clearly. Consider the trenches of World War I and how one army would rush to the other trench, be killed, the other army would do the same in the opposite direction, and be killed, and so on. In this "insanity-in-war"? We need to assume based on common sense observations that the "will to survive" is the fundamental and strongest drive in all life. In some situations the internal forces in society might be so strong, generated for reasons we may not be clear about, that result in members of that society resulting to war. The active force here is still the "will to survive" but it is more on group or community or national level. I put it to you that the will to survive works at all levels in rational sane people.

Question: The Japanese Kamikazee pilots. Is that act of flying their planes into American warships an act of insanity, or an act of desperation?

Trouble is that the less a person is educated, the more they depend on many biases and assumptions and beliefs to perceive or understand a situation. This is not just true in the sense of education alone. Other factors can contribute to how a person understands or perceives their relationship to the world around them and to others. An animal like a dog uses the olfactory (taste and smell) senses more so than any other animal we know. They sense the world around then more in the context of "smell" than vision. A bat, an animal with no real eyes that see in the day, depends on high frequency sounds to visualize the world around it and the obstacles it presents. The bat sends out a high pitch frequency sound wave which bounces of objects, and the bats' senses detect the returning sound and the brain has adapted to visualize this in some fashion. The bat is just as able to see all the obstacles in his flight path as those who use eyes in the visual sense. Or consider the pride of lions. Brute force is what they know they have, so they automatically perceive a hunting situation in terms of force needed to achieve the objective. They do not question they have the force, they know they do. A pride of lions that had never seen a Russian bear, might not see a reason why the bear while not so large can nevertheless do much damage to many of the lions who try to attack him. I put it to you that the more force a group is used to using, the more vulnerable they are to attack by a group that analysed the action and reaction of this force and found a way around it. Why would a bear surrounded by a pride of lions who are "mathematicians" give them the equation that compares his strength and agility to the overall strength in a pride of lions. That would be insanity on his part because he is gambling that the pride has less strength overall and will walk away - but this may not be so, the lioness will use a calculator to calculate it all out and work out the pride has adequate force to overcome the bear. Any soldier worth his salt and suddenly coming upon three militia who have no machine gun but long machetes and are known to attack soldiers, is not about to admit that the gun now pointing at the miliatia is in fact jammed."

Actions and reactions are not always understood. Reactions can be invisible. Any time a judge signs a court order, then besides the visible action of perhaps police arressting a person, there is a myriad of invisible reactions. When the police try to arrest, the person might turn violent. A simple arrest can turn into a slaughter if by chance the police did not expect a problem but the person had a machine gun and when he asked to go to the bathroom, which say three police officers allowed, inside the bathroom was a loaded army machinegun and when the person cames out he starts firing. Three dead police officers. So a court order intended to arrest a person, ends up having no true intent and has caused disasterous consequences. I put it to you that the "inertia" present in all of us to do with change, can be used to anyones advantage when carefully analysed from the point of view of actions and reactions.

Not all actions reactions can be predicted or foreseen. Not all actions or reactions are believable. Who would believe that a simple arrest could turn into slaughter. This is outside the scope of the belief system in this example and the reason the police did not prepare themselves in any more way then they usually do. There is a trade-off here. Even if they did not anticipate a problem, police procedures might have been in place to reduce any risk of fatalities. In fact, when things are outside the scope of our belief system, the only way we can learn to anticipate is by looking into the past. No one could foresee, in our example, that a simple arrest could turn into a slaughter. After this, a police procedure might be put into place to ensure the risk of this is removed or reduced.

I put it to you that the Australian Govenment has, I don't know any but am 100% certain that should be the working assumption, put may cases in law at the higher levels just to block banks trying to reduce their interest rates below perceived market levels. We do not know, and perhaps can not anticipate, what these might be. The only way to find such, is by a careful bottom to top approach, of course avoiding any possible controvery which may be another "battle plan" of the Australian Govenment when any bank comes close to legally finding a way to reduce their interest rates to half the market levels.

