10-10-20: Reply by Radical Honesty SA to City Press Response to Press Ombudsman

1.

Summary of Radical Honesty White Refugee Response to City Press Reply:

2.

For the Record: Johnstone provided City Press, via the Ombudsman, with a copy of both (A) Johnstone Complaint to Press Council Summary; and (B) Complaint to SAPS (180-082010): Criminal Charges: Malicious Defamation and Fraud: Accused: (1) City Press Newspaper: Defamation; (2) City Press Editor: Ms. Ferial Haffajee: Defamation; (3) City Press Journalist: Ms. Khadija Bradlow: Defamation and Fraud; (4) City Press Alleged Anonymous ‘Senior Legal Figure Present in Court’: Defamation.

3.

City Press did not directly address Johnstone’s allegations in [C][4][6], hence it is concluded that City Press does not oppose those allegations. The choice not to oppose the anonymous source as biased, unprofessional and/or unethical [6] further aggravates, City Press’s failure to contact Johnstone for comment [7], considering the pejorative remarks made by the anonymous source.

4.

Re: [C][1]: City Press did not directly address the argument that Radical Honesty is NOT ‘right wing’, because it is NOT A MOBJUSTICE CULTURE OR RELIGION (GROUP), BUT A RULE OF LAW GROUP: “When any group speaks up for justice for members of another group – they are speaking up for CONSTITUTIONAL JUSTICE; I.E. THE RULE OF LAW. Radical Honesty supports the RULE OF LAW for EVERYONE, irrespective of whether we agree with them or not, they deserve to be found guilty by the rule of law, not the media.”

5.

Re: [C][2]: City Press did not address “Speaking up for an accused to be judged in accordance with THE RULE OF LAW, NOT A MEDIA SCAPEGOAT ORGY, is clearly resented by the scapegoat scuppering media.” Put differently, if the – particularly English -media had been reporting impartially on the Reitz Four Trial, SA’s English black and white newspaper readers would have been informed of facts that Afrikaans readers were informed of. Instead SA’s English media chose to intentionally withhold key facts from their readers. This deliberate bias, and consequent prejudging the Reits Four’s alleged guilt, instead of simply reporting the facts of both plaintiff and defendants arguments, and allowing a Magistrate to find them guilty or innocent in accordance with ‘crimen injuria’ law, played a significant ‘court of public opinion’ factor in the Reits 4 decision to plead (dolus eventualis) guilty .

6.

Re: [C][3]: City Press did not address the statement that Radical Honesty SA, is (a) a Transparency Group and (b) filed the Reits 4 Amicus Curiae to object to media scapegoating of the Reitz Four, and to inform the Magistrate and all parties that the media have censored their endorsement and support for fake forgiveness, and the media’s malicious contempt for culture of sincere forgiveness and root cause problem solving; i.e. ‘Transparency group discloses media censorship’.

7.

Re [C][5]: Radical Honesty SA perception of, and conduct towards the TRC has been of honesty and honour since, Johnstone’s 19 January 1999 submission to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, wherein she offered to donate her ENTIRE INHERITANCE TO FACILIATATE SINCERE FORGIVENESS; right up to believing that if the TRC was committed and sincere about facilitating SINCERE FORGIVENESS BETWEEN SA ‘ENEMIES’, that TRC officials would welcome honourable dissent, and particularly notification of root cause problem solving information, to facilitate real and sincere forgiveness, as per her transparent notification to TRC officials of the Radical Honesty SA Amicus Curiae to the Concourt, on 20 July 2010, and all correspondence to TRC officials in

between. This honourable conduct can only be interpreted by honourable and sincere officials sincerely committed to sincere forgiveness, as the highest affirmation and support for the honourable good faith assumption that the TRC that was committed to sincere forgiveness.

8.

City Press seem to endorse the perspective that the TRC must be perceived as a fascist PC dictatorship, where nobody is allowed to dissent, or provide constructive feedback and criticism, so that the TRC can make an impartial enquiry and fix any of its possible errors; and that anyone who has the slightest honourable criticism and feedback to the TRC should be maligned, smeared, and vilified, for no dissent and constructive feedback towards errors made by City Press’s fascist TRC should be allowed, or tolerated.

9.

Johnstone’s good faith perspective of the TRC is to give it the benefit of the doubt that it is committed to sincere forgiveness/reconciliation, hence would be interested in receiving any constructive feedback to facilitate such sincere race relations forgiveness.

10.

City Press seeming perspective of the TRC is to assume it was not committed to sincere reconciliation, but it was fundamentally important to maintain a fake PR illusion pretending it was. For surely if City Press thought the TRC was committed to sincere forgiveness, it would enthusiastically encourage the TRC to grab the opportunity to avail itself of Practicing Radical Honesty information that has been proven to create a culture of sincere forgiveness amongst individuals of different races, ideologies, cultures etc? Instead City Press considers a culture which practices sincere forgiveness amongst it different racial, ideological members to be ‘right wing’.

11.

NOTE: I don’t know what City Press’s definition is of ‘right wing’, but if their definition is that the SA ‘right wing’ practice sincere forgiveness, while SA left wing practice fake hypocrisy forgiveness; then Johnstone misinterpreted City Press’s meaning for the word ‘right wing’. If true, then Johnstone shall bear the ‘right wing’ badge with pride.

12.

Re: [C][7]: City Press did not simply report on the public event of the Radical Honesty SA Amicus intervention in the Reits matter. Andre Grobler of SAPA did simply report on the public event: a.

Sentencing of Reitz four delayed1, IOL on 2010-07-30; also at ‘Belangrike dokument’ vertraag Reitz-vonnis2, Volksblad The sentencing of the four former University of Free State students known as the Reitz Four was delayed on Friday morning.

Chief magistrate Mziwonke Hinxa told the court that a crucial document has reached his office and that the defence and the state would first have to discuss this in chambers.

State prosecutor Johan Kruger also confirmed that he had these documents and that it was best to adjourn for a short time to discuss it in chambers.

Hinxa then adjourned the court for them to meet in his chambers.

b.

1 2

Reitz four fined R20 000 each3, Andre Grobler, SAPA, 31 Jul 2010

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=15&art_id=nw20100730092806761C904069 http://www.volksblad.com/Suid-Afrika/Nuus/Belangrike-dokument-vertraag-Reitz-vonnis-20100730-2

Earlier, sentencing was delayed for the magistrate and legal teams to discuss a document send to court by Lara Johnstone from Radical Honesty SA. Johnstone wanted the magistrate to take special notice of the media’s role in finding the former students guilty before the trial and reprimand it for doing so.

Hinxa said the court took note of the document but it had no bearing on this week’s proceedings. – Sapa

c.

UFS victims smile after verdict4, Andre Grobler, SAPA, 2010-07-30 Media’s role The complainants in the matter still did not want to speak to the media, but there were "smiles on their faces".

Earlier, sentencing was delayed for the magistrate and legal teams to discuss a document sent to court by Lara Johnstone from Radical Honesty SA. Johnstone wanted the magistrate to take special notice of the media's role in finding the former students guilty before the trial and, among others, reprimand it for doing so.

Hinxa said the court took note of the document but it had no bearing on this week's proceedings.

13.

City Press requested a copy of the Amicus Curiae from the State Prosecutor, who provided Ms. Bradlow with two pages thereof. Subsequent thereto, Ms. Bradlow telephoned Johnstone, informing Johnstone she was a ‘journalist’ for ‘City Press’ (i.e. allegedly committed to honouring the Press Code) to request a copy of the entire Amicus. The Amicus was transparently provided to Ms. Bradlow, and Ms. Bradlow proceeded to disregard the concept of fair and accurate reporting, in favour of distortion, exaggeration and misrepresentation, and material omissions, amounting to blatant bias towards Radical Honesty; violating Press Code [1.5], by avoiding contacting Johnstone for comment.

14.

City Press’s argument (para 01-03) once again favours deliberate distortion, exaggeration, misrepresentation and material omissions, Johnstone’s point by point rebuttal, with evidence, follow this Summary.

15.

City Press’s argument (para 04) incorrectly states the application was unsuccessful. All the Radical Honesty SA Amicus application requested was to be (i) accepted into the court record and (ii) the issues raised in the Amicus to be taken notice of by all parties.

Both of which were successfully accomplished. Radical Honesty’s timing of the Amicus application, was in response to the shocking news of the Reitz Four’s decision to plead guilty, based on the unheard of guilty intention of dolus eventualis, including the unheard of conviction on a guilty plea of dolus eventualis. From the information available in the Afrikaans media – Volksblad in particular – it did not make any sense to Johnstone for the Reits Four to plead guilty, on the dubious notion of ‘dolus eventualis’ and when the fundamental legal requirements of ‘crimen injuria’ had not been met, by their conduct, as per the information in Afrikaans news media. For example: The English Media avoided impartially reporting on:

3 4

http://www.mg.co.za/article/2010-07-30-reitz-four-fined-r20-000-each http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/UFS-victims-smile-after-verdict-20100730

a.