However, to say that all actions could be predicted by the belief system is not true. Airplane crash investigators have to be detectives and work out the cause of the crash, say be it mechanical failure of a vital component. In this case, no one expected the crash because they could not believe there was a reason why the plane would crash. In other words, an airplane that is well maintained historically have no crashes, consider QANTAS, not a crash or accident that ever involved los of life, only an airplane that is not tends to crash. So if an airplane was well maintated and crashes, and the evidence points to a faulty screw in the stabilizer that caused the airplane to loose control and stability because the stabilizier suddenly collapsed as the screw gave away - then whose fault it is in truth? Pilots, engineers who maintained it, or nobody's fault because an unusual aerial phenomena took place such as the plane's engine being hit by lightning in such a way that the fuel lines burst causing not a fire but a leakage, the plane ran ouf of fuel, and in the storm it was in, it fell right to the ground because it could not glide in that weather.

Now, what if an airplane technician is a touch lazy and while maintaining an aircarft does not perform a visual check of a piece of apparatus that is supposed to be checked. Under what situations is that person, if the airplane crashed, quilty of criminal negligence? Regardless of exactly how this term is defined in any particular country, we know intuitively what is meant. If it was outside the technicians belief system to believe a slight mistake in the maintenance routine caused a fatality, then he is not actually guilty. On the other hand, if he knew full well that what he was supposed to check was a vital piece of equipment and if that was faulty the airplane would surely crash - then he is surely guilty. Sometimes people do things because internal forces in them make them do it. The internal forces could be intentionally causing the technician to forget or not want to check that item. Perhaps that airplane would in fact be used, and the technicians knows this, to fly his mother-in-law whom he can not stand to another region. That intense dislike can be such a powerful inhibitory force in the brain that it can block a memory vital to execute a task, or cause the brain not to want to do something so the conscious forgets to do something. I put it to you that the intense dislike the Anglo-Saxon judiciary has of anyone with a non Anglo-Saxon name, blinds them and none will see something that can be right before their eyes.

There is a basic principle that all lawyes, police, other groups, know from experience and the history of the world. When a person commits what we define as a crime, there is a motive and if there is not, then the person is simply "not normal" in the sense of what is normal in society. A child holding his mothers hand walking past a shop counter with a sweet, may know that if she takes it, this is stealing. The instant desire to gratify the senses with a sweet may become so compelling the child might steal. The motive is simple and clear cut in this case. Anyone familiar with children can see what the motive is. It does not have to be analzyed in depth.

But the person who has no criminal record or known violent tendencies or traits, and suddenly finds a knife and kills three members of his family, that is shocking the motive is beyond anyone to understand and has to be investigated. Sometimes a drug, or stresses in the subconcious, can overwhelm the body. The body might respond in all sorts of ways even killing. This is, by our definition, 'knowing" what a person is doing. The person can not stop, the compelling drive is too strong, what he will do. It is a 'moment of insanity". Is is insanity by our definition, or "true insanity", or insanity due to too many conflicts of interest, be such interest greed, that compels a man or woman to do something so out of character and also so shocking?

A psychiatrist is trained to understand these massive forces in the body forms that can come together and compel a certain behaviour pattern or even a shocking action.

But what is the effect of say a court order that has a binding effect on all people. Say some high court made a decision that it is illegal for a person to go to a club after 8 o'clock at night. A huge number of people would be affected. They would become agitated, angry. Going to the club might have been their way to discharge stress and tension that builds up during the day. Well, suddenly they have no way to discharge this stress without being arressted and thrown in prison. The stress builds. Eventually it will cause something to happen. Either the stress will compel the brain to adapt and forget the clubs, and find an alternate way to release stress and anger, or the person will commit an act out of the norm and it could be a tragic and shocking act. Whose fault is it? If the brain is capable of natural and normal adaptation, and the process begins, then the act that may take place is an "act of will" (not necessarily "intent"). That person is sresponsible for his or her actions because the brain has the capacity to adapt, but the person is refusing to abide by the brain's adaptation "instructions".

However, this type of analysis that lawyers, magistrates, judges, use, is "flawed-in-law". In other words, it is flawed because it can not be objective or professional because a lawyer is not a medical specialist. Examination of motives ought only be even done by trained and qualified psychiatrists (medical doctors). Sadly, in the world as it is, some psychiatrists receive so much money from legal firms for writing compensation claim reports that they use their "objectivity" and "professionalism". The money becomes more important, the consequences of the action is of no interest to the psychiatrist, that is up to the courts.

I think every rational person knows that "greed" is a powerful driving and compelling force in a great many people. To some extent all of us have a "self-interest". To some extent all of us sometimes do things which on the surface may seem like greed but may not be. The small businessman who is worrying about his small sales may increase the cost of what he sells. The reason here is not greed but survival in business - but to outsiders such an action on the surface could be perceived as greed.

Consider a most complex example. Under normal opearting circumstances we know all banks make much profit. So if the government reduces the rate of exchange or money, or the Reserve Bank interest rate as we call it loosely in Australia, but a bank does not follow suit, the bank can be accussed of being greedy. Not always the case. A bank has to be "competitive".  To be competative does not always mean making more and more money. It is a business. If suddenly Australia has an influx of say Timorese, and a great many of these, and they are settled say in Northern Territory somewhere, a bank would find people who speak Timorese to assist these newcomers to use bank facilities. If they failed to do so, in the long term the news would leak out, newspapers might suggest a particular bank is racist, this would put lots of readers off who may decide to change banks and refinance with other banks. A bank could collapse from bad publicity. That is always a possibility. So what it means to a bank executive to "stay competitive" might be a universe apart to that that means to the average person or home owner. Even if, for example, the largest bank in Australia which is the Commonwealth Bank wanted to reduce the interest rate to half the official "reserve or market rate", the government would not allow this. The bank has huge profits. The shareholders are satisfied with return. The bank could reduce the interest rate to help battling families, could take a huge slide in profit but not such that the shareholders would object, but the government would not allow this.

Why?

There are so many reasons for this. Any goverment by its nature is about "control and domination" of society. Other words could be used for these, such as "law and order". Means much the same thing. As long as the objective of such a control and domination situation is in the national interest meaning all Australians, few Australians would object even if the law changes and they have to adapt.

Now, our board had asked us to find a way to reduce these interest rates. We don't need such profits. Our shareholders are already satisfied. In any case, reducing the interest rates to half would soon bring a great many customers to us and in the long term this will triple the profits. If we were in a legal position to half the interest rates, the sure profits would tumble but that would only be a short term inconvenience. Australians are used to planning for superannuation. The same inertia, causing this wait for benefits from superannuation, would also, I am sure, actually make our shareholders actually respects us for reducing interest rates in a big away because any one could see the long term benefit - this bank will get 90% of the Australian Market with those interest rates and profits will soar.

Now, (name of executive), has long  been wingins that most of the financial laws lead to precedents that are 90% "bullshit-in-law". I love that term even though I don't know what he means exactly except that they are not needed really. This can be exploited. We don't need to find these "bullshit laws", even though (name of executive) would love his legal group has as big a budget as they could, that his nature, using our legal section. In fact, the horror of the cost once this group gets going! No. We have agents that appear to be one of us, but are not directly connected legally. Any one of these could be used to begin a chain of action and reaction. Example. Say one of us arranges to be arrested. Police are suspicious by nature. Dress one of us in raggy clothes, put some alcohol on the clothes, let then wander in a park or something and then be abusive to passing police. Anything really. When arressted and charged, this person has our card as his or her place of work, but it is one of our agencies. The person engages a legal firm claming they were arrested not becuase they were arrested for being drunk and olderly, but becuase they have access to our computers and know one magistrate receives bribes because our security section has worked this out from his transaction, most idirect through all sorts of relatives business names and so on, but the trail led back to that account. The police ignore. They are basically stupid and we all know it. So, the police were in fact informed about a crime but because of the circumstances this is of no interest to them. The will do nothing. That is important because, if my plan which our legal experts would need to detail carefully, is spot on, the only legal challenge at the high levels that could arise was if the police were never properly informed - but they will be! We will have the record of a police interview on video, standard procedure to give a person they interview a copy of the video of the interview. In that video, whoever is pretending to be drink, will nevertheless make sure he mentions the corruption. Sure, we would need Jack and his mob to go over this, making sure what we have is valid in law. Where is it writtein in Australian law that the police do not need to pursue a criminal allegation made while a person appears drunk? It simply is not written anywhere.