In Werkers het geweet hulle speel toneel5, Mike van Rooyen writes that the plaintiffs were asked to role-play as actors, and voluntarily gave their consent to be ‘actors’ for the student satire movie, to be made for the residence’s culture evening; and that they could have ended their voluntary participation at any time. The plaintiffs knew they were acting, for a movie. The atmosphere was funny and jovial. After the movie was completed, the plaintiffs were given a bottle of whiskey as agreed upon. For the following four months after the make of the movie, the relationship between accused and plaintiffs continued to be very good, if not better than before, until five months later in February 2008, when the video became a media sensation, and their fellow community members humiliated them for the ‘urine act’. Subsequent to the video being played on the culture evening, others requested it to be shared with other students, which the accused objected to, since it was a hostel function event. The accused did not place the video on the UFS intranent, nor share it otherwise. They agreed that people who are not familiar with student prank initiations and satire could misinterpret the video, particularly the fake ‘urine scene’. They did not foresee that the video would become a media race war sensation.

Others Agree: Unanswered Questions about Reitz Four Guilty Plea:

5 6 7

b.

Reitz-4 vra om verskoning6, Mike van Rooyen reports that ‘legal history was made yesterday when the Reits four (a) plead guilty to crimen-injuria, on dolus eventualis, and (b) were convicted upon a guilty plea of dolus eventualis. The Reitz four did not plead guilty on Dolus Directus (Direct Intent: where the consequences of an action were both foreseen and desired by the accused); nor on Dolus Indirectus (Indirect Intent: where secondary consequences in addition to those desired by a perpetrator of an act were foreseen by the perpetrator as a certain result), but on Dolus Eventualis, i.e. where the accused did not “mean” for the unlawful act to happen, but foresees the possibility that it could happen, and proceeds with his conduct anyway. Both their action of pleading guilty to dolus eventualis, and for a Magistrate to convict someone based on a guilty plea of dolus eventualis, were unheard of, and made legal history. The Reitz four denied that they made the video with the intention of insulting the dignity of the plaintiffs, consequently stating that they considered themselves to be innocent.

Why did they plead ‘guilty’?

c.

Vrae oor Reitz 4 se saak7, Hennie Vermaak, a retired attorney asks why the Reits 4 spent so much money to hire one of the most expensive advocates in the country: surely not to plead ‘guilty’? Why did such expensive advocate advise them to plead ‘guilty’? Pleading guilty does not require an expensive advocate!.

Why did the expensive advocate not advise them to plead ‘not guilty’, since their only intention had been to make a stupid student SATIRE VIDEO? Why were the plaintiffs not cross-examined about their knowledge and voluntary consent to be ‘actors’ and to role-play, for the satire video, about their good relationships with the Reits Four, that the plaintiffs knew from working for years in Student hostels, that students get up to incredibly stupid pranks, and whether the Reits 4 Attorneys were just trying to get the matter dealt with by a Quick Fix Guilty plea.

http://www.volksblad.com/Suid-Afrika/Nuus/Werkers-het-geweet-hulle-speel-toneel-20100728 http://www.volksblad.com/Suid-Afrika/Nuus/Ons-is-jammer-Reitz-vier-20100727-2 http://www.volksblad.com/MyVolksblad/Briewe/Vrae-oor-Reitz-4-se-saak-20100804

d.

In Reitz-4-regspan se vreemde optrede, Former Judge Arrie Hattingh, agrees with Attorney Hennie Vermaak, that in order to be found guilty of ‘crimen injuria’ the state must prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that the accused had the intention to ‘insult the dignity’ of the defendants. It is not possible to insult the dignity of another person, if they voluntarily participate in the alleged ‘criminal act’. There was no coercion, the entire student prank was enjoyed by all. None of the defendants complained about the ‘student prank’, they voluntarily participated in, to anyone for months, until months later when the media bomb bubble burst. He accuses Advocate Kemp J Kemp of behaving very strangely, in regards to his accused clients.

16. Summary Observations & Conclusions: City Press’s Response Confirms Johnstone’s Hypotheses of City Press’s Malicious Bias: 17.

City Press’s response made no effort whatsoever to simply provide a simple clarification that their use of the word ‘right wing’ was not meant as a pejorative label, by providing their definition for what the editor and journalist mean by the choice of the word ‘right wing’. Like any pejorative word, there are circumstances where the use of the word may be anything but pejorative. City Press did not allege that their use of ‘right wing’ or ‘scuppering’ were not pejorative. Instead City Press’s Response was to select short soundbytes, omit their context, or the evidence justifying the soundbyte, to justify their use of ‘right wing’ ‘scuppering’ headline, confirming that their intentions were pejorative (disparaging; belittling).

18.

Do the select soundbytes provided by City Press, justify their pejorative ‘right wing’ ‘scuppering’ labels? If taken totally out of context, and ignoring all contradictory evidence, perhaps. If taken in context, and making an impartial enquiry into each of City Press’s alleged ‘right wing soundbytes’, an impartial enquiry, shall find City Press’s arguments to be totally without merit.

19.

City Press have additionally provided no evidence whatsoever for how Radical Honesty’s Reits 4 Amicus Application -- subsequent to an unbelievably shocking plea of guilt by dolus eventualis, and even worse a conviction of guilt by dolus eventualis, of the defendants – requesting the Magistrate for “an Order from the court clarifying whether the Defendants and Plaintiffs belong to different culture’s and whether they were informed by their counsel of their constitutional rights to invoking8 cultural law9 in S. 15 (3), 30, 31, and 185, and which require the application of choice of law rules, and if not their Criminal Procedure Act, 51 of 1977: S. 105A. Plea and sentence agreements: (9) (d).10 rights” could in any way be interpreted by any sincere forgiveness reasonable reader, committed to endorsing constitutional rule of law for all, as ‘scuppering’.

8 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.

9 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.’

10 Criminal Procedure Act, 51 of 1977: S. 105A. Plea and sentence agreements: (9) (d) If the prosecutor or the accused withdraws from the agreement as contemplated in paragraph (b) (ii), the trial shall start de novo before another presiding officer: Provided that the accused may waive his or her right to be tried before another presiding officer.

20.

Put differently, City Press’s Orwellian argument argues that requesting a Magistrate to confirm that both defendants and plaintiffs were fully informed of all their rights, prior to their required ‘guilt/innocence’ plea decision-making, would be scuppering a trial.

Conversely City Press consequently argue that allowing defendants and plaintiffs to plausibly be denied information by their legal representatives, so as to be unable to make fully informed decisions, and hence to be railroaded and legally lynched by kangaroo court justice, would be demonstrate a free and fair trial!

21. Radical Honesty SA Amicus Curiae: SA’s Legal Indulgence 95 Theses: 22.

Finally it is herewith stated that City Press attorney’s irritation with the Radical Honesty SA Population Policy Common Sense Interpretation of the TRC Act Amicus Curia before the Constitutional Court in point 3 (“which she seemingly refers to in all her public communications”) , is because the Radical Honesty SA Amicus is to the SA Legal Establishment, what Martin Luther’s 95 Theses on Indulgences as posted on the door of the church of All Saints on 31 October 1517, were to the Catholic Church elite. The Radical Honesty SA Amicus does what no other lawyer in SA has had the courage, let alone integrity, honesty and honour to do: (I) confront the SA Corporate media on their hypocritical parasitic relationship to pressure cooker censorship of non-violent dissent, so as to financially benefit from If It Bleads, it Leads political violence; and (II) confront the SA Legal Establishment about their (a) Right-to-Breed Legal Hypocrisy and Ecological Carrying Capacity, ‘Human Rights Legislation’ Fraud; (b) the relationships between sincere forgiveness v. fake forgiveness and the common law reasonableness test; (c) Legal ‘Innocence/Forgiveness’ Indulgence’s sold to the rich, and (d) failing to educate the poor that the basic principle to get out of poverty is as simple as stated by Amy Wax, Robert Mundheim Professor of Law at Univ. of Pennsylvania, in her book, Race, Wrongs and Remedies: Group Rights in the 21st Century: “If you finish high school and keep a job without having children before marriage, you will almost certainly not be poor. Period. I have repeatedly felt the air go out of the room upon putting this to black audiences. No one of any political stripe can deny it. It is human truth on view.”

23. Detailed Responses to City Press Errors and Allegations in [1], [2] & [3] 24.

[City Press Point 1] states that “Ms Johnstone says that it is incorrect to refer to a group or religion she calls Radical Honesty of whom she is the only member in South Africa, as “rightwing” and to say of her attempted intervention at the trial of the socalled “Reitz Four” as an attempt to “scupper” the trial. …”

25.

City Press appear to wish to imply that no such religion or culture exists, and it is simply a figment of Johnstone’s imagination; when it appears they have done absolutely zero impartial enquiry into Radical Honesty.

26.

Origin & Founding of Radical Honesty religion and culture a.

Johnstone was not the person who named the culture and religion she belongs to as ‘Radical Honesty’ (www.radicalhonesty.com). The person who named the culture and religion she joined in 1998, and consequently hase since been a member of, as ‘Radical Honesty’, was its founder, Dr. Brad Blanton.

b.

11 12 13 14 15

As detailed in both Radical Honesty SA Amicus Curiae, directly and indirectly referred to in City Press article: Dr. Brad Blanton is: i.

President and CEO of Radical Honesty Enterprises Sparrowhawk Book Publishing and The Center for Radical Honesty, both dedicated to promoting honesty in the world;

ii.

Former candidate for Congress (Green Independent & Democratic Party) in 2004 and 2006, on the platform of ‘Honesty in Politics’11;

iii.

Pope of the Radical Honesty Futilitarian Church; i.e. “Dr. Truth”12;

iv.

author of (a) Radical Honesty: How To Transform your Life by Telling the Truth; (b) Practicing Radical Honesty: How to Complete the Past, Stay in the Present and Build a Future with a Little Help from Your Friends, (c) Honest to God: A Change of Heart that Can Change the World, with Neale Donald Walsh (Conversations with God series); (d) Radical Parenting: Seven Steps to a Functional Family in a Dysfunctional World; (e) The Truthtellers: Stories of Success by Radically Honest People and (f) Beyond Good and Evil: The Eternal Split-Second-Sound-Light-Being; (g) Some New Kind of Trailer Trash.

v.

Dr. Blanton’s press package at www.radicalhonesty.com, clarifies that he is the “leader of more than 175,000 followers who have joined his revolutionary movement to tell the truth”. That there is only one member of Dr. Blanton’s ‘revolutionary movement to tell the truth’ in South Africa says much about SA’s interest in a revolutionary movement to tell the truth, as opposed to revolutionary movements to spread left or right wing ideology.

vi.

Dr. Blanton’s press kit, at Radical Honesty (www.radicalhonesty.com), quickly and easily informs any impartial journalist, of Dr. Blanton’s biography13, previous mainstream media interviews with among others14: CNN Talk Back Live, Dateline-NBC, 20/20 with John Stossel, Montel Williams (three appearances), Iyanla, the Roseanne show, Sally Jesse Raphael, Mars and Venus, Esquire, New York Post, and London Times.

vii.

The Radical Honesty culture and religion has been acknowledged as such by Neale Donald Walsch15, the bestselling author of the Conversations with God series: Conversations With God (books 1-3), Friendship with God, Communion with God, The New Revelations, Tomorrow's God, What God Wants, Home with God: In a Life That Never Ends, Happier than God, and his newest book When Everything Changes, Change Everything. Mr. Walsch is the co-author/producer with Dr. Blanton of the book and DVD: Honest to God.

See Video Documentaries at: www.why-we-are-white-refugees.blogspot.com/p/honesty-in-politics.html See Center for Radical Honesty at: www.radicalhonesty.com http://www.radicalhonesty.com/press/bb_biography.pdf http://www.radicalhonesty.com/press/bb_media.pdf http://www.nealedonaldwalsch.com/

viii.

The Radical Honesty culture and religion has been acknowledged as such by Tikkun Magazine, in Radical Hope: Futilitarianism16, by Brad Blanton.

Rabbi Michael Lerner, author of The Left Hand of God: Taking Our Country Back from the Religious Right (Harper San Francisco, 2006) is not only rabbi of Beyt Tikkun but is also the editor of TIKKUN magazine: A Bimonthly Jewish Critique of Politics, Culture and Society. TIKKUN is one of the most respected intellectual/cultural magazines in the Jewish world, but also one of the most controversial because of its stand in favor of the rights of Palestinians, on the one hand, which locates him in the minds of many as the leader and most prominent spokesperson in the U.S. of Jewish supporters of the Israeli peace movement, and on the other hand, because of his stand critiquing the anti-religious and anti-spiritual biases of the secular Left, insisting that they need to address the spiritual hunger of Americans as equally important to their material needs (he calls this a hunger for "meaning" and says that for many Americans the desire to transcend the individualism and selfishness of the competitive marketplace and connect their lives to higher meaning is as important as any interest in money or things, and that one reason why people who might on purely economic grounds be supporting the liberal and progressive social change movements actually end up supporting the Right is that the Left doesn't have a "politics of meaning"). He is the co-author with Cornel West of a book entitled Jews and Blacks: Let the Healing Begin, and several other books.

27. Dr. Blanton’s Radical Honesty about the Importance of Sincere Forgiveness: Dr. Blanton’s Radical Honesty Press Kit17 (Annex A) available to any journalist who visits the Radical Honesty website at www.radicalhonesty.com, includes the following information regarding his perspective to Sincere Forgiveness, as written in his Campaign for Congress Letter to voters:

a.

16

i.

Forgiveness: I forgave my stepfather for almost everything before he died.

It wasn’t easy. And beating the hell out of him was a part of the process of forgiving him. Also included in the process of forgiving him was my coming to understand all the sadness and heartbreak and damage done to him by the life of killing he had been thrown into as a teenager when he spent six years in the Pacific slaughtering human beings. I learned the truth of the bigger story that had crippled him. The hatred that could have consumed me didn’t. Compassion won out over vengeance. It was almost accidental.

But I am not stupid. I was certainly struck by how brilliant our human arrangements for war work as a way to do religion and property settlements! That really works well doesn’t it? And I can testify it lasts for generations to come—a gift that keeps on giving.

ii.

I forgave my mother for everything before she died, as well. Forgiving my mother and stepfather benefited me more than them. I learned that if we are able to forgive we can make a new beginning. I also learned that forgiveness is a very tough process, sometimes including things I myself need forgiveness for along the way. I learned that love happens when

Source Citation: Blanton, Brad. 2004. Futilitarianism, Tikkun 19(6):43: http://www.tikkun.org/article.php/Blanton-futilitarianism http://www.radicalhonesty.com/press.php

17

forgiveness is a two-way street, and that there is probably nothing more important than forgiveness and letting love happen. iii.

[..] My Dilemma and Our Dilemma: Helplessness and meanness are almost always in the same person. The helpless people are the mean people. The mean people are the helpless people who haven’t learned how to forgive their cripplers. (Newsflash: “Childhood is hell, reports former child!”) Some mean people are in denial about being mad at their parents and teachers to such a degree that they profess to love and honor them. These people are generally called neo-conservatives and they are in severe need of psychological help. They are the sickest among us.

iv.

How Lying and Secrecy Prevent Forgiveness: Out of that practice of psychotherapy and from my own life I learned that (1) the key to forgiveness is honesty, and (2) the secret to meanness is lying, and that (3) most of us are trapped into lying most of the time by the way we are raised, and that (4) the major injustices of the world come from our systematic instruction in lying, and the unresolved anger and hurt continuously perpetrated on all of us by the culture in which we are raised. The culture’s agents of instruction are the previous generation of cripples, parents, teachers, and peers, who suffer from a disease called moralism, an illness that lies at the heart of civilization, our mutual sickness.

v.

Based on that insight, I wrote a nationwide bestselling book called Radical Honesty, which has now been published in about a dozen languages. I created a seminar which has been conducted around the world called “The Course in Honesty” (Sometimes called, “The Curse of Honesty.”) I have written five other books since starting and conducting that workshop on an ongoing basis about twenty years ago. I have helped thousands of people live happier lives. I have helped people overcome depression, anxiety disorders, chronic conflict, damaged capacity for intimacy and other forms of self torture and torture of others.

vi.

I have also been a political activist all my life. I joined the civil rights movement is 1959 when I was nineteen years old and stuck with it until we passed the civil rights acts of 1964. Integration has still not yet occurred, but segregation is over. I put my ass on the line to make that happen.

vii.

[..] I know the value of forgiveness and I am in the process of trying to forgive the neoconservatives for their ignorance, malice, heartlessness, greed, and stupidity. Even harder, I am trying also to forgive the lying purveyors of hope who call themselves Democrats. Since I can’t beat the hell out of them and get by with it, I have to use the process of getting to forgiveness by telling the truth. And you need to have the truth told to you as much as I need to tell it. So, for the benefit of both of us:

viii.

This Is the Truth: You are the one responsible for keeping this hell in place.

It is time you did something about it. What you do and don't do makes a difference.

28. Lara Johnstone – Member of Radical Honesty culture and religion

29.

Dr. Blanton, in his capacity as Radical Honesty Author and Pope of the Futilitarian church18 has filed the following affidavits and written statements in SA Legal court records, confirming that I am a member of the Radical Honesty culture and religion, including his EXPERT WITNESS OPINION, AS A WORLD LEADER IN SINCERE FORGIVENESS THAT SOUTH AFRICANS TRUTH AND RECONICLIATION (TRC) WAS NOT ABOUT SINCERE FORGIVENESS, BUT WAS FAKE: a.

Magistrates Court - George: Court Record Letter by Brad Blanton, Ph.D, SAP Case: 572/02 (subsequently HC-CPD A 696-04): Re: Iatrogenic Origins of AIDS Disclosure Trial: Lara Johnstone Psychological Integrity Reference

b.

Magistrates Court – Capetown: 14/1198/08, subsequently 17/1384/07: 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 Commission19.

c.

High Court, Western Cape: # 19963-09: 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.

d.

Constitutional Court # 23-10: Written Statement of Consent by Brad Blanton, Ph.D, to testify as expert witness to: Practicing Radical Honesty, Futilitarianism; i.e. Radical Honesty about Anger & Forgiveness; Paradigms & Contexts: Revolution of Consciousness.

30. Radical Honesty Personal Responsibility Culture v. Slave and Cannon Fodder Breeding Denial of Ecological Responsibility Cultures: 31. There are many differences between Radical Honesty culture and many other cultures.