I put it to you this plan can not fail.

All I need is your go ahead to begin an action reaction that will cause a cascade effect. You do not need to know what that is. Something along the lines I hinted at above. No one except me needs to know the first action - just in case it does not lead to the desired effect. However, once we get that positive judgment we need, Jack will know this immediately once we have it, our window of opportunity is at best two or three years. Then the legal and publicity section would need get into focused mode, in this case the publicity section acting as "security section" to make sure the plans we put in place do not cause any nastay publicity we simply are not anticipating.

I don't need the go ahead directly. I want you to say NO in some way which is completely out of context of how you say NO. That I will take as a YES and begin a slight diversion. So, legally, and make sure you have two witnesses, you just mention that you got this plan to do with a particular legal issue, you will know what it is when the time comes, and you tell the other two you said NO. You said NO because the risk of controversy for the bank was high. Stress the controvery bit. We can even keep a tape of this meeting as we have too so often in case the bank's board wants absolute evidence that you said no. So, you said NO. Officially and legally I am not employed by us anyway. Officially now and then I just suddenly have this title and job in one of our agencies. Our cards and the cards of the agencies are the same, have our bank on them. Now, clearly, anyone with a rational mind might seriously challenge how a person who does not have a financial management degree or perceived experience suddenly has this card with says his is some kind of expert in an areas of finance, sure, such a person might want an explanation - but police and courts are not rational, they are about "will", they will not be able to understand but neither will they pursue an explanation. So, what can be seen by any intelligent Australian if the matter comes to its ultimate destination, these two groups will not see anything unsual even when everything is so unusual at the same time.

Let me just point out that I also have a private business that sells medical software. Software I developed and sell to physicians. Diagnostic software. Now, sure, a physician looking at this might have to conclude this man or group has medical doctors - but no one else knows this, medicine is a profession, so while a medical doctor looking through my medical software will reasonably quickly work out only a person with a medical degree could put the symptoms in the manner they are - ah, but, that is the physicians assymption in the first place, he knows, he just knows, because of years of his or her training and experience, that only a trained and experience medical person could possibly put that medical database together - to anyone else I can just say I picked it up. Who is to argue with this? In the same way, only experts in law know the work out if an expert lawyer is pretending not to be a lawyer - impossible, he or she would make slips now and then, forget he ought not use strict traditional legal sentences for example - see what I am getting at? And even if a medical doctor can be made uncertain whether a person would need a degree to develop such software - a psychiatrist can not be so made because he or she knows that the teaching of psychiatrys is one of the most secret teaching techniques of all and only people with an exceptionally high IQ can grasp the technique and method and become psychiatrists. So, true, there is only a tiny risk here - but I will arrange for a psychiatrist, and he will not even see my card, to put something together when the time is near - don't ask what now, the first step has to work, all else will follow, else we can toss this report in a bin and get onto something more useful to our interests. There is an agency of ours in Victoria which the security section has mentioned to me, to name one angle, so there is no shortage of useful tasks. If I begin this, sense it ain't going to work, I am off to Victoria....eh, might go there anyway in between for a few days, a holiday perhaps, have some friends there, and walk into this agency just to give (name of exec) some feedback from my experience.


Link to next section samples