One of those relevant to this matter is that members of the Radical Honesty culture do not practice Slave and Cannon Fodder Breeding Leadership. Radical Honesty leadership refuses to lie to any prospective follower. They would rather have an honest relationship based upon total transparency between leadership and followers, even if that means far less followers. Radical Honesty leadership does not want any followers who do not want to practice personal responsibility and a commitment to honesty. The ultimate goal for a Radical Honesty leader is the quality of transparency, intimacy and trust in the relationships.

18

Written Statement of Consent by Brad Blanton, Ph.D, to testify as expert witness to: Practicing Radical Honesty, Futilitarianism; i.e. Radical Honesty about Anger & Forgiveness; Paradigms & Contexts: Revolution of Consciousness [PDF: www.scribd.com/doc/31989814] 19 Another expert witness who filed a supporting Expert Witness Affidavit was: Affidavit of Leonard George Horowitz evidencing the Origin of AIDS sourcing from Hepatitus B Vaccine experiments conducted by Agents and Agencies of the Federal Government of the United States of America and the Merck Pharmaceutical Company, in terms of Criminal Procedure Act 51, of 1977: § 213: Proof of Written Statement by Consent; & § 171 & 172: Evidence on Commission.

32.

Slave and Cannon Fodder Breeding cultures leadership is not founded on 100% transparency and honesty between leaders and followers, but based upon half-truths, vague promises, and the manipulation of followers. The goal is accumulation of ignorant cannon-fodder followers who can be manipulated by emotional ‘us’ vs ‘them’ trigger soundbytes; so as to present an image of power, to gain power. The ‘followers’ are simply the cannon fodder enablers for the leaders goal towards socio-political power. Slave and Cannon fodder leaders will never focus on root cause problem solving, and prefer to focus on the band-aid to braintumour symptom mobjustice blame games.

They are well aware that if problems actually get solved, then the people are far less prone to require their ‘leadership services’; because their would be no need for them.

They would lose all their power, consequently it is extremely important for them NOT TO SOLVE problems of poverty, crime, overpopulation etc; but to PRETEND to solve such problems. If they did actually solve the problems, they would work themselves out of power and job.

33.

Radical Honesty is a culture/religion for truth seekers, whatever the truth turns out to be. Most other cultures founded on an ideology are focused on proving their ideology right/superior; hence in a clash between their ideology and truth, their ideology deems truth to be the collateral damage casualty.

34. International Just War Legal Principles & Apartheid [City Press’s Point 2a & b] 35.

In the Radical Honesty Amicus Application, Johnstone requested, among others “[T]o confirm that the Court, Plaintiffs and Defendants have taken notice of the Radical Honesty – RSA Amicus Curiae filed before the Constitutional Court, in the matter of The Citizen v. McBride, the contents of which may have been relevant to the decision making of the Plaintiffs and/or Defendants, if either party had been aware of their contents, but which are being massively censored by the corrupt South African media.

Among others the Radical Honesty RSA Amicus Curiae before the Constitutional Court alleges: That the ‘TRC social contract’20 is founded on Truth and Reconciliation Commission fraud, as a result of, among others:

a. i.

Negligent or Intentional Avoidance of Key Concepts Cultural Definitions: Conflict of Law Definitions, Fundamental Concepts were not defined.

ii.

Truth and Reconciliation was not Seen to Be Done, but was selective, biased, and discriminated against, among others, the SADF, the IFP and ANC members who had been detained, tortured, raped and executed in ANC prison camps such as Camp Quatro, in Angola.

iii.

How the Liberation Struggle could not have been considered a ‘just war’, within Just War Legal principles, when Apartheid had raised poor black living standards to the highest in Africa;

iv.

That Apartheid was not a Crime Against Humanity, but a Just War for Afrikaner Demographic Survival; and that the ANC-TRC deliberately covered up this information and censored it, in favour of declaring Apartheid a ‘crime against humanity’.

20 The Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act, 34 of 1995 (“TRC Act”), mandate was provided for in The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act, 200 of 1993 (“Interim Constitution”), both which collectively set the ‘social contract’ foundation for the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, Act 108 of 1996 (“SA Constitution”); all collectively herein after referred to as ‘TRC Social Contract’.

v.

That Farm Murders provide the evidence that South Africans – Afrikaners in particular -- do not live under a ‘Rainbow TRC Peace’ social contract, but under a Racial Hatred War Reality.”

b.

City Press’s points [2a&b] selectively quote point [iii], leaving out “within Just War Legal Principles”, and half of point [iv]. It naturally totally disregards point [i][ii]and [v]. If speaking up on behalf of the Reitz Four makes Johnstone ‘right wing’, does speaking up on behalf of ANC and IFP members also make her a member of the IFP and ANC? Under this thinking would the democratic socialist editors of Searchlight South Africa, Baruch Hirson and Paul Trewhela be defined as ‘right wing’, for speaking up on behalf of justice for ANC members detained at Camp Quatro?

c.

Just War Legal Principles are Internationally recognized principles of Law, which argue among others that for any one ‘warring party’ to argue that their war was a ‘just war’, their conduct during that war, should meet certain ‘just war legal requirements’; and if not, it cannot be considered in legal Just War terms, a ‘just war’. The ANC’s argument that the ‘liberation struggle’ was a ‘just war’ falls far short of more than one Just War legal requirement. Furthermore, the Just War tradition is only recognized between two culturally similar enemies, who set mutually agreed rules of combat. Apartheid Afrikaners and Africans are not remotely culturally similar, there are huge differences; nor did the ‘liberation struggle’ and apartheid forces share ‘mutually agreed rules of combat’. For example: the security forces did not practice necklacing as a tactic of war; in fact they were culturally repulsed and disgusted thereby; while – for example -- Chris Hani and Winnie Mandela et al certainly were not. Neither did the security forces practice ‘coercive rape of young women to impregnate them with cannon fodder, as a ‘breeding war’ tactic of war’. Apartheid Security Forces were focused on law and order; ANC cadres on chaos and disorder, etc. Consequently in the absence of culturally similar enemies, and mutually agreed rules of combat; the principle of Just War is null and void.

d.

If the enemies were culturally similar, and had a set of mutually agreed upon rules of combat, then the Jus Ad Bellum International Principles of Just War, would be required to be enquired into to determine whether any party’s actions were in accordance with Just War principles: “The principles of the justice of war are commonly held to be: having just cause, being a last resort, being declared by a proper authority, possessing right intention, having a reasonable chance of success, and the end being proportional to the means used.” On every single one of those principles there is sufficient argument for a prima facie case that the ‘liberation struggle’ did not meet the requirements. Consequently, if it is true, as the evidence suggests, that not only did Apartheid raise poor blacks living standards to the highest in Africa, but additionally that poor black Africans (a) not only did not want black rule, because they feared they would be treated worse under an incompetent black government, than under ‘racist afrikaners’; and (b) that poor black Africans were coerced through ‘necklace’ terror and people’s courts to participate in the ‘liberation struggle’, then on each, or all points the IFP’s refusal to join the violent liberation struggle, and insistence to proceed only by means of non-violence is far more conducive to be considered a ‘just war’, than the ANC’s decisions to terrorize their own people, so that they could overthrow the government – and place all their friends in Government Jobs to loot the public purse!

e.

Why did City Press’s legal counsel, deliberately omit the term “within Just War Legal Principles” from Point [2a]?

f.

Finally, if the ANC insist on disregarding Just War Theory’s cultural and mutural agree rules of combat principles, and insist it was a ‘Just war’ liberation struggle, what would an honest impartial population policy common sense enquiry into Apartheid Politicians motivations be? When making a Demographic Enquiry into the ANC’s deliberate ‘breeding war’ practices, which biologically would have the scientific end result of exterminating the Afrikaners, in such an exponential growth demographic reality, Apartheid was in fact a Political Policy, synonymous with the legal Principle of Self Defence. And in fact many Apartheid politicians, including FW de Klerk in his submissions to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission confirmed that the Apartheid fears for the ANC’s ‘Swart Marxist Gevaar’ breeding war was a prime motivation for Apartheid, as a form of self defence for Afrikaners not to be exterminated.

36. UN Convention [Group] Refugee Status [City Press’s Point 2c] 37.

I imagine that City Press’s Legal Counsel is aware that Refugee Status is granted to individuals in accordance the UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. Put simply refugee status is granted when someone (a) feels that they are being persecuted due to their membership of a particular ethnic/religious/racial/political group; and (b) their government is unable or unwilling to acknowledge their fears, and to protect them.

38.

How many SA’s feel – like Brandon Huntley did – that they are being persecuted due to their membership of a particular race (white)? As documented in 74% of White SA’s Agree with Huntley; ANC & Liberals Deliberate Malicious Indifference Legitimize Huntley’s ‘White Refugee’ status21; (a) 83 % of Beeld readers; (b) 62% of Burger readers; (c) 65% of IOL readers, and (d) 87% of Rapport readers feel like they are being persecuted in SA for reasons of their race/membership of a particular ethnic group. Has the South African government and media been able or willing to publicly acknowledge that 74% of white SA’s feel the way that Huntley does, like White Refugees?

39.

So Brandon Huntley and 74% of his fellow white South Africans fit the UNHCR white refugee criteria, by their experience of subjective feelings of being persecuted for being white. What has been the SA Government and media’s ability or willingness to respond to these feelings of persecution?

40.

Did the South African Government request Huntley provide them with the information about his persecution grievances, so they can make an impartial enquiry and if so required rectify the matter?

41.

Did the South African Government express the ability to show sincere concern for the reality that 74% of one of its minority groups feels persecuted in South Africa for reasons of their race; by suggesting an Impartial Tribunal or Board of Enquiry be established to hear their persecution grievances?

42.

As detailed in the Radical Honesty SA Amicus to the Concourt: under [V] Radical Honesty: Culture and Religion, or Refugee Status: [A] Radical Honesty Culture of

21

http://why-we-are-white-refugees.blogspot.com/2010/01/74-of-white-sas-agree-with-huntley-anc.html

Forgiveness Banned in SA Multi-Culture Courts, (para 82) Johnstone does not endorse ‘white refugees’ in SA, from sucking her thumb, but from personal experience of being “(a) illegally arrested, without a valid arrest warrant (18 July 2007)22; (b) denied right to appear in court within 24 hours of arrest (19 July 2007)23; (c) illegally detained for 33 days in Pollsmoor prison (18 July – 22 Aug 2007)24; (c) denied right to information (alleged Arrest Warrant) to defend her rights (18 July 2007 to present)25; (d) denied impartial investigating Officer, Prosecutor and Magistrate (18 July to present)26; (e) framed in court by Investigating Officer and Prosecutor who intentionally withheld critical evidence of innocence (cellphone conversations with plaintiff) from the court; (f) framed by Magistrate who ignored the fact of Plaintiff Politician committing perjury on affidavit and witness stand; (g) denied valid legal internationally recognized Political Necessity27 defence; (h) denied right to present expert witness evidentiary testimony (Dr. Leonard Horowitz28 and Dr. Brad Blanton29); (i) denied right to not be found guilty of an act that is ‘lawful’ (i.e. as per ‘reasonableness’ test)30; (j) denied right to withdraw formal admissions if Prosecution breach the ‘Formal Admission/Plea’ Agreement31; (k) denied right not to be sentenced to a suspended prison sentence for an act that the law says is ‘lawful’32; (l) denied right to file a complaint with the police documenting her persecution33, for their investigation; (m) although the Registrar has approved her In Forma Pauperis application34, Braam Swart & Partners declined to represent her for reasons of ‘complexity of legal argument’35. She has been unable to find one attorney willing to represent her36, to practice her culture: tell the truth. All require her to lie.”

43.

Have the SA Media or Government provided one bit of evidence that Johnstone’s allegations in aforementioned paragraph points (a) to (m) were erroneous? Have the Media or government produced the alleged legal arrest warrant of 18 July 2007? No! Not one such piece of evidence contradicting aforementioned legal persecution (a) – (m) has ever been provided by the SA media or government!

44.

Furthermore what was the media’s response to Dr. Brad Blanton’s expert witness court record affidavit that Johnstone was, among others (a) being legally and politically persecuted; (b) SA is not a democracy because it does not value non-violent freedom of expression dissent; (c) the apartheid ‘insult law’ of crimen injuria is a law so ridiculous it appears to date back to curses from witchdoctors; (d) that SA’s TRC was fake and posed, and not sincere and real; and that the significance between fake and sincere

22

08-12-28: S v. Johnstone: Incomplete Further Particulars; Letter to Senior Prosecutor [PDF: www.scribd.com/doc/20520262] 08-12-28: S v. Johnstone: Incomplete Further Particulars; Letter to Senior Prosecutor [PDF: www.scribd.com/doc/20520262] 24 08-12-28: S v. Johnstone: Incomplete Further Particulars; Letter to Senior Prosecutor [PDF: www.scribd.com/doc/20520262] 25 08-12-28: S v. Johnstone: Incomplete Further Particulars; Letter to Senior Prosecutor [PDF: www.scribd.com/doc/20520262] 26 Respectively: Ibid, Ibid, and Notice of Intention: Application for Leave and for Judicial Review: ITO § 309B (1)) & 304A of Criminal Procedure Act (“CPA”); with § 24(1) of the Supreme Court Act [PDF: www.scribd.com/doc/20519849] 27 Civil Disobedience and Necessity Defence by Pierce Law Review [PDF: www.scribd.com/doc/33149485] 28 Affidavit of Leonard George Horowitz evidencing the Origin of AIDS sourcing from Hepatitus B Vaccine experiments conducted by Agents and Agencies of the Federal Government of the United States of America and the Merck Pharmaceutical Company; [PDF: www.scribd.com/doc/33891726] 29 Blanton, Brad Ph.D: Reasonableness Test Radical Honesty Skills & Competencies Affidavit [PDF: www.scribd.com/doc/33790671] 30 Blanton, Brad Ph.D: Reasonableness Test Radical Honesty Skills & Competencies Affidavit [PDF: www.scribd.com/doc/33790671] 31 Notice of Intention: Correct Record: Withdraw Formal Admissions [PDF: www.scribd.com/doc/20918633] 32 Blanton, Brad Ph.D: Reasonableness Test Radical Honesty Skills & Competencies Affidavit [PDF: www.scribd.com/doc/33790671] 33 Complaint to the SAPS: (i) Senior Pros. Jacobs, NPA: WC, Obstruction of Justice, Persecution and Corruption (II) Hon. P. de Lille, MP; ID: Perjury, Fraud, Corruption, & Persecution [PDF: www.scribd.com/doc/20890741] & [PDF: www.scribd.com/doc/20890746] 34 09-10-13: HC-WC: In Forma Pauperis Proceedings Referral to Braam Swart Partners [PDF: www.scribd.com/doc/21801180] 35 10-02-10: Braam Swart & Partners: In FormaPauperis Proceedings: L Johnstone [PDF: www.scribd.com/doc/26795413] 36 09-10-28: Cape Bar & Intn'l Bar Assoc: Pro Bono Comm: Re: HC-WC In Forma Pauperis (Crimen Injuria) Review Application; RE: Freedom of Speech Political and Cultural Rights, or Secession?; [PDF: www.scribd.com/doc/22039639] 23

forgiveness is almost always avoided by politicians? Did SA media’s editors endorse their support for the abolishment of SA’s ‘crimen injuria’ insult law, or oppose its use as a legal tactic for persecution? No. Not one of SA’s media editors objected to Johnstone’s legal and political persecution, false arrest, detention without arrest warrant and bail hearing, kangaroo court trial, etc. The majority’s response was ‘deliberate indifference’, which was defined as a.

“Editors Name (Editor: Publication) is deliberately indifferent to certain people of certain ethnicities and/or ideologies and/or cultures and/or religions being politically and legally persecuted and prosecuted; and you fit one or more of those particular ethnic, ideological, cultural or religious categories, towards whom, [Publication] is deliberately indifferent.”

45.

Have the SA media made it crystal clear, that they are ‘deliberately indifferent’ to Johnstone’ being legally persecuted and prosecuted, and hence unwilling to support her constitutional right to be protected from such persecution?

46.

Consequently if someone has justification to feel persecuted, impartial independent expert witnesses confirm such persecution, and SA media and politicians (SA Gov & Gov media watchdog) are unwilling to publicly acknowledge the realities of her persecution, nor to protect her from such persecution; do the SA media and politicians, by their ‘deliberate indifference’ to her persecution, confirm her status as a Convention Refugee?

47.

Does City Press’s refusal to make any impartial enquiry into Johnstone’s legal and political persecution, and unwillingness and deliberate indifference to object to the legal and political persecution of certain people from certain religions/races/cultures, confirm Johnstone’s status as a United Nations Convention Refugee?

48. Radical Honesty SA Honourable Affirmation of TRC [City Press Point 2d] 49. Cultural Law and the Constitution [City Press Point 2e] 50.

The SA Constitution affirms the importance of respect for ‘cultural laws’, because it recognizes that different cultures have different cultural values. The SA Constitutional consequently provides for Citizens rights to practice the culture of their choice, and in any legal matter before any legal court or adjudicating body, it provides for the constitutional right for any citizen to invoke37 cultural law38 in S. 15 (3), 30, 31, and 185, which require the application of choice of law rules.

51.

Is City Press implying that the SA Constitution is ‘right wing’, because it is ‘scuppering’ City Press’s politically correct fake forgiveness hegemonic culture’s desire to deny all other cultures their rights to invoke their cultural law, and expert witnesses?

52. Motivations for Filing Reits 4 Amicus [City Press Point 2f] 37 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.

38 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.’

53.

Firstly it appears obvious to me, that the plaintiffs and defendants were from different cultures; the defendants were being charged with ‘crimen injuria’ for allegedly insulting people from a different culture, whose culture does not share the same values for dissent and satire; hence there was a clash of cultures. The Constitution allows for any citizen in any legal matter to invoke their cultural law, which then requires the Magistrate to make an impartial enquiry into choice of law matters. The defendants had no intention whatsoever to insult the plaintiffs, yet the plaintiffs decided to feel insulted, five months after the event. In my crimen injuria matter, I was also charged with crimen injuria for allegedly insulting someone from another culture, who has completely different cultural values to my culture. In my case the Magistrate totally ignored my request to invoke cultural law and the State’s actions were pronounced upon by other impartial observers as ‘legal and political persecution and prosecution’.

When it came to the media objecting to the application of Apartheid ‘insult laws’ (as per their Table Mountain Declaration), in South Africa, the media chose to endorse insult laws and endorse the political and legal persecution of Johnstone, without making any effort whatsoever to make an impartial enquiry into the Johnstone persecution matter. These matters were all dealt with in the Radical Honesty SA Amicus to the Concourt, and were, and continue to be, CENSORED BY ALL SA MEDIA. There were more than enough similarities with the two ‘crimen injuria’ cases of misunderstandings between individuals from different cultural groups; plus the censorship of the media of facts related to the Reits Four case that provided a more than reasonable motivation for the Reits Four Amicus Application. Furthermore if any party wished to object, they were more than welcome to do so, and neither party did.

54. Reitz Accused: Media’s Deny Right to be Judged by Court of Law [Point 2g] 55.

Johnstone is absolutely astounded by City Press’s remarks about the Reitz Four as ‘wrong doers’. Johnstone has no idea if the Reitz accused are guilty or not of their alleged crime, what she does know, and support is that anyone accused of any crime is to be considered INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. The Constitution does not say ‘proven guilty by journalists who censor and omit crucial facts about the case from the public court of opinion’. The Constitution says that any citizen is to be considered INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY BY A COURT OF LAW, IN ACCORDANCE TO THE RULE OF LAW, BY MEANS OF A FREE AND FAIR TRIAL.

56.

Johnstone was under the impression it is the media’s job to impartially enquire into all the facts, and to print such facts fairly and without fear or favour. Johnstone is unaware of any statutory legislation that gave the media the right to appoint themselves Judge, Jury and Executioner of any citizens accused of an alleged crime; to decide whether individuals are guilty of wrongdoing or not, and to prejudge their guilt prior to their trial, so as to pressure public opinion and judicial officials towards a guilty verdict. Media who discard their role as neutral reporters of the facts and decide to censor one party’s arguments in the court of public opinion, against another party, clearly should not be considered a credible news organization, but rather the behaviour of Propaganda Show Trial Scapegoating Yellow Tabloid Journalism.

57.

Once again, City Press demonstrate their preference for mobjustice, instead of a commitment to endorsing and supporting the rule of law for all citizens, including those people whose ideologies they may find reprehensible or disagreeable.

58. Fundamental Attribution Error & African Presumptions of Malice [Point 3a]

59.

From 1997 to 1999 Johnstone lived as the only white woman in the ghetto of Oakland, California, sharing her apartment with an African American lesbian. Johnstone’s African American neighbours affectionately called Johnstone the ‘white nigger’. Is City Press implying that Johnstone should not have accepted the term of endearment, as per the intention of the speaker/s, and should instead of made a decision to feel insulted, based upon PC racial ideological dogma about the word ‘nigger’?

60.

Sociologists suggest that insults are often an indicator of flawed reasoning about the character or motivation of others. Though insults are common, and often used in jest, a fundamental axiom of sociology recognizes that derogatory forms of speech make erroneous attributions about the motivation of a person. Scholars classify the erroneous assumptions as the fundamental attribution error.

61.

In AIDS, Witchcraft, and the Problem of Power in Post-Apartheid South Africa, Adam Ashforth attempts to make an enquiry into the roots of Black Africans spiritual insecurities. One conclusions he reaches is that: a.

62.

“In communities where a witchcraft paradigm informs understandings about other peoples’ motives and capacities, life must be lived in terms of a presumption of malice.”

If you mention the word ‘kaffir’ to a person, whose worldview is founded on a presumption that other people’s motives are malicious, which interpretation might they choose to latch onto as the ‘right’ meaning of the speaker motive, from the following 26 definitions for ‘kaffir’: a.

The word kāfir is the active participle of the Semitic root K-F-R "to cover" or "nonbeliever".39

b.

As a pre-Islamic term it described farmers burying seeds in the ground, covering them with soil while planting.

c.

Thus, the word kāfir implies the meaning "a person who hides or covers". Put differently someone who knows the truth, but deliberately conceals it.

d.

Muslims adopted the word Kaffir, which is used in the Quran, to mean any nonbeliever of Islam, also known as an ‘infidel’.40

e.

To be skeptical in religious matters.41

f.

A name given to certain infidel races by the Mohammedans.42 Muslim from a Differing Sect, Apostate from Islam.

g.

A native of Kafiristan, which is inhabited by the Presungalis, a primitive peaceable race, remarkable for endurance and industry, probably the earliest immigrants, and speaking a language of which almost nothing is known; the Waigulis, of different language, but of whom little is known; and the Siah-Posh, the chief Kafir people, speaking an Indo-European language, mainly herdsmen and

39

Professor Shabul Hammed (Reading Islam http://www.readingislam.com/) [Head of Dept. of English, Farook College, Calicut University; President of Kerala Islamic Mission, Calicut. Author of Islamic books on comparative religion, women’s status, science & human values] 40 Websters New International Dictionary with Reference History, pg.1175 41 Websters New International Dictionary with Reference History, pg.1175 42 Websters New International Dictionary with Reference History, pg.1175

brave warriors, who were only in 1895, after centuries of resistance, subdued by the Afghans, and compelled to accept Islam in place of their former paganism.43

43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57

h.

A member of the most intelligent and powerful of the Bantu races of South Africa.

The country of the Kafirs proper, including the Xhosa, Tembu, and Mpondo tribes, is the region between the Cape Colony and Natal, but the term is often understood to cover the Zulus of Natal, and various related tribes as well. The Kafirs are amongst the tallest people in the world, and are noted for their fine physique, warlike valour, and elaborate social organization. They are mostly agriculturalists and herdsmen.44

i.

South African stocks, especially land or mining stocks.45 Kaffir Circus: a nickname for shares of South African gold mining companies used in the London Stock Exchange

j.

Kaffir (racial term): a term formerly used by white people to refer to black people, now considered offensive, even by white people.46 A word that is used by south africans in describing black people, it is derogatory and is usually expressed while feeling very frustrated and angry at a black persons incompetence.47

k.

Portuguese explorers used the term generally to describe tribes they encountered in southern Africa, probably having misunderstood its etymology from Muslim traders along the coast. European colonists subsequently continued its use.

l.

The Nguni languages, called the Kaffa languages in the 19th century.48

m.

Fanagalo, a Zulu-based pidgin language once referred to as Kitchen Kaffir.49

n.

Kaffraria or British Kaffraria, a former designation for King William's Town and East London, South Africa. 50

o.

Kafiristan, the historic name for the Nuristan Province in Afghanistan51

p.

The Nuristani people descendants of the Hindukush Kafir people52

q.

The Nuristani languages once called Kafiiri or Kafiristani53

r.

Sri Lanka Kaffir people, an ethnic group54

s.

Sri Lanka Kaffir language, a creole spoken by that people55

t.

Kaffir or Kaffir corn, another name for the grain Sorghum. 56

u.

Kefir or Kephir, a fermented milk drink from the Caucasus region57

v.

The phrase 'the K-word' is now often used to avoid using the word 'kaffir' itself, similar to 'the N-word', used to represent 'nigger'.

w.

Kaffir Thinking: Misconstruing something that is not there

Websters New International Dictionary with Reference History, pg.1175 Websters New International Dictionary with Reference History, pg.1175 Websters New International Dictionary with Reference History, pg.1175 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaffir_(racial_term) http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=kaffir http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaffir http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaffir http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaffir http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaffir http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaffir http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaffir http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaffir http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaffir http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaffir http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaffir

x.

Term of contempt for a person (black or white) of uncivilized manners (a swearword if used direct to a person) [Zulu Dictionary].

y.

Rejector, Ingrate, Ungrateful, Obliterator, Concealer of the Truth, Disbeliever

z.

Incapable of sexual restraint, breeds cockroach-prolifically without personal financial or psychological responsibility to, or emotional concern for, its offspring; abuses women and children, cultural ideal of manhood endorses rape as sexual slavery entitlement, etc.

63. Interpreting ‘Kaffir’ in the Radical Honesty Culture [Point 3a] 64.

It is extremely difficult to insult or offend a member of the Radical Honesty culture, for the simple reason that we value honest, constructive, evidentiary and factually accurate feedback – which other cultures frequently find offensive – as an incredible gift for personal growth. Put differently to help us to see our blind spots or hypocrisy is one of the greatest gifts you can give us, for its enables our spiritual growth to rid ourselves of such hypocrisy.

65.

If you called a member of the Radical Honesty culture a ‘kaffir’, they would probably want to know which definition you mean. If you tell them you meant: “Incapable of sexual restraint, breeds cockroach-prolifically without personal financial or psychological responsibility to, or emotional concern for, its offspring; abuses women and children, cultural ideal of manhood endorses rape as sexual slavery entitlement, etc”; they would ask you to provide detailed evidentiary examples of exactly when, where and how they were incapable of sexual restraint’. If your provide such example they are able to see a new perspective, self-reflect, and use the feedback as an opportunity to think about ways to avoid such a re-occurrence loss of sexual restraint.

By providing them with honest feedback, you did them a huge favour to help them to grow to be a more honourable, honest person, not only with others, but with themselves. Honest constructive factual evidentiary based criticism is perceived as an act of love in the Radical Honesty culture.

66.

In Radical Honesty to state that a person who knows the truth and deliberately conceals it, is a kaffir, is stating reality, in the same way as stating that a table is a table, or a Muslim stating that a non-believer infidel is a kaffir. All statements are simply stating the obvious reality, of the speaker. Only people who wish to live in fantasy’s and illusions, with sycophantic friends and colleagues demand that the observable truth, be kept a secret from them, and not be clearly articulated as evidentiary reality.

67.

Is City Press implying that all Muslims who use the word ‘Kaffir’ are ‘right wing’?

68.

Perspectives on the use of the word ‘kaffir’ and ‘Nigger’: In Unlike a Rose, ‘kaffir’ does NOT smell the same to black and white, Mail & Guardian, Sandile Memela writes: a.

the meaning of any word is not in the word itself, but in people’s heads

b.

Kaffirs do exist! The biggest sin will always be: Who says it!

c.

The use of the K-word is something that most white guilt whites still need to discuss with their psychiatrists.

69.

d.

The time may be right for a society that has been undergoing transition for the past 13 years to appreciate new methods of defining the meaning of words and understanding their use in blunt, intense and provocative public speech.

e.

Once 'kaffir' is out of the closet, pseudo-liberal forces both within the white community and their black imitators demand the person apologize, and put 'kaffir' back in the closet, to hush up any use of the word lest it raise the spectre of the apartheid past that haunts us.

f.

But the panic and hysteria that has been caused in the white social and cultural circles is a sad farce of good intentions. The conclusion that should be drawn on this matter is that it is a combination of white guilt and political correctness.

g.

This is part of our self-redefinition and expanding the meaning of words to fit into a new socio-cultural vocabulary that will help ultimately to break with white guilt, political correctness and a deep-seated inferiority complex.

Is the word ‘Kaffir’ something that City Press Editors, Journalists and Legal Counsel still need to discuss with their psychiatrists, or witchdoctors?

70. ‘Kaffir’ Contempt of Court and Crimin Injuria Convictions [Point 3a] 71.

City Press Legal Counsel is well aware that the Amicus Curiae to the Constitutional Court (para 80-85), details the circumstances surrounding these convictions, and that both are on appeal. The first instance of was in response to an Afrikaner Magistrate who endorsed the corrupt activities of the State Prosecutor. He knew the truth, but wanted to deliberately conceal the truth, and hence he was – to his face – informed of Johnstone’s honest opinion that he was a ‘white kaffir’. The second instance was in response to repeated requests to Hon. Patricia de Lille to make an impartial enquiry into the Iatrogenic (Manmade) Origins of AIDS Theory documentation. Mrs de Lille refused with “F**k You, Fuck your racist Manmade Origin of AIDS Theories and F**k You!” Mrs. De Lille was well aware of the quality of evidence submitted to her office, the statements by military expert witnesses with knowledge of AIDS Iatrogenic Origins, and the thousands of pages of Special Virus Cancer Programme Experiments to ‘create a synthetic virus to attack people’s immune systems’, where Scientists mixed dozens of animal viruses, and cultured them in black tissue, so that they could jump species, and then added these virus mixtures to TB vaccinations given to gay men in America and African blacks in the Congo. Instead of accusing Mrs. De Lille of endorsing the silence about the mass murder of millions of her own people; she was informed that her conduct was perceived as someone who knows the truth, but conceals the truth: a ‘kaffir’.

72.

How exactly is accusing an Afrikaner Magistrate of censoring Prosecutorial corruption ‘right wing’? How exactly is accusing a black leader of censoring the mass murder of their own people, ‘right wing’? Are only the SA ‘right wing’ concerned about NPA corruption, and the mass murder of Africans?

73. New South Africa’s “Kaffirs” aka “Criminals” [Point 3b] 74.

See relevant response to ‘Kaffir’ issue from [Point 3a]. For the Record: The source document City Press is referring to was not in either Radical Honesty SA Amicus Curiae.

It was referred to in the Application to Proceed as an Amicus to the Concourt, where it states:

a.

In an 11 June 2004, Essay on Proudly South African Parasite Hypocrisy: Fraudulent Rehabilitation Boomerang58, submission to the South African Government, the applicant detailed how its Criminal Justice and Penological (Prison) Policies were a Major Intentional Source of New South Africa’s ‘Kaffirs’ AKA ‘Criminals’; and how denying any prisoners who may wish to sincerely rehabilitate, the opportunity to express their anger, frustration and hopelessness nonviolently, resulted in their expression of such anger in subsequent acts of recidivist violence.

75. While in America Johnstone mentored under Dr. Richard Korn, a very well known

criminologist and psychologist, who was also the mentor to the founder of Delancey Street Foundation (www.delanceystreetfoundation.org), Mr. John Maher. Delancey Street Foundation is the most successful rehabilitation program in the world, which has helped over 14,000 former gang members, murderers, drug addicts, delinquents to rehabilitate themselves to become law abiding tax paying citizens. It has accomplished this incredible task, at not one cent cost to American taxpayers. Johnstone mentorship with Dr. Korn, included psychodrama and many other aspects that are used by Delancey Street Foundation to accomplish its incredible rehabilitation task. Johnstone also did courses at Delancey Street Foundation. The aforementioned ‘New South Africa’s “Kaffirs” aka “Criminals” was a detailed report wherein Johnstone offered to start a Delancey Street style Rehabilitation Program in South Africa, and explained what it would entail, and enquired whether any Dept. of Corrections, Law Societies, Bar Associations etc, were interested in supporting the establishment of a Delancey Street Foundation in South Africa.

76. None of SA’s Law Societies, neither the Dept. of Corrections, nor the Judge Inspector

General of Prisons, nor any ‘rehabilitation’ organisations in South Africa were interested in establishing a Delancey Street Foundation in SA. DA MP Mr. James Selfe responded to the report, stating he found it incredibly interesting, but doubted that the ANC was remotely sincerely interested in prisoner rehabilitation, so as to adopt or encourage a program that works! He turned out to be prophetically correct.

77. Delancey Street Foundation works on communist collectivist principles. I am totally

confused as to how City Press’s choice to quote the title of a report that advocates establishing a democratic communist rehabilitation program to help poor blacks and criminals, is evidence for Johnstone being ‘right wing’.

78. Perhaps City Press did not even bother to read the report, nor the verbatim transcript of

extreme left winger, satirist Lenny Bruce’s satire show: Are there any Niggers Here Tonight?59in the report, which was the artistic contextual reasoning for the ‘In Your Face’ ‘Kaffir’ title.

79. So, the report title is based upon the skit of an extreme left winger comedienne, and the

contents of the report are about the most successful rehabilitation program in the world, which happens to practice left wing communist principles; and City Press wish to use this report to justify their allegations that Johnstone is ‘right wing’?

80. Prejudicial Allegations Against Media, Gov & Black People [Point 3c] 81.

58 59

Unlike City Press’s statement against Johnstone in [Point 3c] which provides no evidentiary details whatsoever for its allegation; every single allegation made by Johnstone, not only in the Concourt Amicus Curiae, but in any complaint filed with any

PDF: http://www.scribd.com/my_document_collections/2328314 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOnkv76rNL4

government or media body strives to meet the following principles: (a) provides detailed public source (never anonymous sources) evidence for her allegation/s; (b) the party whom is being complained about is provided with a copy of the complaint, complaints are never filed behind parties backs; (c) the party complained against is provided full Audi-Alteram Partem Opportunities for Response.

82.

If the goal of South Africa’s media, government and black people in South Africa is to maintain a fake public relations image, to commit fraud by lying about reality, to deny reality, and to avoid root cause problem solving; then it is of course quite possible that exposing Media, Government and Black Hypocrisy and Fraud, by means of documented evidentiary information, could be damaging to fake and fraudulent public relations images; i.e be prejudicial.

83.

If however the goal of South Africa’s media, government and black people in South Africa are to be naked in their quest for honest 100% sincere race relations, and they are totally and unswervingly committed to sincere forgiveness and reconciliation, then it is a 100% certainty impossibility that providing such media, Government and Black Africans with information and evidence of their hypocrisy, by means of documented evidentiary information, could be damaging to their reputation. For if they are committed to 100% transparent sincere reconciliation, any evidentiary information which makes such sincere reconciliation possible in greater depth and sincerity, would be welcomed and immeasurably appreciated.

84. Worldview Concept: Race Intentions vs. Honest Observation [Point 3d] 85.

Worldview: A comprehensive world view (or worldview) is the fundamental cognitive orientation of an individual or society encompassing natural philosophy; fundamental existential and normative postulates; or themes, values, emotions, and ethics.[1] The term is a calque of German Weltanschauung, composed of Welt, 'world', and Anschauung, 'view' or 'outlook'. It is a concept fundamental to German philosophy and epistemology and refers to a wide world perception. Additionally, it refers to the framework of ideas and beliefs through which an individual interprets the world and interacts with it.

86.

Johnstone’s fundamental worldview is founded on Radical Honesty principles, to report the unvarnished truth interpretations about observable reality. Practicing Radical Honesty has no race related dogma in its foundational principles, its only commitment being an unswerving commitment to report honest interpretations about observable reality, on any observable issue of race, culture, ecology, relationships, politics, etc.

87.

Practicing Political Correctness however is almost entirely founded on race related dogma and ideology, namely where race related observable reality contradicts political correct race related dogma or ideology, it behooves the individual practicing political correctness to deny and ignore reality and blindly and subserviently to obey race related political correct dogma and ideology. See for example: The Origins of Political Correctness60, or Political Correctness61

88.

Consequently it is City Press’s Political Correct Worldview that enshrines race as one of its essential foundation principles. It is the Political Correct Worldview, that is hotwired to search for ‘race’ everywhere it looks, every single statement of ‘kaffir’ or ‘nigger’

60 61

http://www.academia.org/the-origins-of-political-correctness/ http://www.ourcivilisation.com/pc.htm

can ONLY be interpreted in accordance with its Political Correct Race based Ideology.

No other neutral or totally innocent interpretations are allowed!

89.

The Zen for Round Eyes Dischordian religion62 - has a law which clearly humorously demonstrates the intellectual delusions that accompany a worldview founded upon subservience to an ideology, as opposed to a commitment to the observable truth, in what Dischordians refer to as the Law of Fives: a.

The Law of Fives states simply that: All things happen in fives, or are divisible by or are multiples of five, or are somehow directly or indirectly appropriate to 5.

The Law of Fives is never wrong. — Malaclypse the Younger, Principia Discordia, Page 00016

b.

Like most of Discordianism, the Law of Fives appears on the surface to be either some sort of weird joke, or bizarre supernaturalism; but under this, it may help clarify the Discordian view of how the human mind works. Lord Omar is quoted later on the same page as having written, "I find the Law of Fives to be more and more manifest the harder I look." [..] At its basic level, the Law of Fives is a practical demonstration that perception is intent-sensitive; that is, the perceiver's intentions inform the perception. To whatever extent one considers that perception is identical with reality, then, it has the corollary that reality is intent-sensitive.

90.

Practicing Radical Honesty intentions are to find the truth, support and search for the truth, whatever it may be; the truth about race, culture, relationships, forgiveness, truth, an unvarnished brutal confrontation with reality.

91.

Radical Honesty enables psychological and intellectual growth, because a brutally honest confrontation with reality, requires constant new working hypotheses and conclusions, new concepts to self-reflect upon, new ways of perceiving ourselves.

92.

Political Correctness leads to a kind of intellectual paralysis where those who practice it are required to deny realities such as: a.

“In communities where a witchcraft paradigm informs understandings about other peoples’ motives and capacities, life must be lived in terms of a presumption of malice.” -- In AIDS, Witchcraft, and the Problem of Power in Post-Apartheid South Africa, by Adam Ashforth

b.

Sociologists suggest that insults are often an indicator of flawed reasoning about the character or motivation of others.

c.

To whatever extent one considers that perception is identical with reality, then, it has the corollary that reality is intent-sensitive.

d.

This Is the Truth: You are the one responsible for keeping this Hypocrisy TRC fraud hell in place. It is time you did something about it. What you do and don't do makes a difference.

Lara Johnstone || Cell: (071) 170 1954 || 06 October 2010

62

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discordianism

REPLY BY CITY PRESS TO COMPLAINT TO THE PRESS OMBUDSMAN BY LARA JOHNSTONE

1. Ms Johnstone says that it is incorrect to refer to a group or religion she calls Radical Honesty, of whom she is the only member in South Africa, as “rightwing” and to say of her attempted intervention at the trial of the so-called “Reitz Four” as an attempt to “scupper” the trial.

2. In her application to intervene as amicus curiae in the Reitz trial Ms Johnstone:

a. Says that “the Liberation Struggle could not have been considered a ‘just war’ … when Apartheid had raised poor black living standards to the highest in Africa”;

b. says that “Apartheid was not a crime Against Humanity”, but a just war for Afrikaner Demographic Survival”;

c. endorses the concept of “white refugees” in South Africa;

d. renounces the Truth and Reconciliation Commission;

e. advocates “cultural groups” and “cultural laws”;

f. sought admission as amicus in the Reitz matter on the basis that she was admitted as an amicus in an unrelated and undecided Constitutional Court case, which “may have affected” the court’s decision-making in the Reitz matter; and

g. made it clear that she regarded the Reitz accused to be victims rather than wrongdoers.

3. In her application to the Constitutional Court, to which she refers in seemingly all her public communications, and specifically also in her Reitz-application, Ms Johnstone:

a. Defends her use of the word “kaffir” in the South African context and mentions that she has been previously convicted of crimen iniuria in this regard;

b. Approves of a source document entitled “New South Africa’s “Kaffirs” AKA “Criminals”;

c. Lashes out in prejudicial terms against the media, government and black people; and

d. Uses race repeatedly as a prominent concept in her world view.

4. Ms Johnstone brought her (unsuccessful) application in the Reitz matter at the moment of sentencing, resulting in the brief postponement of and last-minute decisions in a highly-publicised, race-related criminal trial.

5. Ms Johnstone also complains that she was not approached for comment. But her abortive attempt at intervention in the Reitz matter was in itself a public event, on which City Press simply reported.

6. Consequently, Ms. Johnstone’s complaints should be dismissed.

[A] Publication & Date: 2010-07-30: City Press: Khadija Bradlow: Rightwing group tries to scupper Reitz trial1

[B] Nature of Complaint: Violations of Press Codes: 1.1, 1.2, 1.5, 2.1, & 5.1 [1.1] Not truthful, accurate or fair; [1.2] Not in context, unbalanced, departed from facts by (1) distortion, exaggeration and misrepresentation; (2) intentional material omissions, (3) summarisation; [1.5] Not contacted for any comment; [2.1] Ideologically discriminatory; [5.1] Headline misrepresentation of facts.

[C] Overview of Radical Honesty White Refugee Argument 1.

Radical Honesty is NOT a ‘right wing’ group. A Jew who speaks up and requests justice for a Christian, is not a Christian. A member of the DA who speaks up on behalf of justice for an IFP member is not a member of the IFP. In a country that practice mobjustice people only speak up for their own group. When any group speaks up for justice for members of another group – they are speaking up for CONSTITUTIONAL JUSTICE; I.E. THE RULE OF LAW. Radical Honesty supports the RULE OF LAW for EVERYONE, irrespective of whether we agree with them or not, they deserve to be found guilty by the rule of law, not the media. (para 12)

2.

Radical Honesty did NOT try to ‘scupper’ the Reits Four trial. To the contrary. Speaking up for an accused to be judged in accordance with THE RULE OF LAW, NOT A MEDIA SCAPEGOAT ORGY, is clearly resented by the scapegoat scuppering media. (para.13)

3.

These headline misrepresentations totally alter the context of the article. Consider for example the headline: ‘Transparency group discloses media’s censorship’

4.

Radical Honesty accused the media of “spitting on cultures who practice sincere forgiveness and root cause problem solving”; the omission is significant. (para.14)

5.

Radical Honesty honourably and transparently provided the Truth and Reconciliation Commission with its conclusions –detailed evidence-for the TRC’s bias, conflicts of interest, censorship, etc; and provided the TRC with all opportunities to provide counter arguments. Such honourable behaviour is only considered an ‘attack’ by those who endorse fascist dictatorship, that don’t allow dissent; and who are totally clueless that the growth of humanity, individuals, or organisations is from hearing honest feedback about errors made, so that they can be fixed. (para.15)

6.

Ms. Bradlow’s anonymous source was not only uninformed (had not read the documentation he was commenting on), prejudiced towards minority groups, but was acting in violation of the Bar Code’s Uniform Rules of Professional Conduct (4.12, 4.18.3 & 4.21.1), hence possibly biased, unprofessional, and/or unethical (para.18-22)

7.

Ms. Bradlow never bothered to call me for any comment; or response to Magistrate ruling or her ‘senior legal figure’ anonymous source’s comment (para.23-27)

[D] 8.

1

SAPS/NPA Referral of my Complaint to Press Ombudsman I filed a complaint of fraud & defamation with the SAPS on 05 August 2010 (CAS 180-082010), which was returned to me on 04 October 2010, by Colonel SV Matiwane, from George Detective Branch; who informed me that “This matter was referred to Senior Public Prosecutor, George for a decision on prosecution. The latter declined to prosecute any person in this matter and requested that you refer your complaint to the Press Ombudsman for adjudication.” [The (para) reference in points 1-7 refer to the paragraphs in the Fraud & Defamation Complaint to the SAPS]

http://www.citypress.co.za/SouthAfrica/News/Rightwing-group-tries-to-scupper-Reitz-trial-20100730

9.

[E]

Waiver

I, Lara Johnstone, the undersigned, hereby agree to submit this complaint and any dispute arising from it for adjudication to the SA Press Ombudsman (“the Ombudsman�) subject to the SA Press Code and Complaints and Procedures of the SA Press Council.

I accept the decision of the Ombudsman, or in the event of an appeal, the decision of the Press Appeals Panel as final and binding.

Furthermore, by submitting the complaint for adjudication to the Ombudsman I waive my right to approach a court of law or any other tribunal to adjudicate upon this complaint or any dispute arising from my complaint submitted to the Ombudsman.

Lara Johnstone || Cell: (071) 170 1954 || 06 October 2010